Datasets:

hsuvaskakoty

/

wide_analysis

like 0

Frank O'Connor (director): Available reliable secondary source coverage consists of being listed in credits for movies and little else. Searches for sources just to substantiate the alleged birth and death dates were unsuccessful (likely was sourced from WP:IMDB, which is a user-generated source). Finding reliable sources about the man himself has also been unsuccessful; even being careful to try to filter out other Frank O'Connors mostly yields results that are either not significant/independent/reliable (user-generated or are credit-information on movie-streaming platforms) or are about the Irish author or the actor husband of Ayn Rand [28] [29] [30] . While prolific in his career, Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate catalog of information , and this O'Connor does not meet the general notability guideline. P-Makoto (she/her) ( talk ) 22:11, 21 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions . CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 22:23, 21 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions . CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 22:23, 21 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions . CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 22:23, 21 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions . CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 22:23, 21 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep - While difficult to parse the information available, definitely meets WP:FILMMAKER , and there is enough to pass WP:GNG as well, such as obit in the Los Angeles Times , story in the Los Angeles Evening Citizen News , a paragraph in article in the San Francisco Examiner , piece , article , and quite a few others. Onel 5969 TT me 00:34, 22 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Close inspection suggests there isn't much more than two paragraphs of substantive coverage. The obituary is three paragraphs long, but the first paragraph is about when his funeral is, and the third is about his widow and children; only the third is about him and his career as a filmmaker. The 1935 San Francisco Examiner article has a singul paragraph that is directly about O'Connor. The other articles mention him only in passing: he's the writer for a film, or the director of a movie, but his writing and direction are not themselves the subject and not themselves examined, analyzed, reported on, etc. These mentions resemble the classic example of what isn't significant coverage : Martin Walker's statement, in a newspaper article about Bill Clinton, that "In high school, he was part of a jazz band called Three Blind Mice" is plainly a trivial mention of that band . P-Makoto (she/her) ( talk ) 02:13, 22 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : Meets WP:FILMMAKER as the director of multiple notable early films, as well as the obituary and articles identified by Onel5969. Toughpigs ( talk ) 00:46, 22 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep . I agree with both ! votes above that he does meet Wp:FILMMAKER and thanks to Onel5969 for the sources that do attest O'Connor was director/writor of multiple notable films (which is what is needed to meet criterion#3), which the nominator apparently concedes. - My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 09:49, 22 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Creating a body of work is only the first part of criterion #3. The full criterion is The person has created or played a major role in co-creating a significant or well-known work or collective body of work. In addition, such work must have been the primary subject of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews, or of an independent and notable work . O'Connor's plural films do not on their own substantiate notability; the films must be themselves significantly covered as a primary subject. From what I can gather, much of his filmography is of works that are documented in mostly a catalog-like fashion that doesn't demonstrate notability. Contemporaneous reviews (what a historian would call a primary source for the film and its reception) seem to be of an indiscriminate nature, with periodicals documenting and reviewing every movie that comes out; such coverage doesn't demonstrate notability. P-Makoto (she/her) ( talk ) 19:44, 22 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Contemporaneous reviews (what a historian would call a primary source for the film and its reception) seem to be of an indiscriminate nature, with periodicals documenting and reviewing every movie that comes out; such coverage doesn't demonstrate notability. That’s not the consensus on Wikipedia, I’m afraid. - My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 13:06, 23 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Agreed: the periodicals covered "every movie" in the 1920s because films made by major studios tend to be notable. The same is true now for major studio films. It's not indiscriminate; it's a reflection of what the industry is like at a given time. Toughpigs ( talk ) 16:41, 23 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Withdraw : Toughpigs's elaboration that a periodical's comprehensive coverage of newly released films is not necessarily the same as an indiscriminate coverage of a subject prompted me reconsider my assessment of the newspaper coverage of O'Connor's movies. I would like to withdraw my nomination. (If I read the deletion nomination instructions rightly, a neutral editor should still be the one to close the discussion, not myself?) P-Makoto (she/her) ( talk ) 23:54, 23 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ). No further edits should be made to this page.

speedy keep

Charles Francis Lott: Much of the article is cited to a Burlington County Medical Society publication of which the subject was a member. The source lacks independence from the subject. The other sources are two publications on the History of Butte County in which his son was a prominent judge. The coverage in both is really more related to giving a biographical background of his son and he is not the main subject. In my opinion, none of these sources indicate that subject was independently notable from his son, and none rise to the level of in-depth independent significant coverage that we require to pass WP:SIGCOV . Further, his career as a physician doesn't appear to have been remarkable in any way. 4meter4 ( talk ) 18:38, 15 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Re: none of these sources indicate that subject was independently notable from his father , the subject's father is not even mentioned in the article. BD2412 T 18:45, 15 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Two of the three sources are principally about his son, Charles Fayette Lott . I was commenting on the sources BD2412 not on the prose in the article. I meant to write son not father earlier, and have corrected the text accordingly. 4meter4 ( talk ) 18:48, 15 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Well I have now added an easily found additional source that is principally about the subject and independent of them, and contains all of the information documented in the source you assert lacks independence, so you can withdraw this WP:BEFORE -lacking nomination. Cheers! BD2412 T 19:00, 15 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I would consider this one source with independent significant coverage. We need multiple sources with independent significant coverage to pass GNG. I am not persuaded. 4meter4 ( talk ) 19:05, 15 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The 1918 source, while primarily on the son, has objectively extensive enough coverage of the father. BD2412 T 19:12, 15 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] There certainly is content in the sources on his son, but I wouldn't consider it significant coverage. By all accounts so far he seems to have been a rather ordinary physician with a rather ordinary life. There are many medical professionals, and many who have served in the military. What makes this particular person encyclopedic? What is his claim to notability? At this point the only thing I am seeing is the family connection with his son and the other Lott family members. Perhaps a larger article on the family, which seems to have been the topic of more sources, would be more appropriate rather than an individual article on this particular member of the Lott family? 4meter4 ( talk ) I would consider raising a cavalry company and directing a military medical facility during a fairly major early American war to suffice on its own. BD2412 T 21:49, 15 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I see you have been busy adding sources and more content; particularly on his work in the military. Good work. I will take a look at it tomorrow, and get back to you. I am off wiki for the rest of today. Best. 4meter4 ( talk ) 22:08, 15 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep , in any case. Nominating an article 29 minutes after its creation, and with an obvious absence of WP:BEFORE , is no way to build an encyclopedia. BD2412 T 19:16, 15 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Before I nominated the article, I did searches in google books, JSTOR, EBSCOE, and my university library search engine. It took me roughly 15 minutes to do a standard WP:BEFORE search as outlined in the guideline. It's not hard when you have access to a university library. Best. 4meter4 ( talk ) 20:33, 15 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] All of the sources that I found were found on Google Books, but it is difficult to effectively search for an individual who is likely to often be identified as just "Charles Lott", or even "Charles F. Lott". BD2412 T 20:51, 15 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Certainly, different naming conventions can make searching more challenging. Having more people look for materials, which this AFD will accomplish, will ultimately benefit the article if it is kept. Best. 4meter4 ( talk ) 21:00, 15 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Military , Medicine , and New Jersey . Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 21:23, 15 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Regardless of the merits of the article, it is clearly not appropriate to nominate it for deletion 40 minutes after it was created, while it was still being written, in what appears to be a continuation of an editing dispute over the Charles Lott disambiguation page. In fact given the existence of the prior dispute I suspect the nominator learned of the article's existence when it was added to the disambiguation page , a mere seven minutes before it was nominated for deletion . (Either that or the nominator was stalking the creator's edits.) I suggest this AfD be closed. Hut 8.5 10:52, 16 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ). No further edits should be made to this page.

speedy keep

List of trains run by Indian Railways: Secondly, many couple of trains have been updated or added officially but lack in this article. Jagganath01 ( talk ) 04:56, 16 March 2024 (UTC) ( WP:SOCKSTRIKE — DaxServer ( t · m · e · c ) 09:24, 17 March 2024 (UTC) ) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions . Jagganath01 ( talk ) 04:56, 16 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Lists and India . WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 06:18, 16 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep. Certainly can use some cleanup and reorganizing, but deletion does not seem necessary . With regards to "many couple of trains have been updated or added officially but lack in this article", WP:OUTDATED applies. S5A-0043 Talk 07:36, 16 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment : Nomination is by a blocked sockpuppet. StreetcarEnjoyer (talk) 02:16, 17 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep No valid reason given for deletion. Category:Indian Railways exist, plenty of things that could be listed here are notable enough to have their own Wikipedia articles. D r e a m Focus 02:25, 17 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ). No further edits should be made to this page.

speedy keep

Volusia error: I can't find any unbiased sources (that aren't obviously connected to Harris) to satisfy WP:GNG . The closest sources I could find are the Washington Post piece and Jeffrey Toobin's Too Close to Call , neither of which provide detailed coverage about the incident, simply mentioning the error as one of several mistakes. The USA Today piece is opinion. Helpful Raccoon ( talk ) 04:01, 18 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: News media , Events , Politics , Technology , and Florida . Helpful Raccoon ( talk ) 04:01, 18 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Re-reading Too Close to Call , it might barely contain significant coverage of the Volusia error: it describes how the error led networks to call the election for Bush, and says that a campaign staffer realized the mistake. But the coverage is somewhat brief, and one source still isn't enough for WP:GNG or WP:EVENTCRIT even if it is significant. Helpful Raccoon ( talk ) 05:35, 19 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ). No further edits should be made to this page.

speedy keep

Love Again (film): I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2023 April 19 . — cyberbot I Talk to my owner :Online 20:59, 19 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ). No further edits should be made to this page.

speedy keep

Cavalier Rural Electric Cooperative: The single reference present in the article does not contain "Cavalier Rural Electric Cooperative". Previous discussion was infested by an alt account who went off on a tangent on how it is not fair for him to get new user mentoring. This is why the close suggested no prejudice towards renominating at AfD. बिनोद थारू ( talk ) 14:24, 29 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and North Dakota . बिनोद थारू ( talk ) 14:24, 29 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep - First of all, this looks to me like somebody didn't like the outcome and is running this within hours of the first close. The mentoring issue was irrelevant to this. It was a side issue that one editor had been assigned to "mentor" a specific editor without the mentored editor asking for mentoring, or even knowing about it ahead of time. What alt account and alt/sock puppet thing mentioned above? Please see North Dakota's Electric Distribution Cooperatives and click on this particular coop. I also linked Rural Electrification Act , which is the detailed legislation that created these coops during the Franklin D. Roosevelt administration. I repeat here original comments about electric co-ops, so readers know what they are: Re Category:Electric cooperatives of the United States . In the United States, these electric coops are the energy-providing life blood of rural areas. Some articles are well-done and fairly well-sourced. Some articles are done just like this one is done. Prior to that, much of rural America had nothing but what a local area could put together, if anything. That said ... you can nit-pick and delete the sparse ones like this, or you can come up with a better solution. — Maile ( talk ) 15:58, 29 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment : Please see North Dakota's Electric Distribution Cooperatives This source only contains a link to their website. No coverage at all. Please see WP:ORGDEPTH for the criteria. This comment is not in line with WP:OR . If extremely sparse primary sources were to be patched together, then original research would be needed to complete the article (like drawing connections with the Rural Electrification Act , for example). बिनोद थारू ( talk ) 16:09, 29 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per Maile66. Coverage almost always exists for such utilities and there is some coverage if someone with access searches on newspapers.com . Someone with access to WP:PAYWALLEDSOURCES can see the coverage. 72.172.120.125 ( talk ) 20:37, 29 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I have done the deed on Google News archive and none is significant coverage or one that meets WP:CORPDEPTH . Here's what I found: Cavalier Rural Electric Cooperative , Clearwater-Polk Electric Cooperative, Minnkota Power Cooperative, Nodak Electric Cooperative, North Star Electric Cooperative,: PKM Electric Cooperative, Red Lake Electric Cooperative, Red River [...] (Farmers Independent. ‎Mar 17, 1993) They were cruising up and down the ditches having a good old time," said Kerry Mikkelsen, line superintendent for1 the Cavalier Rural Electric Co-op in Langdon (McCook Daily Gazette. ‎May 14, 2004) Cavalier Rural Electric Board for over 30 years, taking his father's place when Irwhi retired from the board. (Turtle Mountain Star. ‎Dec 10, 2007) Using those as basis for an article would be an egregious failure of WP:PRIMARY and the corporations guideline . The best source I have been able to find, not a newspaper, is "Report of the Rural Electrification Administration (1953)". It is searchable on Google with the term "Cavalier Rural Electric" (with quotes). The enthusiasm for the development of rural electrification in the Great Plains was vividly demonstrated at the meeting of Cavalier Rural Electric Cooperative, shortly after VJ-day. More than 700 farmers and their families crowded into the little school auditorium at Langdon, N. Dak., to hear about the new Cavalier Co-op and what it could do for them. Co-op leaders, remembering the prewar skepticism of many North Dakota farmers when electricity for their homes and farms was discussed, had doubted that more than 40 would turn out for the meeting. The North Dakota farmers by thousands clamored for electricity. That demand spread across the Nation in every type of farming area. Even in Alaska [...] The only information one can take out of that is that it was created between 1944-1953. Yet the creation date is present in all of the company articles that get routinely deleted here. And saying it was created in 1944-1953 can be construed as original research , since the source doesn't directly say it. बिनोद थारू ( talk ) 20:45, 29 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete , mainly due to lack of WP:SIGCOV by independent secondary sources, no evidence thus far that WP:CORPDEPTH has been satisfied. Left guide ( talk ) 21:06, 29 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Obvious Keep In order to build an encyclopedia, the community created {{citation needed}} tags. The previous AfD came on the heels of this failed WP:PROD initiated by the nom, who is now using a different rationale. This is after the admin who closed out the previous AfD wrote I just want to emphasize that BEFORE is an important step prior to any AFD nomination and it's useful to share the results of any BEFORE search that was done. Here is WP:BEFORE . The community is not obligated to tediously devote resources to flagrant wikilawyering by a single-purpose editor specializing in AfDs ( contributions history ). As regards WP:SIGCOV , a non-profit electrical utility that serves an essential service (electricity) to many thousands of users is far-cry from some random Dairy Queen or “Al’s Tire-O-Rama” in nearby Belcourt on State Route 10. Citing WP:SIGCOV as a basis for deleting this article flies in the face of the very reason we have Category:Electric cooperatives of the United States . Greg L ( talk ) 22:25, 29 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Speedy procedural close - The last AfD has only just concluded, and although Liz said there was no penalty against a return trip, I am sure she did not mean a return trip on the same day she closed it! The AfD was closed as no consensus. Leave it two months before re-nominating. It gives a chance to improve the page/find sources and if nothing changes, then sure, bring it back to AfD at the beginning of March. Sirfurboy🏄 ( talk ) 23:24, 29 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment . The previous discussion (which I didn't even start) was interrupted by three people (Locke Cole, Greg L and his alt MLee1957) who were angry at my prior nomination of a WP:FAKEARTICLE -type user page [4] . So the closer allowed to renominate it with no prejudice. If it were a case of no consensus due to strong keep/delete votes and no alts, then yes, it would be advisable to wait half a year before obtaining new consensus. बिनोद थारू ( talk ) 23:39, 29 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] @ बिनोद थारू : : With regard to WP:FAKEARTICLE , you need to better familiarize yourself with Wikipedia and its processes and infrastructure. WP:Sandboxex are where editors work on articles outside of user-space; that’s what they’re there for. As for User:MLee1957 being an “ Alt ” account, this sockpuppet investigation resulted in the obvious conclusion as follows: which clearly indicates two people in two separate places . I ask you to not engage in baseless allegations on that score from hereon. Greg L ( talk ) 23:55, 29 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I second the motion for Speedy procedural close in part, per the reasons stated by Sirfurboy🏄 . More importantly, I spent a small fraction of the time the community has so-far wasted on this disruption by adding two much-needed citations establishing where Cavalier Rural Electric Cooperative is headquartered and what area it serves. Thus, the foundational premiss upon which this AfD is based is moot. Adding citations beats and endless cycle tendentious wikidrama . Greg L ( talk ) 00:12, 30 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep It has been established by others here that Cavalier Rural Electric Cooperative is A) notable (electrical co-ops have their own category here on Wikipedia), B) this AFD was improperly brought against the directions of the person who closed the last one, C) the article now has citations on two key facts. First a PROD, then an AFD. This new AFD, fresh on the heels of the previous one, should not have been started. MLee1957 ( talk ) 00:43, 30 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ). No further edits should be made to this page.

speedy keep

Bankruptcy of Penn Central: This article only had 3 paragraphs about the bankruptcy. The rest is about the Penn Central Transportation Company. Not sure this calls for a standalone page. Longhornsg ( talk ) 22:37, 15 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Withdraw. Will properly nominate at WP:RfD . Longhornsg ( talk ) 22:42, 15 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ). No further edits should be made to this page.

speedy keep

Itchy: Vitaium ( talk ) 06:51, 11 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Arts , Film , Television , Comics and animation , Entertainment , Science , Behavioural science , and Biology . Vitaium ( talk ) 06:51, 11 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Speedy Keep This page is a perfectly reasonable Disambiguation page, and this AFD has no chance of success. Exemplo347 ( talk ) 06:55, 11 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep Yes, what Exemplo347 said. Imaginatorium ( talk ) 07:06, 11 July 2023 (UTC Speedy Keep per WP:DAB . APK whisper in my ear 07:19, 11 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep as good disambiguation page. Hogo-2020 ( talk ) 13:43, 11 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Speedy Keep . Solid disambig page. — Carter (Tcr25) ( talk ) 14:25, 11 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Speedy keep , getting to WP:SNOW at this point. BD2412 T 20:02, 11 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep Perfectly good disambiguation page. SportingFlyer T · C 21:57, 11 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Snow keep @ Vitaium : if you think this word should be made into a redirect you should start a move discussion instead. ★Trekker ( talk ) 22:26, 11 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Speedly Keep : User:Vitaium I don't think that the article is incorrect.The article is the perfect one to be in Wikipedia so i think this might be your mistake please check it on. MICHAEL 942006 ( talk ) 17:35, 12 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ). No further edits should be made to this page.

speedy keep

North of England cricket team: The only sources you provided were CricketArchive and Scores & Biographies, which are not considered reliable or independent for this purpose. You also did not provide any context or history of the team, or explain why it is notable or relevant. DarklarkOxs ( talk ) 21:00, 22 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions . DarklarkOxs ( talk ) 21:00, 22 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Speedy keep per WP:SK#2 as a bad faith revenge nomination. The deletion rationale also appears to have been written by ChatGPT. 192.76.8.94 ( talk ) 21:06, 22 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Speedy keep per 192.76.8.94 and above AfD discussion. WhichUser AmI 21:20, 22 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Cricket and England . Shellwood ( talk ) 21:16, 22 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ). No further edits should be made to this page.

speedy keep

Wu Yuzhang Honors College: It should be notable but that needs evidence. It has been in CAT:NN for 14 years; hopefully we can now resolve this. Boleyn ( talk ) 12:44, 18 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Schools and China . Owen× ☎ 12:58, 18 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions . Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 18:21, 18 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] I found two sources that may meet the requirement of GNG, one from the biography of the former president (as part of the biography series for some academicians of the Chinese Academy of Engineering ), another from Journal of Sichuan Normal University (it's a different university and not affliated with Sichuan University , which this college belongs to) 大学之魂：中国工程院院士、四川大学校长谢和平 [ The soul of the university - Xie Heping, Academician of the Chinese Academy of Engineering and President of Sichuan University ]. 在川两院院士丛书 (in Chinese). 四川人民出版社. 2016. p. 110. ISBN 978-7-220-09824-6 . Retrieved 2024-01-21 . "Wu Yuzhang College requires students to complete undergraduate courses within two and a half years, exchange abroad for one year, and then return to school to complete their graduation thesis. The school has been cultivating this type of top students for nearly ten years. Many of its graduates have been admitted to world-renowned universities such as Harvard and Yale to study for master's and doctoral degrees. Some students have published high-level publications during their undergraduate studies..." Li, Wenxin; Chen, Wei. "Building Platforms and Mechanism Innovation for Talent Cultivation in Research-Oriented Comprehensive Universities" (PDF) . Journal of Sichuan Normal University (Social Science Edition) . Retrieved 21 January 2024 . "Sichuan University established Wu Yuzhang College as a platform for cultivating top innovative talents. In the past five years, students have published 6 SCI papers and 55 core journal papers, and won 4 international awards and 132 national awards. It can be seen that research-oriented universities have created more favorable growth conditions for the cultivation of top innovative talents through institutional and mechanism innovation..."-- 94rain Talk 09:04, 21 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗ plicit 14:17, 25 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources . The subject passes Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies)#Schools , which says: All universities, colleges and schools, including high schools, middle schools, primary (elementary) schools, and schools that only provide a support to mainstream education must either satisfy the notability guidelines for organizations , the general notability guideline , or both. For-profit educational organizations and institutions are considered commercial organizations and must satisfy those criteria. (See also WP:SCHOOLOUTCOMES ) Sources The sources found in 94rain ( talk · contribs )'s excellent research. Tu, Shiwei 涂诗薇; Long, Yumei 龙玉梅 (2006-06-30). "首个荣誉学院川大挂牌成立" [The first honours college of Sichuan University was established]. Tianfu Morning Post (in Chinese). Archived from the original on 2024-01-28 . Retrieved 2024-01-28 – via Sina Corporation . The article notes: "昨（29）日下午，四川首个荣誉学院———吴玉章学院正式在四川大学挂牌成立，川大校长谢和平将出任吴玉章学院荣誉院长，他在挂牌仪式上介绍说，四川大学将从进入该校的学生中选拔出优秀者进入该学院学习。而学生则可享受自选专业的“优待”。 ... 此次吴玉章学院将把四川大学的创新班和联合班合并，学院性质为荣誉学院，管理权直接归属学校，与其他学院平行，... 学校将每年从全国报考四川大学的高分考生及保送生中通过考试选拔产生学院学生，每年招生人数约占学校招生总数的1.5%，学院规模总体不超过1000人。" From Google Translate: "Yesterday (29th) afternoon, Sichuan’s first honors college, Wu Yuzhang College, was officially established at Sichuan University. Xie Heping, president of Sichuan University, will serve as the honorary dean of Wu Yuzhang College. It was introduced at the listing ceremony that Sichuan University will select outstanding students from the students entering the school to study in the college. Students can enjoy "preferential treatment" in their chosen major. ... This time Wu Yuzhang College will merge the innovative classes and joint classes of Sichuan University. The college will be an honors college, with management rights directly vested in the school, parallel to other colleges. ... The school will select college students through examinations every year from high-scoring candidates and recommended students who apply for Sichuan University across the country. The annual enrollment accounts for about 1.5% of the school's total enrollment. The overall size of the college does not exceed 1,000 students." There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow Wu Yuzhang Honors College ( simplified Chinese : 吴玉章学院 ; traditional Chinese : 吳玉章學院 ) to pass Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline , which requires "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject". Cunard ( talk ) 09:00, 28 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Withdraw nomination per excellent comments above. Boleyn ( talk ) 09:29, 28 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ). No further edits should be made to this page.

speedy keep

Brendan Mahoney: The person does not have WP:SIGCOV and does not meet WP:GNG in my opinion. Lightburst ( talk ) 00:13, 21 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Newspapers.com brings up a decent amount of coverage, e.g. Vancouver Sun feature story (further Sun coverage: [100] [101] and [102] ), The Province (further Province coverage: [103] , [104] and [105] ), and Calgary Herald . The first Sun piece is the best one BeanieFan11 ( talk ) 03:10, 21 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Thanks @ BeanieFan11 : these can be added to the article: his notability is derived from something other than his position as directorof player personnel. I will withdraw. Lightburst ( talk ) 04:20, 21 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ). No further edits should be made to this page.

speedy keep

Mandelbrot Competition: Helpful Raccoon ( talk ) 03:16, 18 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Mathematics and United States of America . Helpful Raccoon ( talk ) 03:16, 18 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ). No further edits should be made to this page.

speedy keep

Crazy Gary's Mobile Disco: Possible ATD is redirect or merge/redirect to Gary Owen , but it could unbalance that article. Boleyn ( talk ) 15:04, 17 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Theatre and Wales . – Laundry Pizza 03 ( d c̄ ) 15:49, 17 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep – I have added more sources, including reviews in several major newspapers. The play has been published by a major publisher and has had several productions. Verbcatcher ( talk ) 01:31, 22 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Withdraw nomination per above. Boleyn ( talk ) 21:37, 24 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ). No further edits should be made to this page.

speedy keep

Draft:Evolutionary Tinkering: So requesting to delete this page. Evolutionary_tinkering iVickyChoudhary ( talk ) 07:27, 11 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ). No further edits should be made to this page.

speedy keep

GPT4-Chan: Popo Dameron ⁠ talk 02:50, 22 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions . Popo Dameron ⁠ talk 02:50, 22 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep (reluctantly): I would argue the sources provided establish notability, as there are several of them, they are independent, and the coverage seems to be significant in the few that I checked out. It's not the best article I've ever seen, and I really hate to give the creators of the software an eternal perch on one of the few reputable corners of the internet, but it meets our criteria for notability and verifiability. WeirdNAnnoyed ( talk ) 02:56, 22 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] In my opinion, in the best case, the article is, even if potentially notable, not ready for the main space and should be worked on as a draft. Most of what has been written is not usable and does not belong here at all. Popo Dameron ⁠ talk 03:44, 22 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Since the topic is covered by multiple sources, it does establish notability and verifiability. However, it is understandable that such a controversial, inflammatory, and possibly harmful topic could not be welcomed on the wiki. The article could either be left up so multiple people can correct, improve, and make sure the article just informs and does not promote the topic, or it could possibly be moved back into draft space and worked on until it meets the requirements and/or safety standards of those who would want to remove it. That way, we can make sure the wiki is not promoting this topic and people's concerns can be addressed by their contributions to the article. Targed ( talk ) 04:21, 22 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Consider: this was a valuable and noteworthy social experiment. An AI was trained over a toxic environment, and reflected this toxicity. It's important to get a visceral sense of the potential dangers of AI, and Yannic's work did just that. As an analogy: YouTube censors harm, so you can find many videos of miraculous car accident-avoidances but no grizzly car accidents. This will give the viewer a false psychological sense that a miraculous escape is likely, while a grizzly accident is unlikely. So is this YouTube policy ultimately helpful or harmful? 2A0E:1D47:D201:6300:A83D:5A11:143E:127E ( talk ) 10:55, 22 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep . Meets WP:GNG via the references in the article including Engadget , Vice , Fortune , The Register , and a staff article at Thenextweb . A search finds enough WP:SUSTAINED coverage in academic sources as well eg [50] [51] (later published in IEEE conference ), [52] , (i.e. even if we consider this topic an event, it has become a WP:CASESTUDY ) There may be unreliable sourcing in the article (I see a blog, a substack, and some other iffy stuff), but we can WP:FIXTHEPROBLEM . — siro χ o 06:27, 22 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep . Extensive coverage in non-primary sources clearly establish notability. The subject matter being controversial or inflammatory is irrelevant to its inclusion in an encyclopedia. Draftifying would only slow down work on improving it. Owen× ☎ 12:51, 22 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep (withdrawn). As other editors have said, I can see now that the sources are definitely notable enough for WP:GNG and the article isn't nearly bad enough to WP:TNT . I might have been a bit hasty in doing this when I saw that the article had been rejected three times and no improvements were made before moving it to the main space... Popo Dameron ⁠ talk 19:06, 22 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ). No further edits should be made to this page.

speedy keep

Military history of the Republic of Artsakh: The article's content currently consists of duplicated content from its linked articles and doesn't have any original content from what I can tell. I'm not familiar with "Military history" articles but to me, I can't see the utility of this article. All of its current content is already covered in the main Republic of Artsakh article I think as well as its subarticles. Much of the history of Artsakh deals with "military history" as well so I'm not exactly sure what differentiates this from the main History of Artsakh article. Would like to others' thoughts on this though. Cheers, Dan the Animator 22:59, 29 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History , Military , Armenia , and Azerbaijan . Dan the Animator 22:59, 29 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : Article needs improvement, but it fits into SUMMARYSTYLE well, I don't think stubbish really describes the article. This would fit as the parent article for the military history articles summarized and hatted in the article. Article lacks sources, but the needed refs are present in the child articles to show this meets GNG and fits into a reasonable SUMMARYSTYLE structure. I can see how this dups some content from the main Republic of Artsakh article, but this I think is a reason for improvement, not deletion. // Timothy :: talk 07:06, 30 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : I think this could/should be developed, but it requires a proficiency in Armenian that I do not have, so I cannot really help there. With regards to the difference with the main article, well, I believe this one could deal with a lot of minutiae that are unsuitable for History of Artsakh (comments on military equipment, individual battles, etc.). It will need a lot of babysitting, though, as PoV wars are bound to happen. Ostalgia ( talk ) 08:02, 30 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment thanks y'all for the replies! I'll withdraw this nom now given the reasoning above and apologies for starting it in the first place! Cheers, Dan the Animator 18:25, 30 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ). No further edits should be made to this page.

speedy keep

The Devil On Trial: Sorry about that. So, the user who created the page has been blocked on multiple accounts: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/সিডাটিভ হিপনোটিক্স . (per MushyYank request, stricken) This page, before I did digging on it, was purely promotional. I added several sources (incidentally, my additions were the reason the PROD was removed), but I don't think this passes WP:NFILM , in my understanding. It's possible that I'm not following something in the criteria that does make this notable, but I don't know that the documentary should have its own page. In reading the reviews, they focus mainly on the 1981 trial rather than on the film. Some of them mention The Conjuring: The Devil Made Me Do It . One of them mentioned an older documentary that they said "did it better". I'm willing to dig for more sources if the community decides as a whole that it passes WP:NFILM . 1 might apply b/c there are reviews. But: its only claim to "historical notability" is its coverage of a historical event, of which it is not unique; I saw no indication that the film is up for any kind of award; as far as I know it hasn't been selected for preservation in a national archive; nor did I find any notice of it being taught in an accredited university's film program. As for the inclusionary criteria that aren't part of the top : it's not unique in any aspect of its production; there aren't any major film stars in it; and it was made by Netflix, so it doesn't fall under the third one. So, before I spend another several hours sussing out sources for something that, frankly, I stumbled over because of a CS1 error and was erroneously marked as AFI, I thought there should be consensus that it actually passes WP:NFILM . OIM20 ( talk ) 16:52, 31 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film and Crime . OIM20 ( talk ) 16:52, 31 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : The film only needs to fit one of the criteria of WP:NFILM to demonstrate notability. (Otherwise, every film described on Wikipedia would have to win an award and be preserved in an archive, which is an absurdly high bar.) So the relevant measure here is that it's received multiple reviews. In this case, the combo of the Time article and the New York Times article are enough to demonstrate notability. Good job on rescuing the article! Toughpigs ( talk ) 17:04, 31 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Understood. To clarify, I meant that the PROD I placed on it myself was removed because of the sources I had added in, before I put the PROD on it. The reason given for removing the PROD was only that there were a number of sources. From what you've said I understand that the reason was b/c of the reviews. And to be fair, the two you mention were included in the promotional piece it was before, though the NYT review does not say what the article creator claimed it said. Part of my concern stems from the fact that many of the reviews focus in a large part on the incident rather than on the film. I don't think I included many of those - it was wee hours for me and I've since closed those tabs. There were a lot of reviews, but not all of them from places that I think are considered RS. But thank you for explaining. Since it only needs two reviews and it has a number, I will try to focus my research on the production and casting areas, to get a better source than IMDB. OIM20 ( talk ) 18:09, 31 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] I'm confused. What's the reason advanced for deletion exactly? The film received multiple reviews, including 1 in the NYT . .... Strong keep . (I'm the one who deproDed the page, fwiw). - My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 17:07, 31 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] I know you did. I'm not trying to be contrarian, though I'm sure it seems it. I really was thinking that this needed more than just reviews, so I misunderstood the criteria for NFILM. Not the first time I've misunderstood something. After I realized that the AFI was placed on the article erroneously, I looked into the article creator's talk page and found the note about them being a banned user. I realized when looking at the other pages in drafts listed on their talk page that they were posting promotional articles - which was what the other cleanup on the article you took care of (the sections I stopped at b/c I wasn't sure continuing would be worth the effort if it was just going to get nuked) were. Thank you for taking care of that. Thank you for your patience. I still consider myself relatively new. I'm trying to learn. OIM20 ( talk ) 18:15, 31 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Should i change my talk page? I do not wish or mean any harm to anyone.... please guide me, i will change accordingly. Omadacycline ( talk ) 14:34, 1 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Move to lowercase "on" if we keep it or recreate it again. Dicklyon ( talk ) 19:26, 31 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment: @ OIM20 : thank you for your clarifications and concern. Two things, though: 1) the user who created the page has been blocked on multiple accounts: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/সিডাটিভ হিপনোটিক্স : no, I read the page and I'm sorry but that's not accurate. The page creator is NOT blocked and he says he's not the person in question. Can I ask you to strike that comment or to rephrase that bit of your rationale at the very least, please? 2) Did I understand your current position: you now think the film is notable, am I right? Would you consider withdrawing? It might save other contributors some time. Thank you. - My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) , 22:23, 31 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Yes, I'll withdraw - how do I do that? OIM20 ( talk ) 05:10, 1 April 2024 (UTC); I think I understand how. OIM20 ( talk ) 05:43, 1 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Withdraw - I apologize for the trouble and thank everyone for their patience. OIM20 ( talk ) 05:43, 1 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Is there any problem with the content of the page? Sock? I am not any sock. And i just want to contribute.... . the devil on trial is not about anyone.... I am confused, have i done anything wrong. .... Omadacycline ( talk ) 14:32, 1 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] The "Withdraw" notice you replied to means that the nomination is withdrawn. OIM20 ( talk ) 07:55, 2 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] the devil on trial: The Devil On Trial: Unpacking the reality behind Netflix's chilling documentary, is it a true story? - The Economic Times (indiatimes.com) The Devil On Trial - Wikidata The Devil on Trial (2023) - IMDb Watch The Devil on Trial | Netflix Official Site The Devil on Trial | Rotten Tomatoes Omadacycline ( talk ) 14:37, 1 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Linking to the Wikidata item isn't a source. The others are on the page already, with the exception of the Economic Times. I don't know that there's much more to add that isn't about the case itself, unless there's a review in that article. I can't read it- it pops up a "login to read" screen and then it very kindly doesn't give me a spot to do that, or to create an account. I'd like to have had a news article about the production process more, b/c I'd like to replace the one primary source for that. And I'd like to have something that lists the first two actors in the cast list other than the IMDB page, since that's a user edited site. But I didn't find either of those things. OIM20 ( talk ) 08:01, 2 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ). No further edits should be made to this page.

speedy keep

Fey Truscott-Sade: Doesn't meet GNG or SIGCOV. Pokelego999 ( talk ) 01:24, 30 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements , Science fiction and fantasy , and Comics and animation . Pokelego999 ( talk ) 01:24, 30 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ). No further edits should be made to this page.

speedy keep

Zaal Udumashvili: Appears to be a failure of WP:GNG and WP:NPOL . The original article was a series of unsourced quotes feeling more promotional in nature than anything. Unsourced quotes have been removed. IceBergYYC ( talk ) 16:58, 31 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions . IceBergYYC ( talk ) 16:58, 31 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Georgia (country)-related deletion discussions . A. B. ( talk • contribs • global count ) 17:05, 31 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : The article does not represent this, but the subject passes WP:NPOL as a member of the Parliament of Georgia . Curbon7 ( talk ) 21:19, 31 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I've rewritten the article, added a couple of sources and removed the uncited bits. Curbon7 ( talk ) 21:44, 31 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Withdrawing as nominator to Speedy Keep meets NPOL as stated by Curbon7. source [27] IceBergYYC ( talk ) 21:43, 31 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Kudos to the nominator for withdrawing the nomination when new information shows up. This is a collective search for the right answer and I admire people like IceBergYYC that don't see AfD as a zero-sum test of wills. -- A. B. ( talk • contribs • global count ) 22:32, 31 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ). No further edits should be made to this page.

speedy keep

Coponius: I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2024 March 18 . — cyberbot I Talk to my owner :Online 13:39, 18 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians , History , Israel , Palestine , and Italy . Skynxnex ( talk ) 13:54, 18 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep - One of a series of notable Romans being nominated for deletion by this edtor. See my comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gessius Florus . Undoubtedly notable. Treated in many books (e.g. [20] ). Scholar has nearly 2000 articles to sort through, many/most being relevant. This should be a snow keep. Sirfurboy🏄 ( talk ) 14:01, 18 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] A lot of articles have been deleted that I might consider 'undoubtably' notable, ( Tristan Tate ). Yet if they don't pass WP:GNG they should be deleted. Serrwinner ( talk ) 14:20, 18 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Speedy Keep , pointless nom, no WP:BEFORE attempt, and regarding the "Almost no sources" rationale, the article is mostly based on the "Coponius" entry in The Jewish Encyclopedia and on A History of the Jewish People , Harvard University Press , two sources that speak volumes about Coponius' notability. The only excuse for the nominator is that they are a fairly new account with about 300 edits, otherwise I would consider them to be openly disruptive. -- C avarrone 19:45, 18 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Speedy Keep Improper nomination. TulsaPoliticsFan ( talk ) 22:32, 18 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep . Clearly notable as governor of Judaea, and one about whom at least some detail is known, making it less practical to merge him into an article about other governors. P Aculeius ( talk ) 23:41, 18 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep . Clearly notable. -- Necrothesp ( talk ) 11:35, 19 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per User talk:Serrwinner #Roman AfDs , this is a pointy nomination of a clearly notable subject. FortunateSons ( talk ) 14:06, 19 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ). No further edits should be made to this page.

speedy keep

Anna Nicole Smith: You Don't Know Me: Fails WP:NFILM . QuestFour ( talk ) 21:33, 30 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Withdrawn by nominator , seems to be a snowball. QuestFour ( talk ) 15:23, 31 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions . QuestFour ( talk ) 21:33, 30 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep The film has been reviewed by numerous major publications. The ones currently cited in the article are from Variety , The Atlantic , The New York Times , The Guardian , and Time Magazine . Clearly the film meets notability guidelines with such coverage. Thriley ( talk ) 23:14, 30 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep This is a well-sourced stub with plenty of room for expansion. Darkfrog24 ( talk ) 01:08, 31 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep multiple sigcov in-depth secondary reviews in WP:RS . Resonant Dis tor tion 11:56, 31 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment to nominator : @ QuestFour : Would you consider withdrawing your nomination? A Snowball Keep seems more than likely. - My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 13:00, 31 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ). No further edits should be made to this page.

speedy keep

Spanish Cobras: It has been edited almost exclusively by one IP editor (although their specific IPv6 has changed, all of them edit in the same pattern and time) since April 2020. Before that, it received little editorial attention. It has had a {{ more citations needed }} since February 2011. There are nearly no inline citations. It has nearly 0 sources to corroborate the majority of information in the article. Of the 4 that exist, only 1 is reliable and has significant coverage (Chicago Tribune). Attempts to find sources have failed, as nothing that I can find satisfies RS and also has coverage beyond 2 words (or 3). It also reads as a FORUM and is full of ultimately unverifiable information. If it does turn out to be notable, it would be far better to blow it up . WhoAteMyButter ( 🌇 talk │ 🍂 contribs ) 23:39, 29 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions . WhoAteMyButter ( 🌇 talk │ 🍂 contribs ) 23:39, 29 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Puerto Rico and Illinois . Skynxnex ( talk ) 01:38, 30 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Subject is notable and has many sources, particularly in newspapers and crime-related sources. Article would be better re-written instead, not deleted. I withdraw my deletion nomination. WhoAteMyButter ( 🌇 talk │ 🍂 contribs ) 18:16, 5 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep - From poking around, there is an insane amount of coverage on the (Insane) Spanish Cobras, especially starting around June 1977. So there is WP:RSed coverage via newspapers.com and from the Schaumburg Police Department educational pamphlet on street gangs covers them. Surely, any city police department with a gang unit would most likely have material on them. There is coverage in books. 1 , 2 , 3 and more. There's coverage in newspapers and here by a guy who says he's only interested in researching 20th century (street) gangs. In 2019 . They feature in arts and culture too, and the FBI 's got a file on them. Perennial crime coverage won't stop. So stay tuned for more to come, folks, as they are a "folk" gang, not a "people" gang. 4 , 5 , 6 , in 2023. United Gangs , Hour Detroit has brief mentions. Perhaps the article should be worked on. The Eloquent Peasant ( talk ) 13:47, 30 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Good reference finds, greatly appreciated! Disappointed in myself that I couldn't find them. Seems they definitely are notable. Although, I do believe the article should be re-done anew. I'll see what I can do and work on. WhoAteMyButter ( 🌇 talk │ 🍂 contribs ) 21:27, 2 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I've decided to withdraw my nomination, there's certainly a lot of potential here. WhoAteMyButter ( 🌇 talk │ 🍂 contribs ) 18:16, 5 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ). No further edits should be made to this page.

speedy keep

Ptolus: The article does not even make clear what works the setting is composed of, outside am ambiguous section 'sources' listing three self-published books. 99% of the article is unreferenced plot summary (aka WP:FANCRUFT ), reception is only 1%, and said reception is composed of the claim that "It has received good reviews" sourced to two unreliable fan-reviews at WP:SPS sites (RPGnet and slashdot...). The only suggestion of notability in the article is the claim that the work won an ENnie Award (actually, according to that list, it won 4 - out of ~2 two dozen categories). Not sure if this award (awards) is sufficient to keep this (nothing in the article about the award suggests it is particularly significant for the gaming scene), my BEFORE shows nothing else that we can use as a source, so if we were to enforce WP:V we would be left with a substub catalogue entry and a sentence on ENies. Perhaps WP:ATD-R to the designer? Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | reply here 04:12, 24 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements , Science fiction and fantasy , and Games . Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | reply here 04:12, 24 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep - won the Ennie award which is the top award in the roleplaying industry for product of the year. This alone makes it notable. I do agree the article could do with a bit of an overhaul though, howevre WP:AFDNOTCLEANUP . Canterbury Tail talk 04:32, 24 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] @ Canterbury Tail "top award in the roleplaying industry" - according to whom? This claim is not even in our article about the awards. I'd be happy to accept it if you can find a RS for this claim (and I encourage you to add it to the article). Which was prodded just last year ( [25] ), hardly encouraging thinking this is a major award. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | reply here 08:25, 24 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep It actually won TWO Ennie awards, if you read the linked pdf. Slashdot and RPGnet are both longstanding sites (20+ years?) with editorial control, and the reviews are both posted by staff members, not random bloggers. So GNG is met--no objection to cleanup and expansion of the reception section, no objection to looking for and incorporating other coverage. I just don't see a good merge target: Monte Cook would be better than deletion, but that article needs to be buffed--the guy's been around the hobby since I started 40+ years ago, and worked on some major products. Jclemens ( talk ) 06:43, 24 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I'll ping @ VickKiang for 3O in the reliability of these, as he is experienced with them. However, Slashdot is a social news website where "Summaries of stories and links to news articles are submitted by Slashdot's own users". The article appears to be a blog ("Posted by Zonk"). Two RSN discusions do not suggest the site is seen as reliable ( 1 , 2 ). Ditto for RPGnet : "users have contributed numerous reviews of board and card games.". It is considered unreliable by Board games WP ( Wikipedia:WikiProject_Board_and_table_games/Sources#Unreliable ) and self-published in related RSN discussions: 1 , 2 . So right now I very much doubt we are meeting the requirement of being covered in-depth by reliable sources. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | reply here 08:22, 24 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Users could submit anything to slashdot, but what got posted was decided by moderators. If Zonk posted it, Zonk was site staff at the time it was posted. Reviewing both sources, I don't see the discussion of other sources from those sites as normative: they read like RS'es, and I'm not accepting uncritically others' criticism of the sites. Jclemens ( talk ) 08:59, 26 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] A complete list of Ennie Award nominees and winners for 2007 can be found at https://ennie-awards.com/portfolio-item/2007-nominees-and-winners/ . Ptolus won four gold medals and an honorable mention. Guinness323 ( talk ) 22:43, 24 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep It being Christmas Eve, it may take me a few days to overhaul this article, but so far I have found a full page review in Coleção Dragon Slayer ; an interview with Cook about this setting in Polyhedron , a 3-page interview with Cook that delves into Ptolus in Coleção Dragão Brasil ; references to the game in Appelcline's Designers & Dragons ; a review in Inquest Gamer ; another review in RPG Review ; etc. Some of these will also be used in Cook's own wiki. Give me a few days to do the family thing and then I will get on this. Guinness323 ( talk ) 22:38, 24 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] @ Guinness323 Sounds good, i you think you can save this I don't mind withdrawing this. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | reply here 11:37, 25 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Yes, as noted, there are definitely enough sources to make this notable. Won't happen until later this week, though. Guinness323 ( talk ) 18:17, 25 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] @ Liz Can you close this as withdrawn/keep? Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | reply here 02:55, 26 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per all of the above. BOZ ( talk ) 08:18, 25 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ). No further edits should be made to this page.

speedy keep

Yellow (2006 feature film): I found no reviews on Rotten Tomatoes . I did a WP:BEFORE and found nothing suitable or reliable enough to pass NFO, NFSOURCES and WP:NEXIST . The Film Creator ( talk ) 18:58, 23 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions . The Film Creator ( talk ) 18:58, 23 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Puerto Rico-related deletion discussions . CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 20:56, 23 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Added a few things. to the page. Please have a look. Keep . - My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 22:12, 23 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep Variety and TV Guide reviews are enough to pass WP:NFILM Donald D23 talk to me 02:08, 24 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : There is also a review in the Los Angeles Times . Somebodyidkfkdt ( talk ) 08:11, 24 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep and comment . Since the fall of 2023, The Film Creator has nominated 28 articles for deletion with only 3 closing as delete . That's pretty remarkable. Of the articles that were kept, half were kept speedily. This verges on a situation where The Film Creator should seriously consider if they should refrain from starting more AFDs. From the many film nominations, it can be widely observed that: (a) Rotten Tomatoes is useless in many cases. (b) The Film Creator is unable to find reviews that other users have little problems finding. Why is that? (c) The Film Creator should learn from these users, and maybe even contact them directly instead of wasting everyone's time with ill-conceived nominations. (d) Sure, the articles are improved through this process, but AFD is not cleanup. Geschichte ( talk ) 12:18, 24 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per added sources. Toughpigs ( talk ) 17:05, 24 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per above. TROUT for The Film Creator and I suggest closing this as speedy keep. voorts ( talk / contributions ) 00:10, 28 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] I withdraw this nomination. Apparently, I need to practice WP:BEFORE more carefully. I vow not to nominate any film articles for the rest of 2024. The Film Creator ( talk ) 02:07, 28 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ). No further edits should be made to this page.

speedy keep

Shayde: As it stands, he doesn't meet GNG or SIGCOV. Pokelego999 ( talk ) 01:25, 30 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements , Science fiction and fantasy , and Comics and animation . Pokelego999 ( talk ) 01:25, 30 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ). No further edits should be made to this page.

speedy keep

Clint Eastwood at the 2012 Republican National Convention: There is an article about the Political life of Clint Eastwood so I wouldn't have a problem with merge, although I think we should delete. Desertarun ( talk ) 09:57, 21 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers , Events , Politics , and Florida . Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 10:04, 21 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep - Of course it wasn't a speech, but he certainty made the news afterwards. He was there for his entertainment value. It was an Eastwood performance, what he does so well, this time at a political convention. It was possibly more remembered than anything else that happened at the convention that night. As such, he did what he was hired for, and had people talking about it for a long time afterwards. We're discussing it now. It's part of a series on Eastwood, and should remain as such. — Maile ( talk ) 15:20, 21 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep a very notable appearance which is still discussed years later. Lightburst ( talk ) 19:43, 21 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : WP:NOTNEWS is definitely a consideration, but there are sources from after the event: this one from over a year later , for instance. Also discussed in a biography of Eastwood here , and in a 2013 book looking retrospectively at the 2012 campaign here . To me, that's clear evidence that the notability of this event is more than that of a news story, even leaving aside the huge number of 2012 sources in the article. UndercoverClassicist ( talk ) 20:24, 21 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep: per Lightburst Jack4576 ( talk ) 01:07, 22 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep this is definitely a WP:LASTING event that is still mentioned today, 11 years later. The 1st AfD from 2013 already looked at it as beyond WP:NOTNEWS . – The Grid ( talk ) 01:37, 22 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep . If NOTNEWS, then why is it being discussed on the national stage 10 years later? [14] . Here's [15] a mention about it in 2020. This in addition to coverage in later presidential election cycle years. [16] , [17] I would support renaming, maybe to Clint Eastwood's empty chair speech . Jacona ( talk ) 14:42, 22 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I'm going to Withdraw this one. Desertarun ( talk ) 14:47, 22 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ). No further edits should be made to this page.

speedy keep

Pseudoneuroterus mazandarani: it doesn't have a taxonbar. Hongsy ( talk ) 14:07, 28 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Animal and Organisms . Hongsy ( talk ) 14:07, 28 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep. That someone hasn't added a taxonbar or wikidata yet isn't a reason for deletion, that's a WP:FIXIT situation. The species clearly meets WP:NSPECIES having a valid name and in reliable sourcing, so this isn't even one we'd normally be debating. KoA ( talk ) 14:21, 28 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep Article could use some work but is properly sourced; this is a recognized species. WeirdNAnnoyed ( talk ) 14:53, 28 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep No indication of invalidity. @ Hongsy : would you please stop with these bad nominations? Some understanding of what constitutes a valid name is required before wading into this area. This is getting disruptive. -- Elmidae ( talk · contribs ) 15:32, 28 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep - notable per WP:NSPECIES -- A. B. ( talk • contribs • global count ) 16:56, 28 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep (or speedy keep ?) for all the sensible policy-based reasons above jengod ( talk ) 22:36, 28 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ). No further edits should be made to this page.

speedy keep

Cantref Arfon: The topic may or may not be notable (my BEFORE gives some passing mentions, but maybe something more could be found), but I fear what we have needs WP:TNT , given the lack of sources. WP:V is a major concern, as is the possibility of WP:HOAXex or at least pure WP:OR in this. Possible ATD redirect targets, if this cannot be salvaged now, include District of Arfon and Kingdom of Gwynedd . Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | reply here 09:44, 18 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Literature and Wales . Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | reply here 09:44, 18 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to District of Arfon per WP:TNT and a lack of a better destination. Though I do wonder, if there should just be an Arfon article which may be easier to justify and source hopefully. Dank Jae 18:20, 18 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : this is notable as a historical district. Its existence and approximate borders are confirmed by the RCAHMW . [45] Even though the sourcing is minimal at present, it is very probable that reliable sources do exist, possibly some of the sources cited in Cantref . Wikipedia:Deletion policy#Reasons for deletion includes Articles for which thorough attempts to find reliable sources to verify them have failed - have such attempts been made? For the most part, the article does not appear to present original research, and presents material that is supported the the geography and history of the area, and are often (possibly always) supported by other articles. While citations should be given in the article where the statements are made, this requirement is widely unmet and this is not an adequate reason for an article to be deleted. Verbcatcher ( talk ) 20:21, 18 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Moreover , the Find sources links at the top of this discussion for 'books', 'news' and 'scholar' all give potential sources. These should have been investigated before the article was nominated for deletion, see WP:BEFORE . Verbcatcher ( talk ) 20:44, 18 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] WP:THEREMAYBESOURCES is not a very strong argument for keeping unreferenced piece of OR... Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | reply here 11:11, 19 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep . I've added some sources; I think the topic is notable and the article could be expanded further. There are a couple of bits of information that I wasn't able to verify but we're far from needing TNT. Sojourner in the earth ( talk ) 13:24, 19 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep , as per above. --- Ehrenkater ( talk ) 14:49, 19 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep following newer responses above and an article in a better state, although still open to the original re-direct if this AfD leads elsewhere. Dank Jae 17:36, 19 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Withdraw . Article has been improved, addressing my concerns. -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | reply here 23:30, 19 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ). No further edits should be made to this page.

speedy keep

Taygete citranthes: Hongsy ( talk ) 14:10, 28 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Animal and Organisms . Hongsy ( talk ) 14:10, 28 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep. Clearly meets WP:NSPECIES with not just a valid name in published sources but additional description. It's not clear why these pages are being nominated at AfD. KoA ( talk ) 14:16, 28 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep seems well-sourced enough to pass WP:NSPECIES . WeirdNAnnoyed ( talk ) 14:51, 28 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep No indication of invalidity. @ Hongsy : would you please stop with these bad nominations? Some understanding of what constitutes a valid name is required before wading into this area. This is getting disruptive. -- Elmidae ( talk · contribs ) 15:31, 28 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Brazil-related deletion discussions . Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 15:38, 28 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep - notable per WP:NSPECIES -- A. B. ( talk • contribs • global count ) 16:56, 28 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep . All species are notable and pass WP:NSPECIES . Eastmain ( talk • contribs ) 06:47, 29 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ). No further edits should be made to this page.

speedy keep

Iris Wildthyme: While she seems notable in the fictional universe, she doesn't meet GNG or SIGCOV. Pokelego999 ( talk ) 01:27, 30 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements , Science fiction and fantasy , and Literature . Pokelego999 ( talk ) 01:27, 30 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ). No further edits should be made to this page.

speedy keep

Babu Karam Singh Bal: — Preceding unsigned comment added by Unionrow ( talk • contribs ) 08:31, 16 January 2024 (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/2024 January 20 . — cyberbot I Talk to my owner :Online 17:15, 20 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians , India , and Punjab . Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 17:28, 20 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment : Can someone link the first nomination here? Or is this the first AfD for this subject? Jeraxmoira🐉 ( talk ) 09:17, 24 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ). No further edits should be made to this page.

speedy keep

Abraham Solomonick: It has been in CAT:NN for 14 years; hopefully we can now resolve this. Boleyn ( talk ) 19:07, 17 January 2024 (UTC) Withdraw nomination , my error. Boleyn ( talk ) 19:08, 17 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ). No further edits should be made to this page.

speedy keep

Marullus (prefect of Judea): Not close to meeting WP:GNG Serrwinner ( talk ) 13:11, 18 March 2024 (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/2024 March 18 . — cyberbot I Talk to my owner :Online 13:41, 18 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians , History , Israel , and Palestine . Skynxnex ( talk ) 13:57, 18 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep - One of a series of notable Romans being nominated for deletion by this edtor. See my comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gessius Florus . Undoubtedly notable. AfD is not for article cleanup. Sirfurboy🏄 ( talk ) 14:03, 18 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep . Automatically notable as a senior government official. People will use this series of nominations as evidence that AFD is broken and that some people are more interested in deleting articles created by others than in building an encyclopedia. I urge the nominator to withdraw these AfDs. Eastmain ( talk • contribs ) 15:11, 18 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] I agree with you AfD is broken. But I don't think I should be the example here. I was more than enthusiastic to build an encyclopedia here, but that was soon crushed by the same reasons you are stating here. I was simply trying to maintain consistency to some of the ludicrous deletions of people who I viewed as notable but admins just want WP:GNG met. Heck many articles I created got deleted without the people caring. But trust me I'm not doing this in any bad faith. Serrwinner ( talk ) 15:32, 18 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Speedy Keep Improper nomination. TulsaPoliticsFan ( talk ) 22:32, 18 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep for the reasons already stated by Sirfurboy and Eastmain. P Aculeius ( talk ) 23:35, 18 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep . Obviously notable. popo dameron ⁠ talk 00:42, 19 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep . Clearly notable. -- Necrothesp ( talk ) 11:35, 19 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ). No further edits should be made to this page.

speedy keep

Melki Sedek Huang: Allan Nonymous ( talk ) 21:14, 29 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Indonesia . Allan Nonymous ( talk ) 21:14, 29 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep - appears to be a notable activist [15] with enough citations available to support SIGCOV. Meets GNG. Bhivuti45 ( talk ) 21:18, 29 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep No indication that the nominator has reviewed the existing sources on the page or performed any other WP:BEFORE activities. Jfire ( talk ) 23:27, 29 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Crime and Law . WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 01:04, 30 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep - per WP:GNG, plenty of sources and coverage. SIGCOV applies. BabbaQ ( talk ) 07:00, 30 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ). No further edits should be made to this page.

speedy keep

Mojtaba Abdollahi: I prefer the information of this article be transferred on the article that contains the list of governors in Iran. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anonymy365248 ( talk • contribs ) 13:27, June 10, 2024 (UTC) Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log ( step 3 ). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2024 June 10 . — cyberbot I Talk to my owner :Online 13:41, 10 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians and Iran . Eastmain ( talk • contribs ) 14:04, 10 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Reformatted to add the missing article name by Eastmain ( talk • contribs ) 14:03, 10 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep . Each governor is automatically notable, so there is no reason to delete the article. Eastmain ( talk • contribs ) 14:08, 10 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Agreed . Keep AlexBobCharles ( talk ) 18:22, 10 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge . I suggest we merge it to the article containing a list of current Iran governors-general if not delete. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anonymy365248 ( talk • contribs ) 14:44, 11 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment you don’t need a deletion nomination to achieve a merge. In any case we have many other articles about Iranian governors, and saying you’d prefer a merge isn’t a deletion rationale. Mccapra ( talk ) 21:25, 10 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] I know. That's why I suggest merge if not delete. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anonymy365248 ( talk • contribs ) 14:46, 11 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Speedy keep No valid reason for deletion has been offered, and the subject passes GNG. Mccapra ( talk ) 17:05, 11 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Speedy keep : Applications of WP:SKCRIT #1 and #3. The nominator has failed to provide an accurate deletion rationale and has also failed to give intelligible grounds for content deletion. The subject itself passes the general notability guideline . Aviationwikiflight ( talk ) 17:10, 11 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : Clearly notable per WP:NPOL . '''[[ User:CanonNi ]]''' ( talk • contribs ) 12:32, 13 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ). No further edits should be made to this page.

speedy keep

Dirt (1979 film): QuicoleJR ( talk ) 13:26, 11 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film , Motorsport , and United States of America . QuicoleJR ( talk ) 13:26, 11 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I've added some references - the film received a national cinema relese it deserves an entry. Britfilm ( talk ) 13:56, 11 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep or draftify - the sources at the moment demonstrate notability, and the fact that more have been added shows how the article is improvement and can be improved further. DaniloDaysOfOurLives ( talk ) 15:54, 11 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ). No further edits should be made to this page.

speedy keep

Cisco Bradley: None of the sources in the article are independent. From what I could find on google, nothing seemed to be totally independent or reliable. Note: article creator is an editor who has declared a COI. ––– GMH MELBOURNE 03:33, 10 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators , Music , and Montana . ––– GMH MELBOURNE 03:33, 10 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Work has not made an impact through citations. Xxanthippe ( talk ) 03:50, 10 October 2023 (UTC) . [ reply ] Book citations in musicology are extremely hard to find - what sources did you consult for this? -- Michael Scott Asato Cuthbert (talk) 21:25, 10 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The claim that "book citations in musicology are extremely hard to find" needs a source. A look at GS for "Musicology" shows many references with well over 100 citations. Xxanthippe ( talk ) 01:44, 12 October 2023 (UTC) . [ reply ] Keep Seem to meet WP:AUTHOR for authorship of some notable books. Here's some reviews: The Legacy of Shaykh Da’ud bin ‘Abd Allah al-Fatani in Mecca and Southeast Asia Sevea, Teren. Bijdragen Tot de Taal-, Land- En Volkenkunde 172, no. 4 (2016): 545–48. [31] Bruinessen, Martin van. Journal of Islamic Studies. Jan2018, Vol. 29 Issue 1, p103-106. [32] BROWN, JARROD W, Southeast Review of Asian Studies Volume 39 (2017), pp. 159–87 [33] Fogg, Kevin W. Journal of Asian Studies. Nov2018, Vol. 77 Issue 4, p1131-1132. 2p. [34] ) Eric Tagliacozzo Volume44, Issue3. Special Issue: Biblical Translating and Interpreting. September 2018. Pages 344-345. [35] Universal Tonality: The Life and Music of William Parker Benjamin Barson, Critical Studies in Improvisation / Études critiques en improvisation, Vol. 15, No. 1, [36] Henry, Lisa, Universal Tonality: The Life and Music of William Parker. Library Journal, 03630277, Jan2021, Vol. 146, Issue 1 [37] Dietrich, K. R. Choice: Current Reviews for Academic Libraries. Nov2021, Vol. 59 Issue 3, p458-458. 1/4p — siro χ o 09:09, 10 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep -- three books by two of the top presses in their respective fields (Duke for Jazz studies; UH for East/Southeast Asian studies), with significant numbers of reviews for the books that have been out long enough to have reviews found by Siroxo. Definitely above the Average Professor test as a significant music researcher. -- Michael Scott Asato Cuthbert (talk) 21:25, 10 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep . I added some of the above reviews and some others to the article. I agree they're enough for WP:AUTHOR . — David Eppstein ( talk ) 06:26, 11 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep Meets our guideline for WP:AUTHOR Lightburst ( talk ) 14:52, 11 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ). No further edits should be made to this page.

speedy keep

Bharatiya Janata Party, Mrghalaya: Title doesn't make any sense. — H e m a n t D a b r a l ( 📞 • ✒ ) 11:17, 13 April 2024 (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/2024 April 13 . — cyberbot I Talk to my owner :Online 11:40, 13 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politics and Meghalaya . Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 12:20, 13 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment - WP:RfD might be the better venue. Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 12:21, 13 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ). No further edits should be made to this page.

speedy keep

Slappy and the Stinkers: Does not appear to meet WP:GNG or WP:NFILM . I cannot find any independent significant coverage of this movie. (Article was deleted in 2008 by WP:PROD .) Schazjmd (talk) 18:03, 14 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Withdrawn by nominator , and my thanks to the editor(s) who added the refs to the article. My before obviously fell short in this case. Schazjmd (talk) 14:32, 15 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions . Schazjmd (talk) 18:03, 14 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Hmm. Was reviewed in the New York Times , in Variety , in TV guide , by Roger Ebert, etc! Sources about production and release abound. So Strong Keep. . Will add(ed) those sources to the page but a withdrawal of this nomination would be appreciated and save other contributors' time, I should think. Thank you. - My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 00:53, 15 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per NFO #1, two nationally known critics, Ebert and Van Gelder. Agree with @ Mushy Yank this AfD is a time-waster. Oblivy ( talk ) 02:08, 15 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per WP:HEY . As it turned out, the nomination was both sloppy and a stinker. (I gamble that you have some self-deprecating humor on this.) Geschichte ( talk ) 09:13, 15 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ). No further edits should be made to this page.

speedy keep

Historiography of Indigenous genocide: This is sort of an essay, the contents of which is just describing what approximately 10 different sources said about Genocide of Indigenous peoples , there is no real distinct topic here. IMO a merge into that article should be done although the material to merge would be commentary by ~10 sources on Genocide of Indigenous peoples and the sources themselves. North8000 ( talk ) 01:10, 22 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History and North America . WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 04:09, 22 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep. This is specifically about historians writing about the genocide as opposed to the genocide itself. Instead of deleting this or merging this into the 300K byte main article Genocide of Indigenous peoples , the historiography material there could be merged into this article. Yuchitown ( talk ) 14:40, 22 April 2024 (UTC) Yuchitown [ reply ] Keep I'd like to withdraw this nomination. Sincerely, North8000 ( talk ) 12:33, 23 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ). No further edits should be made to this page.

speedy keep

St. Kateri Tekakwitha Catholic Secondary School: TheLonelyPather ( talk ) 02:05, 17 September 2023 (UTC) Withdrawn by nominator . @ Eastmain added sources. TheLonelyPather ( talk ) 02:48, 17 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Schools , Christianity , and Canada . Eastmain ( talk • contribs ) 02:14, 17 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Understandable, I just kind of assumed all high schools had a page because all of them seem to :) CommieKarlovy ( talk ) 02:15, 17 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep . I added some references. The school passes WP:NSCHOOL . Eastmain ( talk • contribs ) 02:45, 17 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Whew, thanks! I will see how can I retract this AFD nom. TheLonelyPather ( talk ) 02:47, 17 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Withdrawn by nominator . @ Eastmain added sources. TheLonelyPather ( talk ) 02:48, 17 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ). No further edits should be made to this page.

speedy keep

Helen O'Donnell: Per WP:POLITICIAN , being a candidate doesn’t grant notability. That said, not all the referenced coverage here pertains to her candidacy. She was Limerick person of the year and a local businesswoman. Would such mentions have granted her notability, independent of her candidacy? Iveagh Gardens ( talk ) 13:17, 23 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians and Ireland . Iveagh Gardens ( talk ) 13:17, 23 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] She was red linked through Forum for Peace and Reconciliation long before candidacy for DEM, this being the major jumping off point for a page. That with work with the Safefood advisory board, founded as part of the Good Friday Agreement, seemed like valid notability. ChocoElephant ( talk ) 16:44, 23 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions . Skynxnex ( talk ) 16:49, 23 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Withdraw: As another editor has noted, the article had the air of a party political broadcast. While it might still need work, I’m reasonably satisfied this isn’t as obvious a candidate for deletion as I thought earlier today. My earlier searches provided only references to her current candidacy, but there is more there than that. Iveagh Gardens ( talk ) 20:11, 23 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ). No further edits should be made to this page.

speedy keep

Eric Hagg: No improvement since last AFD Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eric Hagg Gabriel (talk to me ) 16:59, 19 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People , Sportspeople , Sports , and American football . Gabriel (talk to me ) 16:59, 19 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Speedy keep . Another ridiculous nomination by this user. Clearly meets GNG: [9] [10] [11] [12] . And you absolutely do not know that there's been "no improvement since last AFD" – which was over a decade ago , since there has been... BeanieFan11 ( talk ) 17:08, 19 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] What tool do you use to cite out those newspaper? They seem to be helpful as they don't appear on Google. Gabriel (talk to me ) 17:13, 19 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Newspapers.com is accessible to users through the Wikipedia Library . BeanieFan11 ( talk ) 17:15, 19 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : What do you mean no improvement since the last AFD? Looking at the

speedy keep

Woman in the Moon (album): Complete absence of in-depth discussion of the album in reliable sources. Brett Milano of New Country magazine is cited, but that was a short-lived marketing effort for the purpose of promoting new country music. In no way would that magazine be considered independent. Note that AllMusic does not have a prose review by a named author. Binksternet ( talk ) 03:25, 29 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions . Binksternet ( talk ) 03:25, 29 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Changing to Keep after recent expansion with multiple sources. Binksternet ( talk ) 20:31, 29 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ). No further edits should be made to this page.

speedy keep

Rana Muhammad Faraz Noon: He has no prior parliamentary position so IMO, he do not meet WP:POLITICIAN. Most of their press coverage stemmed from his 2024 election win, which was later overturned so he fails WP:GNG as well. — Saqib ( talk | contribs ) 10:26, 19 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions . — Saqib ( talk | contribs ) 10:26, 19 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Withdraw I forgot that I nom this for deletion just last month & then later withdrew the nom. I'm withdrawing again. However, I feel its important to discuss whether this person meets the WP:POLITICIAN. --— Saqib ( talk | contribs ) 10:30, 19 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ). No further edits should be made to this page.

speedy keep

Visoki Dečani: I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2024 March 13 . — cyberbot I Talk to my owner :Online 19:20, 13 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Automated comment: This AfD cannot be processed correctly because of an issue with the header. Please make sure the header has only 1 article, and doesn't have any HTML encoded characters. — cyberbot I Talk to my owner :Online 19:20, 13 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Serbia-related deletion discussions . CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 19:58, 13 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Kosovo-related deletion discussions . CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 19:59, 13 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Archaeology-related deletion discussions . CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 19:59, 13 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions . CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 19:59, 13 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Religion-related deletion discussions . CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 19:59, 13 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep Clearly notable. If there are issues, fix them. Deletion is not cleanup. Andy Mabbett ( Pigsonthewing ); Talk to Andy ; Andy's edits 21:08, 13 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep . My vote is in line with WP:ATD-E . This article should be edited, as all relevant concerns can be solved by source-checking and changing the wording structure to be more neutral. Personhumanperson ( talk ) 21:59, 13 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Strong keep . The monastery is clearly notable. The presence of "unverified information" is not a reason for deleting the article – instead, find verification or remove the claims. Maproom ( talk ) 23:04, 13 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep . Very obviously notable. No idea why the nominator thinks they've given a good reason for deletion. -- Necrothesp ( talk ) 10:05, 15 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions . Necrothesp ( talk ) 10:06, 15 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Strong keep ! Deletion is not cleanup. Malicious users should be blocked! Kaster ( talk ) 23:34, 15 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep AfD is not cleanup . The subject of the article has clear notability, unverified information can either be tagged , removed, or have sources provided. Shaws username . talk . 04:07, 16 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment I don't see anything tagged in the article as unverified, citation needed, etc. at the moment. Thus, even if the nomination statement is true, it's premature, as there is no roadmap to fix whatever problems prompted the nomination. Jclemens ( talk ) 05:09, 16 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep clearly notable, no good reason for deletion given. SportingFlyer T · C 09:22, 16 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ). No further edits should be made to this page.

speedy keep

Nera Corsi: I've previously AFD'd their pages. This particular page is more complex, as the hoax creator has crafted it deceptively. They have mashed up various sources that mention the subject's name, added historical images, and done everything possible to make it difficult to easily verify the authenticity of the claims. After checking the cited sources, I found that some of them do not support the facts stated in the article. Some sources, such as [43] , don't even mention the subject at all. I also checked Wikipedia Library and couldn't find any organized or in-depth source detailing her life. It appears that a person named Nera Corsi did exist in the 15th century, but they did not lead the life described in this article. In summary, this is a hoax article that combines sources and images mentioning the subject's name to create a veneer of legitimacy but is filled with misinformation and fabricated stories. Even if the subject was notable, this article cannot be relied upon as factual due to its pervasive inaccuracies. As per new findings, I'm withdrawing this nom. But I'd still question the notability of the subject, agreeing with User:3 kids in a trenchcoat 's opinions regarding the subject's notability. X ( talk ) 09:43, 14 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women , Royalty and nobility , and Italy . WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 11:51, 14 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment : So I've only done a fairly cursory search, and only in English, but just about everything in the article checks out. This book from 2018 says on page 20 that Nera's tomb is "the only extant independent, fifteenth-century tomb for a married woman in Florence", which is probably her main claim to significance. On page 132 the author says that "the function of the Sassetti Chapel was to house the tombs of Francesco Sassetti and his wife Nera Corsi", and a caption on page 133 dates her tomb specifically to 1485. Pages 31 and 32 also briefly talk about her portrayal in Domenico Ghirlandaio 's portrait of her, but this isn't really relevant to the article. Then this book from 2000 and this one from 1981 (only available in snippet view) both briefly describe Nera's tomb and note that its decoration appears to be a pun on her name; they don't say anything about her life, but they at least corroborate the image gallery currently in the article, so it's not a hoax. This book , which is cited in the article, was the last source I checked, but I'm putting it here because most of what the article says about Nera's life is in here. It shows her in a family tree of the Sassetti family, with dates of birth, death, and marriage for her and her children. It doesn't really seem to say anything else about her, though. So it seems that the first three sentence-paragraphs in the "life" section of the article are sourced from basically a chart. It's not a bad source; it's good for establishing the dates of birth and death and whatnot, but I don't think it's really a significant mention. I could also find some other (prose, non-chart) information about her life in other sources: this book (first page of chapter 11; I can't see the page number] briefly mentions that she was 15 years old when she married Francesco Sassetti in 1458 (he was apparently 37 years old then, ewww) and that she came from a prominent Florentine family that was "also closely allied with the Medici". This book from 1990 , on the other hand, says her family came from Fiesole , so I'm not sure which is more accurate. Finally, this website I see that her son Teodoro apparently died in 1478 and then she gave birth to a second son also named Teodoro a few months later. I'm not sure that this site really constitutes a good source, though. So the bulk of Nera's current article can be traced back to sources that predate the article's creation. The only parts I could not verify are (A) the claim that her tomb is "the only woman's tomb not only in Florence but in all of Italy from the 15th century", which seems like a massive overstating of what Maria DePrano said (which I quoted above); (B) the immediately following claim that her tomb has become "a historical and cultural landmark", which probably applies more to the Sassetti Chapel as a whole than her tomb specifically; and (C) some of the specifics about her family, like her father being a powerful banker or her being born in Florence. Most of the article's last paragraph I also didn't bother checking, but it's mostly background about the chapel's construction and it can probably also be verified, possibly already in DePrano's book. So the article is not a hoax, but I'm not sure if it meets notability guidelines. "The only extant independent, fifteenth-century tomb for a married woman in Florence" seems like an overly-narrow qualifier to me, and none of the sources contains much more than a trivial mention of Nera herself. It's mostly related to her tomb, or to the painting of her, or her marriage and family. While I would personally rather see the article kept, I think a merge into the Sassetti Chapel article would probably make the most sense. However, I'm not sure what the notability guidelines are for 15th-century Italian noblewomen, and she may satisfy those. I also haven't checked any Italian-language sources, and those might have a more in-depth biography of her. -- 3 kids in a trenchcoat ( talk ) 05:04, 18 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep -- This article is most decidedly not a hoax. Talk about a failure of WP:BEFORE . Even a cursory search on Google Scholar or JSTOR would reveal that much. There are dozens of high quality sources. I'll add a few to the article to make my point, but this isn't something I'm really interested in editing. On the other hand nom should consider withdrawing this AfD, as it's extraordinarily misguided. Central and Adams ( talk ) 17:44, 21 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Natg 19 ( talk ) 02:11, 22 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ). No further edits should be made to this page.

speedy keep

Hybolasiopsis abnormalis: Hongsy ( talk ) 05:03, 26 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Oppose , referenced and meets ToL guidelines. Per what source is this not a valid name? -- Kev min § 05:41, 26 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Animal and Organisms . Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 09:19, 26 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep The species existed in terms of WP:NSPECIES , but given its synonym is also Xylotoles abnormalis [27] , and it appears there was some renaming going on recently. [28] That source combined Xylotoles abnormalis among other names into Hybolasiopsis abnormalis . Maybe there's been more changes going on I couldn't find, but this is a case for a redirect at most to the current name, not deletion. KoA ( talk ) 20:59, 26 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep - Species, if they are real and are cited to their original author who described them, are basically always notable. Species articles should not be brought to AfD unless there is a specific problem, such as the species is a hoax. Chiswick Chap ( talk ) 16:41, 28 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep - notable. Meets WP:NSPECIES -- A. B. ( talk • contribs • global count ) 17:17, 28 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Move – This name appears to be a synonym of Hybolasiopsis trigonellaris , according to doi : 10.1080/00779962.2008.9722170 . Esculenta ( talk ) 21:03, 28 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ). No further edits should be made to this page.

speedy keep

Everyone Loves Mel: I found no reviews on Rotten Tomatoes . I did a WP:BEFORE and found one review from The Dove Foundation . Needs one more suitable and reliable review to pass NFO, NFSOURCES and WP:NEXIST . The Film Creator ( talk ) 19:14, 23 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions . The Film Creator ( talk ) 19:14, 23 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science fiction and fantasy-related deletion discussions . WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 20:45, 23 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Added the review mentioned above+1 in Teen Ink . Keep . If judged insufficient, redirect to Joey Travolta. - My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 22:39, 23 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : There is also a review in The Spokesman-Review . Somebodyidkfkdt ( talk ) 23:51, 23 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep Dove and Spokane are enough to pass WP:NFILM Donald D23 talk to me 02:07, 24 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] keep just barely passes with the two reviews found. Likely more in paper sources. Oaktree b ( talk ) 02:12, 24 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep and comment . Since the fall of 2023, The Film Creator has nominated 28 articles for deletion with only 3 closing as delete . That's pretty remarkable. Of the articles that were kept, half were kept speedily. This verges on a situation where The Film Creator should seriously consider if they should refrain from starting more AFDs. From the many film nominations, it can be widely observed that: (a) Rotten Tomatoes is useless in many cases. (b) The Film Creator is unable to find reviews that other users have little problems finding. Why is that? (c) The Film Creator should learn from these users, and maybe even contact them directly instead of wasting everyone's time with ill-conceived nominations. (d) Sure, the articles are improved through this process, but AFD is not cleanup. Geschichte ( talk ) 12:18, 24 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per added sources, and I agree with Geschichte's sentiments. Toughpigs ( talk ) 17:07, 24 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep blatant lack of WP:BEFORE from the usual suspects. -- C avarrone 23:18, 24 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] *I withdraw this nomination. Apparently, I need to practice WP:BEFORE more carefully. I vow not to nominate any film articles for the rest of 2024. The Film Creator ( talk ) 02:08, 28 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ). No further edits should be made to this page.

speedy keep

SciTech (magazine): Hemiauchenia ( talk ) 17:37, 15 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions . Hemiauchenia ( talk ) 15:32, 5 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies , Technology , Websites , and United States of America . WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 16:35, 5 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Journalism-related deletion discussions . ~ A412 talk! 18:16, 5 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, L iz Read! Talk! 06:56, 12 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per WP:GNG and WP:HEY , and move to SciTechDaily . Although its URL has always been scitechdaily.com, the site was originally called Sci Tech Daily Review ; it is currently called SciTechDaily (one word) but the name appears variously as SciTech Daily or Sci Tech Daily , making the search for coverage trickier than it may seem at first. Coverage establishing notability include the 1999 review in The Independent which rated Sci Tech Daily as "the best science news site" at the time – better than Science Daily , The New Scientist and Scientific American , "if you [could] accept its perfunctory design". More recently, there was an in-depth review in CHOICE: Current Reviews for Academic Libraries in 2015 , which briefly covers the history of SciTechDaily ; describes its format; and analyzes its content in comparison with Science Daily , noting that "SciTechDaily appears to edit sources more heavily for readability and publishes fewer articles overall and so may be preferred by those who find ScienceDaily overwhelming". The fact that it was nominated for a Webby led to a 2002 article in USA Today , about how the founder and her business partner set off 1,000 rockets in New Zealand to celebrate. There are many other reviews and articles recommending scitechdaily.com in newspapers such as The Courier Mail in Brisbane (2002) and The New York Times (1998) and again in 2000 ; industry trade publications such as Design News (2000) ; and academic journal articles such as The Lancet in 2000 . These and other links have been added to the expanded article now. Cielquiparle ( talk ) 20:17, 13 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Given that this SciTechDaily is a popular science website, the most relevant notability criteria is WP:WEBSITE rather than WP:NCORP . The sources listed above demonstrate that the website fulfills WP:WEBCRIT #1 and #2 (short list for Webby award). @ Hemiauchenia : Request reconsideration of expanded article in light of the above. I have also added one more article from New Zealand Herald since yesterday about SciTechDaily following the 2011 Christchurch earthquake . Cielquiparle ( talk ) 08:18, 14 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep as it clearly meets general notability. Schwede 66 17:07, 15 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ). No further edits should be made to this page.

speedy keep

Texas Band of Yaqui Indians: Cited mostly on primary sources but no independent, reliable sources is available. CSMention269 ( talk ) 05:55, 11 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and Texas . CSMention269 ( talk ) 05:55, 11 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment A quick search turned up this source which looks reliable and has some pretty detailed discussion of the Texas Yacqui band. Also some coverage here . Someone should check the hits for Yaqui at the Texas Observer . I don't have an opinion either way yet, but more is out there than what is on the article. ~ L 🌸 ( talk ) 08:44, 11 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep . They get written about fairly often. Will add more sources. Yuchitown ( talk ) 13:13, 11 February 2024 (UTC) Yuchitown [ reply ] Keep . I'm not sure what the nominator means by "Cited mostly on primary sources", as it currently does not look like that to me. One user's sourcing has been removed, the user blocked for edit warring. Right now, the article and its sourcing looks pretty good to me. Most definitely notable to Texas history. — Maile ( talk ) 17:06, 11 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : Looks notable enough to me to be on Wikipedia. A quick scan of sources shows multiple secondary sources from different websites. ASmallMapleLeaf ( talk ) 17:53, 11 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment : Upon a careful review of this, I withdraw my AfD request. Only thing we can do is to improve the article. CSMention269 ( talk ) 00:04, 12 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Thank you! — Maile ( talk ) 00:07, 12 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ). No further edits should be made to this page.

speedy keep

Nachhatar Pal: Existing sources are mostly trivial mentions. Does not seem to have significant coverage from independent sources. Jeraxmoira🐉 ( talk ) 09:25, 23 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People , Politicians , Politics , India , and Punjab . Jeraxmoira🐉 ( talk ) 09:25, 23 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Speedy keep Per Wikipedia:NSUBPOL . - MPGuy2824 ( talk ) 09:47, 23 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] I was not aware of Wikipedia:NSUBPOL , thank you for sharing. Jeraxmoira🐉 ( talk ) 10:07, 23 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : The subject passes WP:NPOL as an Indian state legislator. From a perfunctory search in English, there seems to be sufficient coverage to surpass WP:NOPAGE ; more sources likely to be available in Hindi/Panjabi. Curbon7 ( talk ) 10:04, 23 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ). No further edits should be made to this page.

speedy keep

Mariana Dražić: Couldn't find any significant coverage from reliable sources, just passing mentions and stats. Fails WP:GNG and WP:SIGCOV . FatCat96 ( talk ) 21:48, 19 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople , Women , Tennis , and Croatia . Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 22:16, 19 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I opened the previous AfD, but that AfD is no longer relevant as the player now passes WP:NTENNIS . Haven't had a chance to look for Croatian sources yet. Iffy ★ Chat -- 09:54, 20 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep Quickly found some good looking Croatian sources that suggest this player is notable. [3] [4] [5] Iffy ★ Chat -- 10:07, 20 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Thanks. I looked for Croatian sources, but didn't find any. FatCat96 ( talk ) 13:58, 20 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Nomination withdrawn . Sources found. FatCat96 ( talk ) 13:58, 20 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ). No further edits should be made to this page.

speedy keep

Red Song Society: Everyone can publish their articles (without royalties) on the website and thus the website is subject to pervasive conspiracy theories and yellow journalism. Most importantly, the article lacks sufficient sources to support its independent notability. NZCAJD2 ( talk ) 09:50, 24 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Websites and China . NZCAJD2 ( talk ) 09:50, 24 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep There is substantive treatment of the website in the Economist and Yingjie/Garrick discusses the Hong Zhenkuai case at length including discussion of the role of Red Song Society (see esp. page 339-40). It also receives mentions in scholarly work talking about neo-maoism. I added a VOA article about the Visual China controversy. Aside from sourcing, the other reasons given in the nomination (blog style, conspiracy theories, yellow journalism) are not valid deletion rationales and has some features of WP:IDONTLIKEIT . Websites can be notable without being paragons of virtue or good editorial practice. Oblivy ( talk ) 03:12, 25 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ). No further edits should be made to this page.

speedy keep

Yevgeny Sinyayev: Invading Invader ( userpage , talk ) 04:33, 20 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople , Olympics , and Russia . Invading Invader ( userpage , talk ) 04:33, 20 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Speedy keep , nominator did not do WP:BEFORE B7. The Russian Wikipedia article ru:Синяев, Евгений Палладьевич has a wealth of sources and information that should be translated and placed into the English article as appropriate. -- Habst ( talk ) 16:15, 20 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ). No further edits should be made to this page.

speedy keep

Melissa Moore (soccer): Paul Vaurie ( talk ) 16:09, 24 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople , Women , Football , and United States of America . Paul Vaurie ( talk ) 16:09, 24 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football 's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 22:29, 24 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found please ping me. Giant Snowman 14:21, 25 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per sources below which show notability. Giant Snowman 07:44, 27 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per WP:GNG and WP:HEY . Article on this notable WUSA professional goalkeeper has been expanded to B-class (per Rater) and is now quite complete so please read it: Melissa Moore (soccer) . (Note: Sports biographies from this period (late 1990s/early 2000s) require research beyond basic Google searches, which tend to miss older newspaper and magazine articles. ) There are plenty of sources now cited within the article, but the strongest of the lot include the 2002 Los Angeles Times feature article on Moore ; the 2001 Washington Post article (three informative paragraphs on Moore plus a quote); the 2002 Soccer Digest article ; and the 1994 Albuquerque Tribune feature article on Moore as a college player . Pinging GiantSnowman . Cielquiparle ( talk ) 21:51, 26 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Can't access source 3 but the rest seem fine and willing to AGF for it. Giant Snowman 07:43, 27 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] To access the EBSCOHost article, log in to Wikipedia Library first, then click on the link and it should work. Cielquiparle ( talk ) 09:32, 27 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Speedy keep - impressed by sources that I could not find. They seem to display significant coverage. Keep. Paul Vaurie ( talk ) 04:18, 28 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ). No further edits should be made to this page.

speedy keep

Erik Christensen (American football): The page currently has two sources, one a database and one an obituary clearly not independent. Looking for sources shows a passing mentions here [15] but no significant coverage. This [16] is presumably someone else with the same name. WP:NSPORT has no specific guidance on American football, so WP:BASIC applies. CohenTheBohemian ( talk ) 16:18, 30 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the list of American football-related deletion discussions . CohenTheBohemian ( talk ) 16:25, 30 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep . Passes WP:GNG . I would rate these as the top three : (1) ( part 1 / part 2 ), (2) this , and (3) this . Also lots of further coverage with varying levels of depth, including (4) this , (5) this , (6) this , (7) this , (8) this , (9) this , (10) this , and (11) this . Cbl62 ( talk ) 16:53, 30 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] That works. Thank you for your efforts; I'll close the nomination. CohenTheBohemian ( talk ) 16:43, 31 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and New Jersey . Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 20:48, 30 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep , passes WP:GNG per Cbl62. BeanieFan11 ( talk ) 01:41, 31 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep The coverage cited above establishes that the notability standard is satisfied, with kudos to Cbl62. Alansohn ( talk ) 02:53, 31 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ). No further edits should be made to this page.

speedy keep

G5 Entertainment: Moreover, the inclusion of interviews from PocketGamer and paid publication from Forbes Georgia is suggesting the page is not notable. 25lucky ( talk ) 08:26, 14 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games , Companies , and Sweden . CptViraj ( talk ) 08:47, 14 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ). No further edits should be made to this page.

speedy keep

Serene Oasis: Very low-quality article and no one seems to be willing to improve it. If it is notable then someone can start fresh after WP:TNT . But the article gives no indication of notability. Already nominated Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Serene_Oasis but no consensus. Polygnotus ( talk ) 05:53, 22 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Hong Kong-related deletion discussions . Polygnotus ( talk ) 05:53, 22 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Update: The article has changed a LOT from when I first found it. Retracting AfD. Polygnotus ( talk ) 00:35, 26 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep: Delete: Keep : (Article was rewritten to include good sources and have better writing; see Cunard's comment) The one vote for keep by @ Philg88 on the previous nomination, and his point that there are good citations, simply that they are chinese, which is completely fine, is valid. I agree that the article is very poorly written, and has some sounding-like-an-ad issues, but this doesn't automatically mean it should be blown up, just that it needs some rewriting. (good) Citations not being in English and poor or non-encyclopedic writing do not exempt an article from passing NORG. Flemmish Nietzsche ( talk ) 13:44, 22 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] @ Flemmish Nietzsche : So you believe that anyone can dump a very low quality article on the English Wikipedia, and we should never get rid of the trash because in theory it could be improved (despite the fact that no one has even after 3351 days)? You pinged Philg88 but they have not edited in the last 1780 days. That is not logical. Do you understand Chinese? If so, please improve the article. If not, how are you so sure that it passes NORG? You would need more than a quick Google Translate to judge the reliability of a source. Polygnotus ( talk ) 14:45, 22 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Obviously not. While this article has some bad writing and promotional material, there is plenty of salvageable content — saying an article is badly written alone is not a good argument. If an article has enough good content to the extent that it would be able to remain on its own if the promotional content were removed, the article should not be deleted in its entirety. (if it would not be deleted under G11 ) And no, I don't understand Chinese, but while Chinese sources may only exist for the company itself, when doing a search for the term there's plenty of English-language sources about the horticulture method itself rather than the company that started the concept, which the article's main topic could certainly shift to. Flemmish Nietzsche ( talk ) 19:07, 22 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Weird, I don't see plenty of salvageable content . Or any. In an AfD, when saying that there's plenty of English-language sources it would be helpful to actually list them. And perhaps then we can incorporate information from those alleged sources into the article. And get rid of the current content. So do you believe that when someone writes a very low quality article we should not delete it and should be forced to rewrite it instead? What if we don't want to write an article about that topic? What if the article is actually about a non-notable organization and not about a horticulture method? If someone wants to write an article about a horticultural method it would be better to start fresh. Which search engine are you using? I use Google and I can't find evidence of any horticultural method called Serene Oasis. Polygnotus ( talk ) 19:20, 22 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Sorry, didn't see this until now, but no, as I said before, a poorly written article does not deserve to be rewritten to be a good article just because someone created it. I wasn't really saying we have to rewrite the article at all, just remove the content relating to the company rather than the horticulture method. There's a sample of what this might look like on my sandbox , and of the sources mentioning a serene oasis I saw, (originally using Searx but this time using Google) most were just non-reliable blogs, but there are at least two here: [9] [10] Flemmish Nietzsche ( talk ) 02:39, 25 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] @ Flemmish Nietzsche : Thank you. I think I understand now; what you describe is not a horticultural method. It is a form of therapy called horticulture therapy . But we already have an article about that. The Chinese characters near the start of the article, 基督教家庭服務中心, translate to "Christian Family Service Center" and not "Serene Oasis". Polygnotus ( talk ) 09:39, 25 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] I know it's not a horticultural method, it says in the lead that it is a method of horticulture therapy. The use of the two sources I provided were really dependent on whether or not the article would stick to the primary topic of the company rather than the horticulture therapy method; the SCMP source would of course be for if it were not rewritten. I wasn't able to find any additional sources on the Hong Kong company itself though, so for sake of not wanting to argue more, I'll say to just blow it all up and someone can start the article over as being about the horticulture therapy method if they wish. Flemmish Nietzsche ( talk ) 09:48, 25 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : A fabric distributor/art shop and an AirBnB using this name are what I can find in my search. What's used now for sourcing in the article isn't acceptable, sources 4 and 9 are red per Cite Highlighter, so non-RS. Rest isn't helping much either. We could perhaps draft this, but if it's not been worked on in the last decade after being tagged, drafting won't help. Oaktree b ( talk ) 15:08, 22 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Keep : @ Flemmish Nietzsche : May I request for some potential Chinese sources? Philg88 simply mentioned that there were Chinese sources in the previous AFD, but provided none as example. I just did a search in Chinese (I can read Chinese) but nothing came up. I could only find some sources with glancing mentions of the Christian Family Service Centre (including several from unreliable sources like Epoch Times ), and none of them have mentioned this Serene Oasis garden thing. Meanwhile, the SCMP source you raised is fine, but the Fine Gardening one doesn't seem like referring to the subject of this article (a therapeutic garden opened by the Christian Family Service Centre in Hong Kong), it is about something else. So at this point of the discussion, I can only see one source with SIGCOV, and it hardly passes GNG. — Prince of Erebor （ The Book of Mazarbul ） 08:45, 25 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Prince of Erebor ( talk · contribs ) and Flemmish Nietzsche ( talk · contribs ), I've posted some sources below. Thank you. Cunard ( talk ) 11:01, 25 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources . Serene Oasis, which reliable sources have described as a "garden", falls under Wikipedia:Notability (geographic features)#Scope , which says: For the purpose of this guideline, a geographical feature is any reasonably permanent or historic feature of the Earth , whether natural or artificial. The subject passes Wikipedia:Notability (geographic features) , which says: Notability on Wikipedia is an inclusion criterion based on the encyclopedic suitability of an article topic. Geographical features meeting Wikipedia's General notability guideline (GNG) are presumed , but not guaranteed, to be notable. Therefore, the notability of some geographical features ( places , roadways, objects, etc.) may be called into question. Sources Extended content Lo, Wei (2013-05-15). "The serene urban garden that helps the vulnerable to grow in confidence" . South China Morning Post . Archived from the original on 2024-05-25 . Retrieved 2024-05-25 . The article notes: "A "Serene Oasis" of scented herbs and colourful flowers is being opened to the public after proving successful in helping people deal with mental and emotional problems. Operators of the 7,000 sq ft garden next to housing estates in urban Choi Hung say caring for the plants and meeting others with similar problems has proved healing for people with dementia and depression during a two-year trial. ... The garden, named "Serene Oasis", has more than 60 plant species and is designed to create a peaceful feeling. It is surrounded by trees with sounds from a small waterfall and chirping birds. Scents of herbs like rosemary and lemongrass linger in different parts of the garden. Some of the flower beds are elevated for wheelchair users." Yim, Man-wai 嚴敏慧 (2013-05-15). "7,000呎綠洲　種花醫病 憂鬱腦退化患者　92%好轉" [7,000 sq. ft. oasis, planting flowers to heal patients, 92% of patients with depression and dementia improved]. Apple Daily (in Chinese). p.  A21. The article notes: "基督教家庭服務中心在彩虹坪石鄒附近，建立市區最大園藝治療花園「心靈綠洲」。 7,000平方呎的花園設五感體驗區，種有逾百種植物，特設高架花槽方便輪椅人士種花。... 佔地7,000平方呎的花園組合為五感體驗區，例如觸覺係有到手香，其特徵為葉肥厚有絨毛，手指輕輕觸摸會留有香味；而味覺係則主要為食用瓜菜，為迎合本土 口味，也特別種植蔥、薑等；視覺則有色彩斑斕的花朵如多色日日春、五星花等；嗅覺系則有九層塔及香茅等；聽覺則為被環境吸引到來的小鳥及昆蟲 。" From Google Translate: "The Christian Family Service Center has established the largest horticultural therapy garden "Spiritual Oasis" in the city near Shek Chow, Choi Hung Ping. The 7,000-square-foot garden has a five-sense experience area with more than 100 species of plants, and specially equipped elevated planters to facilitate people in wheelchairs to plant flowers. ... The garden covering an area of ​​7,000 square feet is a five-sense experience area. For example, the tactile category includes hand fragrance, which is characterised by thick and fluffy leaves that leave fragrance when lightly touched by fingers; while the gustatory category mainly involves edible vegetables. In order to cater to local tastes, green onions, ginger, etc. are also specially planted; for the visual sense, there are colorful flowers such as multi-colored spring flowers, five-star flowers, etc.; for the olfactory sense, there are nine-story pagodas, lemongrass, etc.; and for the auditory sense, there are small flowers attracted by the environment. Birds and insects." Lee, Yue-wah 李越樺 (2016-01-02). "親子園藝花園" [Parent-child gardening garden]. Hong Kong Economic Times (in Chinese). p.  C2. The article notes: "筆者早前有機會參觀基督教家庭服務中心位於彩虹的「都市綠洲」，這塊原本已荒置了十多年的土地，現時以植物作為媒介，推行園藝治療服務，不但綠化環境，更讓平日工作 忙碌的家長、... 筆者最欣賞其「心靈綠洲」園區，其體驗區以六感元素為準則，種植過百種植物，如觸感似地毯的波斯草、感覺膠質的海棠、毛毛的到手香……香味的植物如 檸檬草、迷迭香、薄荷葉等。 一邊觀賞色彩斑斕的植物、流水牆傳來潺潺的流水聲，一家大小更可一邊採摘植物沖水，泡杯檸檬香草茶。" From Google Translate: "The author had the opportunity to visit the "Serene Oasis" of the Christian Family Service Center in Choi Hung earlier. This land, which had been abandoned for more than ten years, now uses plants as a medium to provide horticultural therapy services, which not only greens the environment, but also makes daily work easier. Busy parents,... The author admires its "Serene Oasis" park the most. Its experience area is based on the six sense elements and has over a hundred kinds of plants planted, such as Persian grass that feels like a carpet, Begonia that feels gelatinous, and fluffy hand-made plants. Fragrant... Fragrant plants such as lemongrass, rosemary, mint leaves, etc. While admiring the colorful plants and the sound of gurgling water coming from the flowing water wall, the whole family can pick plants to drink water and make a cup of lemongrass tea." "東網透視：園藝治療建綠洲　遠離塵囂煩心事" [Oriental Daily Insight: Horticulture therapy creates an oasis to stay away from the hustle and bustle of the world]. Oriental Daily (in Chinese). 2015-11-21. Archived from the original on 2024-05-25 . Retrieved 2024-05-25 . The article notes: "基督教家庭服務中心將這原理轉移到治療情緒，在市區開設了一片「心靈綠洲」，通過植物作媒介開展園藝治療，透過種植及觀賞等活動，幫助受困的參加者心靈產生正能量。" From Google Translate: "The Christian Family Service Center has transferred this principle to the treatment of emotions and opened a "spiritual oasis" in the urban area. It uses plants as a medium to carry out horticultural therapy. Through activities such as planting and viewing, it helps trapped participants generate positive energy in their hearts." The article notes: "這塊公開予市民參與的園藝治療花園至今已服務近300名參加者。基督教家庭服務中心高級服務總監周淑琼表示，園藝治療在香港是一個較新的概念，這片位處彩虹佔地約6000平方呎的「心靈綠洲」，現正提供園藝治療服務予患有腦退化症的長者、抑鬱症患者及自閉症患者等，治療服務屬輔助性質，以小組進行，每組不超過10名參加者，整個治療分6至8節進行，每節約個半小時。" From Google Translate: "This horticultural therapeutic garden, which is open to public participation, has served nearly 300 participants so far. Christian Family Service Center Senior Service Director Zhou Shuqiong said that horticultural therapy is a relatively new concept in Hong Kong. This "spiritual oasis" located in Choi Hung covering an area of ​​about 6,000 square feet is now providing horticultural therapy services to people with dementia. For the elderly, patients with depression, patients with autism, etc., the treatment service is of a auxiliary nature and is conducted in groups, with no more than 10 participants in each group. The entire treatment is divided into 6 to 8 sessions, each session is half an hour." Yuen, Oi-chee 袁藹慈 (2018-03-03). "開花結果　治癒心靈" [Bloom and bear fruit, heal the soul]. Ming Pao (in Chinese). p.  D1. The article notes: "彩虹坪石鄒對面有片逾七萬英尺的地方，基督教家庭服務中心取名為都市綠洲，並將其中約七千英尺劃為心靈綠洲，種有不同植物和花卉，用作園藝治療場地。... 心靈綠洲以外的地方，予大眾參觀，大家又可租地一嘗城市農夫滋味" From Google Translate: "There is an area of ​​more than 70,000 feet opposite Choi Hung Ping Shek Tsou. The Christian Family Service Center named it Urban Oasis and designated about 7,000 feet of it as a spiritual oasis. It is planted with different plants and flowers and used as a horticultural therapy site. ... Apart from the spiritual oasis, the place is open to the public, and everyone can rent land to have a taste of urban farming." Wang, Ng-hin 王卓軒 (2014-05-06). "團體出書推廣園藝治療" [Group publishes book to promote horticultural therapy]. Hong Kong Commercial Daily (in Chinese). p.  A14. The article notes: "基督教家庭服務中心於2010年在九龍建立香港市區內最大的園藝治療花園，在過去3年已經為971人提供治療服務，當中有892人是抑鬱症或 腦退化症患者，中心將相關經驗編輯成書並於昨日發布，為社工及業界人士提供園藝治療操作指導。... 集結了相關學者的理論，以及過去3年在本港推廣園藝治療經驗的《園藝治療實務工作手冊》於昨日發布。該書作者羅迪 ..." From Google Translate: "Christian Family Service Center established Hong Kong's largest horticulture therapy garden in Kowloon in 2010. In the past three years, it has provided treatment services to 971 people, 892 of whom were patients with depression or dementia. The center compiled relevant experience A book was written and released yesterday to provide guidance on horticulture therapy for social workers and industry professionals. The "Horticulture Therapy Practical Work Manual", which brings together the theories of relevant scholars and the experience of promoting horticulture therapy in Hong Kong over the past three years, was released yesterday. Luo Di, the author of the book ..." The article notes: "位於九龍觀塘道2號A的園藝治療花園「心靈綠洲」，是本港首個提供園藝治療訓練及服務場地。 園區內設有以視覺、聽覺、觸覺、味覺及嗅覺五種感官元素的體驗區，栽種逾百種各色各樣植物，為有需要人士提供治療服務。" From Google Translate: "The horticultural therapy garden "Serene Oasis" located at 2A Kwun Tong Road, Kowloon is the first venue in Hong Kong to provide horticultural therapy training and services. The park has an experience area with five sensory elements: sight, hearing, touch, taste and smell. More than 100 kinds of plants are planted to provide therapeutic services to those in need." "7000呎花園治情緒病" [7,000-square-foot garden cures emotional illness]. Hong Kong Daily News [ zh ] (in Chinese). 2013-05-15. p.  A6. The article notes: "鳥語花香，的確令人心礦神怡，基督教家庭服務中心在九龍灣開設佔地7,000平方呎的園藝治療花園「心靈綠洲」，輔助治療腦退化症及情緒病病人，透過種植中 誘發參與者紓發情緒，並藉此改善情緒控制、提升專注力、加強社交能力。" From Google Translate: "The singing of birds and the fragrance of flowers are indeed soothing. The Christian Family Service Center has opened a 7,000-square-foot horticultural therapy garden "Serene Oasis" in Kowloon Bay to assist in the treatment of patients with Alzheimer's disease and emotional illness. Through planting, It induces participants to relieve their emotions, thereby improving their emotional control, concentration and social skills." The article notes: "此外，花園設五感體驗區，以五感設計元素設計，分別種有過百種不同植物，例如有觸碰後手指會有香味的到手香等，帶給病人五官上的刺激，減輕病情引致的認 知能力衰退。" From Google Translate: "In addition, the garden has a five-sense experience area, which is designed with five-sense design elements. There are more than a hundred different plants planted there, such as hand incense that will smell fragrant when touched, which can stimulate the patient's five senses and reduce the cognitive impairment caused by the disease. Intellectual ability declines." Lau, Sze-nok 劉思諾 (2013-05-15). "城中墾綠洲 患者開心扉" [Opening an oasis in the city makes patients happy]. Sky Post [ zh ] (in Chinese). p.  P28. The article notes: "基督教家庭服務中心2010年起，在觀塘道開設佔地7,000平方呎的園藝治療花園—「心靈綠洲」，過去已為856人提供治療，當中超過九成患憂鬱症及腦退化症。" From Google Translate: "Since 2010, Christian Family Service Center has opened a 7,000-square-foot horticultural therapeutic garden - "Soul Oasis" on Kwun Tong Road. It has provided treatment to 856 people in the past, more than 90% of whom suffered from depression and dementia." Yeung, Tak-ming 楊德銘 (2013-05-15). "鬧市建「心靈綠洲」" [Building "Serene Oasis" in a busy city]. Ming Pao Daily News (in Chinese). The article notes: "基督教家庭服務中心3年前首度在該處引進園藝治療，建立「心靈綠洲」花園。踏進花園，受助的長者會被多達60種色彩繽紛的植物包圍，鳥鳴蟬叫，香氣四溢。 受助者可觸摸植物，部分植物如薄荷、香草等更能即場摘食，滿足味覺。 共6至8節的園藝治療過程中，輔導人員會透過園林景緻，利用五官感受引導約8名受助者抒發情緒，排解煩憂。" From Google Translate: "Christian Family Service Center introduced horticultural therapy to the site for the first time three years ago and established the "Serene Oasis" garden. Stepping into the garden, the elderly recipients will be surrounded by as many as 60 kinds of colorful plants, with birds chirping and cicadas chirping, and the fragrance overflowing. Recipients can touch the plants, and some plants such as mint and herbs can be picked and eaten on the spot to satisfy their taste buds. During a total of 6 to 8 sessions of horticultural therapy, counselors will use the garden scenery and five senses to guide about 8 recipients to express their emotions and resolve their worries." "園藝治療腦退化與憂鬱患者" [Horticulture therapy for patients with brain degeneration and depression]. Sing Pao Daily News (in Chinese). 2013-05-15. p.  A13. The article notes: "有機構把市區一塊荒置土地開闢成一個有意義的社會計畫－「心靈綠洲」(Serene Oasis)，首階段的主要對象為患有腦退化症的長者和憂鬱症患者，" From Google Translate: "An organization has developed a piece of abandoned land in the urban area into a meaningful social project - "Serene Oasis" (Serene Oasis), the main target of the first phase for the elderly with dementia and patients with depression," The article notes: "這項工作由基督教家庭服務中心開拓，「心靈綠洲」位於九龍觀塘道2號A，佔地約7000平方呎，是市區內最大的園藝治療花園，也是首個同時提供園藝治療訓練及 服務的場地，園區綠樹環抱、鳥語花香，內設五感體驗區，以五感元素設計，種植了過百種不同的植物。" From Google Translate: "This work was developed by the Christian Family Service Centre. The "Spiritual Oasis" is located at 2A Kwun Tong Road, Kowloon, covering an area of ​​about 7,000 square feet. It is the largest horticultural therapy garden in the city and the first to provide both horticultural therapy training and services. The venue is surrounded by green trees, with birds singing and flowers fragrant. There is a five-sense experience area, designed with five-sense elements, and more than a hundred different plants planted." Less significant coverage: "Large urban farm in east Kowloon set to open in March" . South China Morning Post . 2014-01-07. Archived from the original on 2024-05-25 . Retrieved 2024-05-25 . The article discusses phase 2 of the project, Urban Oasis. The article has a paragraph about phase 1 of the project, Serene Oasis. The article notes: "Phase 1 of the project, “Serene Oasis”, was opened in May 2013. It provides horticultural therapy, which includes communal planting and learning activities for people suffering from dementia and depression. The centre has also reserved a 20,000 square-feet plot for phase 3 of the project." "都市綠洲 治癒心靈" [Urban Oasis. Heals the soul]. Hong Kong Inmedia (in Chinese). 2016-06-03. Archived from the original on 2024-05-01 . Retrieved 2024-05-25 . This is another article about phase 2 of the project, Urban Oasis. The article notes: "「都市綠洲」將開拓旁邊的一塊約二萬呎空地，讓更多市民可以成為都市農夫，以及繼續發展「心靈綠洲」園藝治療服務，給予新的服務使用者，例如：殘疾人士及有特殊學習需要學童等。" From Google Translate: ""Urban Oasis" will open up a vacant land of about 20,000 square feet next to it, allowing more citizens to become urban farmers, and continue to develop "Spiritual Oasis" horticultural therapy services to provide new service users, such as people with disabilities and people with special learning Need school children etc. " There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow Serene Oasis ( traditional Chinese : 心靈綠洲 ; simplified Chinese : 心灵绿洲 ) to pass Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline , which requires "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject". Cunard ( talk ) 11:01, 25 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] @ Cunard : Are you willing to turn this into a decent Wikipedia article? Because the current content is so bad that the notability question is moot; it should still be deleted per WP:TNT . No one has bothered trying to improve the article in many years. If you are willing and able to improve it it should be userfied. I have added a collapse template to increase readability. Polygnotus ( talk ) 11:32, 25 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Oh, I get it. The Chinese translation name in the article is wrong, it should be 心靈綠洲. No wonder why I could only find sources in English. Anyway, I took a look at the sources with linked articles Cunard provided, the Oriental Daily News and Hong Kong Inmedia ones are interviews of the Service Centre's staff and look like advertisements. I also think that Polygnotus has made a point, the article was left unattended for about nine years, and the current quality is low. Perhaps we can consider draftifying it? — Prince of Erebor （ The Book of Mazarbul ） 18:14, 25 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Yeah the Chinese characters near the start of the article, 基督教家庭服務中心, translate to "Christian Family Service Center" and not "Serene Oasis" for some reason. I am not sure if the Christian Family Service Center is notable. Polygnotus ( talk ) 18:36, 25 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] @ Prince of Erebor : I think I found a trick: search google for: site:cfsc.org.hk +"media coverage" Perhaps some of those can be used when working on the draft? Polygnotus ( talk ) 18:47, 25 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment: Draftifying is not a good option because draftspace has lower visibility than mainspace. In draftspace, it likely would be deleted under G13. Abandoned drafts and Articles for creation submissions . This article (and many other Chinese articles) have been in such a poor state because there are not enough English Wikipedia editors with the interest and Chinese-language skills to improve them. Wikipedia:Systemic bias discusses this, noting that As a result of systemic bias , Wikipedia underrepresents the perspectives of people in the Global South , which includes Hong Kong. Prince of Erebor ( talk · contribs ), Polygnotus ( talk · contribs ), Flemmish Nietzsche ( talk · contribs ), and Oaktree b ( talk · contribs ), I rewrote the article as it looks to be headed for deletion if I did not rewrite it. It took me 90 minutes to find these sources and three hours to rewrite the article. In total, this is 4.5 hours I spent on this article. This is time that I had been planning to spend on participating in other AfDs and writing a new article on a topic that interests me. Cunard ( talk ) 00:25, 26 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Great job. Seems to be a well written and decent article now. Changing my vote back to keep. Flemmish Nietzsche ( talk ) 00:31, 26 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] That is the best result this AfD could have. Excellent work, thank you! Unfortunately I cannot read or write Chinese, otherwise I would've given it a try. How do we retract this thing? Polygnotus ( talk ) 00:33, 26 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Close it as keep I assume. See WP:Articles for deletion#Procedure for non-administrator close (nominator withdrawal) . Flemmish Nietzsche ( talk ) 00:38, 26 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ). No further edits should be made to this page.

speedy keep

List of Lucky Luke albums: microbiology Marcus ( petri dish · growths ) 17:03, 19 February 2024 (UTC) Withdrawn microbiology Marcus ( petri dish · growths ) 20:13, 19 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep Lucky Luke is plainly notable. Merging this into the main page would result in a huge amount of clutter. It needs editing, sourcing etc, etc but that's cleanup, not AfD. BoomboxTestarossa ( talk ) 17:28, 19 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Comics and animation and Lists . Shellwood ( talk ) 17:29, 19 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep ; note that there's an omnibus merge in progress (see Talk:List of Lucky Luke albums#Created as per discussion at AfD ), merging the even-worse individual articles to this page. I suggest a waiting until the merges are done (which should remove 20-or-so weak articles), consolidating what's there into one place where it can be improved. Note that the merge proposal itself arose from an AfD ( Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Les Collines noires , so I think that it's best to let the consequence of that AfD play out first. Klbrain ( talk ) 18:48, 19 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : As a list page, this falls under WP:NLIST , which says, "a list topic is considered notable if it has been discussed as a group or set by independent reliable sources." Is the nominator's argument that there are no RS that discuss Lucky Luke as a whole? If that's the case, that seems trivial to establish. I agree with Klbrain that the merge should be completed, and then this article can be improved. Toughpigs ( talk ) 18:58, 19 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Speedy keep and close as too soon, I don't know how I missed the merge tag. microbiology Marcus ( petri dish · growths ) 20:13, 19 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ). No further edits should be made to this page.

speedy keep

Jacob Dahl Jurgensen: The four External links are to websites that describe the artist's works, but no indepth content about the artist. After searching, unable to find sources to provide sufficient coverage. Created on 12 September 2007 JoeNMLC ( talk ) 05:16, 14 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Withdrawn by nominator - article now has sufficient references to establish notability. Thankyou for improving this one. JoeNMLC ( talk ) 12:54, 17 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Artists and Denmark . Hey man im josh ( talk ) 11:59, 14 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment I updated the article. WP:BEFORE shows he is in the British Museum collection. That makes him notable. Slim article, but I think it is a keep. -- WomenArtistUpdates ( talk ) 23:32, 16 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ). No further edits should be made to this page.

speedy keep

Astrothelium chulumanense: No sources exist for this topic beyond the single cited (primary) source containing the initial description of the species. Esculenta ( talk ) 19:02, 25 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : All species are notable. Eastmain ( talk • contribs ) 19:11, 25 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] According to what policy? Esculenta ( talk ) 19:17, 25 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] WP:NSPECIES says: Species that have a correct name (botany) or valid name (zoology) are generally kept. Their names and at least a brief description must have been published in a reliable academic publication to be recognized as correct or valid. Because of this, they generally survive AfD. As of 2022, no officially named species listed in Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Organisms has been deleted since at least mid-2016. Eastmain ( talk • contribs ) 19:47, 25 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] That's not a policy or guideline, and "species articles are kept because they're kept at AfD" is a circular deletion rationale not based on any policy. JoelleJay ( talk ) 20:00, 25 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] WP:NSPECIES is not a policy, but a sentence describing common outcomes of species' articles at AfD, and is thus a circular argument that shouldn't be used to keep the article ("this article should be kept because species article are usually kept). Now what policy-based arguments are there for keeping this article that does not meet WP:SIGCOV ? Esculenta ( talk ) 20:03, 25 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Procedural close as this is nomination is strictly to prove a point . JoelleJay ( talk ) 20:02, 25 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] What policy-based arguments are there for keeping this article that does not meet WP:SIGCOV? Esculenta ( talk ) 20:04, 25 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Procedural close per JoelleJay. (Incidentally – keep, as it summarizes valuable information for the reader. This is Wikipedia's key purpose: to be an encyclopedia. This article is encyclopedic; and it is not excluded by WP:NOT , therefore it is notable.) Cremastra ( talk ) 20:09, 25 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Can no-one answer this: What policy-based arguments are there for keeping this article that does not meet WP:SIGCOV? Per WP:Encyclopedic : "Information should not be included solely because it is true or useful. " Esculenta ( talk ) 20:15, 25 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] That's not what I said. Cremastra ( talk ) 20:29, 25 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] What's not what you said? You called the article "encyclopedic". How you and I might define the word "encyclopedic" may be different, so I went to WP:Encyclopedic , and quoted a sentence from that page to counter your argument of it being "encyclopedic". Now back to the important question for this AfD: What policy-based arguments are there for keeping this article that does not meet WP:SIGCOV? Esculenta ( talk ) 20:37, 25 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] In this case, a single article in a reliable academic publication constitutes significant coverage. Applying standards meant for athletes and movie actors to taxa would damage the encyclopedia, not help it. Eastmain ( talk • contribs ) 21:02, 25 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Where is this exemption to normal WP:SIGCOV rules for species written down as policy? Esculenta ( talk ) 21:06, 25 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Policies are made for the encyclopedia, and not the encyclopedia for the policies. Crossroads -talk- 21:35, 25 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] So there is no WP:SIGCOV exemption for species? Esculenta ( talk ) 21:48, 25 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep , this is encyclopedic, and WP:NSPECIES is good. Also, seems to be WP:POINT . Crossroads -talk- 21:35, 25 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] WP:NSPECIES appears to be bad, as it doesn't address cases like these, which lack enough sigcov to warrant inclusion in this encyclopedia. Still not seeing any policy-based rationale to keep this article. Esculenta ( talk ) 21:50, 25 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per Eastmain. Mccapra ( talk ) 22:12, 25 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organisms-related deletion discussions . WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 00:31, 26 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep / procedural close . (i) All species are encyclopedic and deserve articles in this encyclopedia, (ii) a potential lack of SIGCOV is not and should not be the end of the world, and (iii) this nomination is purely done to prove a point. BeanieFan11 ( talk ) 01:38, 26 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete . From WP:TOOSOON : "Generally speaking, the various notability criteria that guide editors in creating articles require that the topic being considered be itself verifiable in independent secondary reliable sources." This article simply does not meet that criteria, and, according to existing policies, should not yet exist on Wikipedia. Esculenta ( talk ) 02:14, 26 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] You're the nominator, and nominators don't vote in their own AfDs; we already know the nominator supports deletion. Crossroads -talk- 02:51, 26 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Procedural close Disingenuous and POINTy; you don't attempt to alter established handling of tens of thousands of articles by trying hammer a wedge into one random example. Stick to the high-level discussions for that. -- Elmidae ( talk · contribs ) 05:07, 26 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ). No further edits should be made to this page.

speedy keep

Fatal System Error: Most sources in the article are by the author of the book. Only the New Yorker review ( [14] ) seems significant and independent. The CSO Online article ( [15] ) is about (some of) the same events Fatal System Error covers, but doesn't mention Fatal System Error at all and was written five years before the book was published (it also is invalid as a citation for what it's claiming since the article mentions Lyon and Maksakov only; note for anyone reviewing this source that the original is offline and the archive is across 20 independent short pages). The best other source I was able to find was a 2013 TechCrunch article about Lyon ( [16] ) which only mentions the book in passing. All in all I don't see enough independent coverage of the book here to build an encyclopedia article out of. It may be appropriate to redirect this to Barrett Lyon , the subject of the book, as an alternative to deletion (if this is done the incoming redirect from Joseph Menn , the author of the book, should be deleted, not retargeted). Dylnuge ( Talk • Edits ) 21:57, 11 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions . Dylnuge ( Talk • Edits ) 21:57, 11 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Info - Note to closer for soft deletion : While this discussion appears to have no quorum , it is NOT eligible for soft deletion because it was previously discussed at AfD and the result was delete. Previous discussions : 2009-10 (closed as ✗ delete) Logs : 2010-10 move to → Fatal System Error (book) ← 2009-10 ✗ deleted -- Cewbot ( talk ) 00:03, 19 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 02:22, 19 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep . This should meet WP:NBOOK . In addition to the above, 173 word review in The Guardian [17] , and via ProQuest I see a couple trade journal reviews: Ellen Messmer in Network World [18] . 1500+ words, published less than a week prior to book publication (i.e they had a preview copy). Should remain reliable and independent. Curtis Verschoor in Internal Auditing [19] , a shorter ~400 word review released a few months after the book. Almost certainly independent, should be reliable. — siro χ o 05:13, 19 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Withdraw based on the sources Siroxo found above, which are enough to bring this up to significant coverage. I'm not actually sure how I missed those in my initial search here, and a bit embarrassed that I didn't find them. Dylnuge ( Talk • Edits ) 15:43, 19 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ). No further edits should be made to this page.

speedy keep

Annius Rufus: I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2024 March 18 . — cyberbot I Talk to my owner :Online 13:20, 18 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions . Sirfurboy🏄 ( talk ) 13:51, 18 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Judaism , Israel , and Palestine . Skynxnex ( talk ) 13:53, 18 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep - One of a series of notable Romans being nominated for deletion by this edtor. See my comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gessius Florus . Treated in very many journal articles and similar. Scholar has 608 hits to sift through [21] and also treated in a very great number of books. Here's just one. [22] . The page needs work but deletion is not for cleanup. Sirfurboy🏄 ( talk ) 13:57, 18 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Speedy Keep Improper nomination. TulsaPoliticsFan ( talk ) 22:34, 18 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep . A weaker case than some of the other governors of Judaea, but there's likely potential for expansion. The lack of material on him isn't due to his being non-notable, but due to a paucity of records about his administration, due either to the nature of record-keeping and history during this period, or the loss of material over the passage of time. These don't demonstrate a lack of notability; just a lack of detail about a presumptively notable person. P Aculeius ( talk ) 23:38, 18 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep , let's not create a damaging break in the sequence of Roman governors just because there is less information on one of them. Notability is obvious, and there are more sources than are currently used. Zero talk 00:20, 19 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep . Clearly notable. -- Necrothesp ( talk ) 11:35, 19 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per User talk:Serrwinner #Roman AfDs , this is a pointy nomination of a clearly notable subject. FortunateSons ( talk ) 14:05, 19 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ). No further edits should be made to this page.

speedy keep

David Nissman: Mccapra ( talk ) 22:53, 21 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Law , Caribbean , and United States of America . Mccapra ( talk ) 22:53, 21 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] This raises an interesting question. We have never established that a U.S. Attorney is inherently notable. On the one hand, they are appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate, and have substantial power over federal legal prosecutions in their jurisdiction. On the other hand, they still answer to orders from the Attorney General, and can be fired by the administration that appointed them in the first place. One would think that a U.S. Attorney would receive fairly substantial coverage, to be found if sought. BD2412 T 23:02, 21 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Leaning keep , based on a review of Newspapers.com coverage. Apparently, the subject has also written a number of books in the field, and received additional coverage for running unsuccessfully for a seat on the Oregon Supreme Court in 1984. BD2412 T 23:31, 21 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Georgia (U.S. state) and Oregon . WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 00:11, 22 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 00:51, 29 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note : having added about a dozen sources and found some more likely points of notability, particularly with respect to the subject's publications reviewed in reliable sources, I am upgrading my ! vote to "keep". BD2412 T 15:30, 31 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Withdraw thanks for finding those sources. I think he passes as the author of several books that have been independently reviewed and amount to an important contribution to his field. Mccapra ( talk ) 20:50, 31 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ). No further edits should be made to this page.

speedy keep

Marius Bear: Pottyantós WC ( talk ) 11:42, 22 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Speedy keep . Nomination indicates no attempt at WP:BEFORE . Passes point 2 (not one but THREE songs charting on a country's national charts), point 10 (represented Switzerland in the Eurovision Song Contest 2022 ) and WP:GNG - enough coverage of him in the sources in the article. ser! ( chat to me - see my edits ) 11:57, 22 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] One of those three songs is a cover. -- Pottyantós WC ( talk ) 11:58, 22 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Point two of NMUSIC says "Has had a single or album on any country's national music chart", it doesn't say you have to be the original performer. But even taking that argument at its best, that still leaves two songs that have passed point 2 of NMUSIC. ser! ( chat to me - see my edits ) 12:00, 22 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log ( step 3 ). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2023 September 22 . — cyberbot I Talk to my owner :Online 12:04, 22 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Switzerland . Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 12:07, 22 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : He's charted AND won a national music award? Probably one of the easier cases for notability here in a while. Easy keep. Oaktree b ( talk ) 13:32, 22 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Sourcing here [20] , here [21] and here [22] . Oaktree b ( talk ) 13:34, 22 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per above. Idiosincrático ( talk ) 14:15, 22 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep Passes WP:NMUSIC and WP:GNG . "Barely achieved anything" is inaccurate at best. Deauthorized . ( talk ) 15:07, 22 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Take a look at Zsolt Süle if possible, it's also at AFD. - Pottyantós WC ( talk ) 05:52, 23 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] keep - Several charting songs. Good sourcing. Covers WP:GNG and NMUSIC. Would also like to add that a national final for ESC is not a reality show. One of the easiest Keep-decisions for a while. BabbaQ ( talk ) 07:18, 23 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment : Nominating editor has been indefinitely blocked on 23 September. David notMD ( talk ) 19:50, 23 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Is there any scope for closing this early? The nominator has been blocked and it seems it's WP:SNOWing . I'm not overly familiar with AfD procedures so I said I'd ask. ser! ( chat to me - see my edits ) 12:59, 24 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] @ Ser! : If the sockpuppetry is confirmed (which is seeming likely) the article can be speedily kept and the nomination deleted as a banned contribution. Deauthorized . ( talk ) 17:59, 24 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Speedy keep : charting individual as well as award nominee and winner . dxneo ( talk ) 09:41, 25 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ). No further edits should be made to this page.

speedy keep

Victory at Sea (game): Does not pass GNG and no sources independent of the publisher could be found on the web. PRmaster1 ( talk ) 17:47, 11 June 2023 (UTC) Withdrawn by nominator; it seems like some sources have been found and issues with this article have been fixed. I would still suggest renaming it (not a game, but a set of rules). PRmaster1 ( talk ) 18:16, 15 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Entertainment and Games . PRmaster1 ( talk ) 17:47, 11 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep I agree original content was non-encyclopedic. I have replaced it with sourced and cited content about game system, publication history, and critical reception. Guinness323 ( talk ) 23:00, 13 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep Issues seem to have been fixed. Paulturtle ( talk ) 00:34, 14 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per above, article has been rewritten from scratch to fix the issues. BOZ ( talk ) 05:45, 14 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ). No further edits should be made to this page.

speedy keep

Roba Negousse: Never won a medal Invading Invader ( userpage , talk ) 00:18, 27 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople , Olympics , and Ethiopia . Invading Invader ( userpage , talk ) 00:18, 27 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Did compete at Ethiopia's first Olympics (see [49] and [50] ), so the claim is technically correct. Notability is a different matter, however. BeanieFan11 ( talk ) 00:45, 27 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Some coverage from this source (translated): In seventh place, and therefore last, in this heat came the Ethiopian Neggousse Roba , who had also participated, again in the 100 metres, in the Melbourne Games, also finishing last in the second heat of the first round. Why do we care about Neggousse Roba, 11.0 sprinter? We would like to remember him because, once his competitive activity was over, Neggousse began his career as a coach and in this capacity achieved glory and fame that had been denied him by his less than excellent skills as a sprinter. Neggousse stopped competing after the Rome Games and immediately began taking care of compatriot Abebe Bikila whom he guided to a second marathon gold medal in Tokyo. He was also a valuable guide and coach to two other cross-country greats, Mamo Wolde and Miruts Yifter . BeanieFan11 ( talk ) 00:51, 27 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep . Aha! Negousse seems to be better known by the name "Negussie Roba" and is considered one of the greatest coaches in his country's history: MEDIAEthiopa has an article here on him that calls him the "sensational national coach [who] is widely acknowledged as the man behind the success of every Ethiopian long-distance runner from the Mexico City Olympics all the way to the Moscow Olympics in 1980" and notes that "Ethiopia will always remember this fine coach for the pride he brought to his people." The Sydney Morning Herald also has an article that is arguably significant coverage and there appears to be plenty of other mentions of him in modern media, and this is all without access to newspapers of the time in his country. Will expand the article. BeanieFan11 ( talk ) 01:22, 27 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I have substantially expanded the article to be over 500 words; @ InvadingInvader : would you be willing to withdraw this nomination? BeanieFan11 ( talk ) 02:39, 27 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ). No further edits should be made to this page.

speedy keep

Frederic Chapple: While he did get an entry in a biographical dictionary, the newspaper articles seem to be local briefs about how the subject left on a voyage, returned from another, retired, died, etc. RadioactiveBoulevardier ( talk ) 08:21, 17 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators and Australia . RadioactiveBoulevardier ( talk ) 08:21, 17 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions . WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 10:52, 17 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : Entry in the Australian Dictionary of Biography should be sufficient for WP:ANYBIO #3. Curbon7 ( talk ) 18:38, 17 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep . The refs in the article clearly demonstrate that the subject has significant coverage in independent reliable sources. Jenks24 ( talk ) 20:35, 17 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per WP:ANYBIO #3 — siro χ o 00:26, 18 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep – Pretty clear that the existing references cover it. 5225 C ( talk • contributions ) 02:08, 18 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ). No further edits should be made to this page.

speedy keep

Fast X: I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2023 April 19 . — cyberbot I Talk to my owner :Online 20:42, 19 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ). No further edits should be made to this page.

speedy keep

Ashutosh (spiritual leader): We're volunteers at Divya Jyoti Jagrati Sansthan ( DJJS ). About the Organization: Divya Jyoti Jagrati Sansthan, established and run under the Mentorship of His Holiness Shri Ashutosh Maharaj Ji , is a registered socio-spiritual, not-for-profit organization. To realize DJJS's vision - From Self Awakening to Global Peace - we have chosen the grass-root level, to begin with. Currently, DJJS toils for the upliftment and empowerment of the most deprived, underserved and underprivileged strata of society. We envisage a world where compassion and empathy are the 'rule of thumb'. (Source: About DJJS) Our Presence : With more than 350 branches all over the world, DJJS is headquartered in India and registered under The Societies Registration Act of 1860. About His Holiness : Our Founder and Head, His Holiness Shri Ashutosh Maharaj Ji, is revered by millions of disciples and followers across the world. His Holiness is an epoch-making personality, a perfect Spiritual Master on the world stage who has mastered and subsequently revealed the eternal science of Self-Realization– Brahm Gyan to transform the torn and tormented humanity into a peaceful "global family". (Source: Shri Ashutosh Maharaj Ji) Request to editors/administrators : We're reaching out to you as your platform Wikipedia is being maliciously used by miscreants for maligning information about His Holiness' divine and pious contributions to society. We found a page titled Ashutosh (Spiritual Leader) created by anti-social elements to spread falsehood and propagate misinformation about our revered Gurudev. This scam is deeply disturbing, offensive and unwarranted. The content posted on the page is nothing less than fake news and highlights the very opposite of truth and reality about His Holiness' noble deeds. Given Wikipedia is an open-source platform, we tried several times to rectify the details by editing the content. But the misinformation gang and opposing forces are reverting the changes. They're making use of editing feature to retain the old and incorrect version of the content. Hence making it literally not possible to sustain the fact-based truth. Request you to take down this page. We have also enclosed a few of the well-researched resources and articles that are publicly available to prove the truth and showcase facts about His Holiness and DJJS's initiatives: Source 1: Mahayogi Ka Maharahasya by Sandeep Dev (paid version on Amazon Kindle): https://www.amazon.com/Ashutosh-Maharaj-Mahayogi-Ka-Maharahasya/dp/9385936409 Source 2: DJJS Representative participates in International Peace Conference: https://www.djjs.org/news/djjs-representative-participates-in-virtual-international-peace-conference Source 3: DJJS Representative delivers at 11th Spirit Harmony Multicultural Festival in Australia: https://www.djjs.org/news/djjs-representative-delivers-online-talk-on-science-and-spirituality-in-11th-spirit-harmony-multicultural-festival-in-australia Source 4: Councilor Angela Owen met DJJS representatives to discuss the roadmap of upcoming social projects in Australia: https://www.djjs.org/news/cr-angela-owen-in-her-india-visit-met-djjs-representatives-at-hotel-pullman-to-discuss-roadmap-of-upcoming-social-projects-in-australia Source 5: DJJS's Efforts Make A Difference for Visually Impaired: https://www.djjs.org/news/from-visual-impairment-to-self-reliance-djjss-effort-makes-a-difference-this-diwali Source 6: DJJS Disaster Management Program Organising Relief for Needy During COVID–19 Lockdown: https://www.djjs.org/news/djjs-disaster-management-program-samadhan-organising-relief-for-needy-during-covid-19-lockdown Source 7: 135 OPDS were organized for 2585 patients on February 23 by DJJS Aarogya: https://www.djjs.org/news/135-opds-were-organized-for-2585-patients-in-february-23-by-djjs-aarogya Source 8: DJJS Marks its Support Towards Combating Climate Change: https://www.djjs.org/news/djjs-observes-earth-hour-marks-its-support-towards-combating-climate-change Source 9: SAM at National Youth Festival (by Ministry of Youth Affairs & Sports): https://www.djjs.org/news/sam-at-national-youth-festival-2017-by-ministry-of-youth-affairs-sports Source 10: DJJS reaches schools to educate students to take an informed decision against drug abuse: https://www.djjs.org/news/bodh-djjs-reaches-schools-of-muktsar-to-educate-students-for-taking-an-informed-decision-against-drug-abuse-unmoolan-campaign-punjab Source 11: Kamdhenu Gaushala Adjudged as the Best in India by Indian Govt. : https://www.djjs.org/news/djjs-kamdhenu-awarded-national-kamdhenu-and-gopal-ratna-by-indian-government Source 12: DJJS celebrates success of Manthan-SVK - a holistic education program of DJJS for the underprivileged children: https://www.djjs.org/news/djjs-branches-across-the-country-celebrates-success-of-sanskarshala-with-nival-djjs-manthan-svk Source 13: Kamdhenu Project - A case study for Organic Farming: https://www.djjs.org/news/kamdhenu-project-a-case-study-for-organic-farming Source 14: DJJS awarded for work in Tihar jail: https://www.djjs.org/news/celebrated-achievers-of-indian-women-excellence-leadership-award-30-2020 We want to help The Wikimedia Foundation towards its goal of hosting Wikipedia as a reliable source and protecting the values and policies that allow free knowledge to thrive. And, highlight once again the importance of bringing out the truth. The currently posted content lacks authenticity and integrity. It is defamatory to His Holiness - the divine teacher who has guided millions of people out of darkness and vices, has taken mankind towards light, and embedded humane values in society. As the official administration of His registered organization, we would like to request you to take the page down . Millions of His followers are eagerly awaiting your cooperation and assistance in bringing facts before society and standing with the truth. Please let us know if you need any additional information from the organization. Looking forward to your action towards enabling us in reflecting His Holiness Shri Ashutosh Maharaj Ji's correct and factual details on your platform. Best Regards! — Preceding unsigned comment added by WikiReviewer111 ( talk • contribs ) Speedy keep: A conflict of interest is not grounds for deletion, and Wikipedia is not censored anyway . - Sumanuil . (talk to me) 07:02, 19 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log ( step 3 ). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2023 May 19 . — cyberbot I Talk to my owner :Online 07:07, 19 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Speedy keep : Bad faith nomination by a devotee of Ashutosh who does not like the current content of the article and has been temp blocked for edit warring there. WikiDan61 ChatMe! ReadMe!! 11:53, 19 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Speedy keep . Clearly notable individual. Contrary to the questionable assertation that the article was created by "anti-social elements to spread falsehood and propagate misinformation", reliable sources in the article verify the details mentioned there. Edit-warring to change the "was" to "is" for a person who has been dead for nearly 10 years is preposterous. gobonobo + c 15:22, 19 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Speedy keep : You can't delete a page because you don't like it. This is clearly a CoI issue. Schminnte ( talk • contribs ) 16:55, 19 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Hinduism and Bihar . Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 18:12, 19 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Speedy Keep Bad faith nomination, obviously notable. I'm going to close this AfD per WP:SNOW and the nature of the nomination. JML1148 ( Talk | Contribs ) 00:51, 20 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ). No further edits should be made to this page.

speedy keep

LaKisha Jones: Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:56, 12 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians , Women , Television , and Michigan . Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:56, 12 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per WP:GNG and sustained coverage. See People (2007) , MI Live (2012) , MI Live (2015) , East Village Magazine (2018) . There's also coverage of her 2022 starring role in the musical adaptation of The Color Purple . pburka ( talk ) 15:40, 12 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep, she's had legal troubles after Idol, circa 2015 [22] . Oaktree b ( talk ) 17:35, 12 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] That kind of civil court news seems like the kind of undue scandal/titillating claim that is excludable by WP:BLP policy and therefore does not contribute support to notability. Beccaynr ( talk ) 19:01, 12 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] It shows continued coverage in media, not a contributor to notability, but helps keep the article. Oaktree b ( talk ) 22:51, 12 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I think if tabloid-style scandal was all there was in addition to American Idol , it would not support keeping a standalone article, because a breach of WP:BLP policy can be a reason for deletion , and a redirect would likely be more appropriate. I recognize how it is continued coverage and how her Idol notoriety seems to have led to coverage of the civil case, but I think WP:BLP and WP:NOT should also be considered when assessing encyclopedic notability. Beccaynr ( talk ) 00:00, 13 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Weak keep per WP:BASIC and sustained coverage that can help develop the article; in addition to sources identified by pburka, there are reviews for her album So Glad I'm Me : MLive 2009; AllMusic ; some biographical coverage in The Houston Chronicle 2007 ; and some biographical coverage in My City Magazine 2018 . She also appeared on The Winner Is in 2013, with coverage from MLive [23] , [24] . Beccaynr ( talk ) 21:13, 12 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep in view of the reliable sources coverage identified in this discussion that together shows a pass of WP:GNG and shows continuous coverage over time, imv Atlantic306 ( talk ) 22:59, 18 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ). No further edits should be made to this page.

speedy keep

Jax (Mortal Kombat): The character is never really discussed in any significant enough capacity, and while mentioned in the context of black representation/stereotyping in gaming, that's solely it: mentions. Nothing in depth to really build an article around and not enough for SIGCOV. While there was a controversy about his ending in MK11, what articles are there don't talk about his character but more a synopsis of it and then a brief mention of people's overreaction. It can be summed up better as part of public reception towards MK11. With that said, what's here in the article's body is a lot of listicles that also barely cover the character, and a lot more that focus on gameplay of a particular title. There's not emphasis on why Jax is important as a character outside of MK and barely within the context of MK. Kung Fu Man ( talk ) 16:50, 23 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements and Video games . Kung Fu Man ( talk ) 16:50, 23 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I found one or two scholars discussing the character but getting access to such articles is a pain. Apparently, Wikipedia gives us access to such sources but I often have problems entering there. This book goes in depth about the franchise but I couldn't mind any narrative mention of Jax other than this University of Michigan Press "Jax was instead introduced in MKII as a Special Forces major attempting to rescue Sonya from captivity by Shao Kahn. Although Sonya and Kano ironically proved the least-selected char-acters in MKI, Midway’s decision to include a sexualized female char-acter (likely inspired by SFII’s Chun-Li) over a heavily muscled Black character—effectively treating femaleness and Blackness as superficially interchangeable nods to “diversity”—may have been motivated as a broader appeal to heterosexual male gamers than to the smaller contin-gent of nonwhite American gamers.Meanwhile, some early critics of Mortal Kombat claimed that the games reinforced stereotypes of nonwhite (and especially East Asian) ethnicities." This Portuguese analysis which compares MK2 Jax with MK3 Jax. Universidade Federal de Goiás [ https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/60588788.pdf The buck is the most prevalent portrayal of the black male body in video games. Mainstream media have forged a stereotypical image of blacks as inhuman savages with supernatural strength. In an article titled, “Black Characters in Video Games Must Be More Than Stereotypes of the Inhuman”, Sidney Fussell describes how black video game characters are placed in games for the sake of diversity. Most representations of black males tend to be uniform in the sense that they usually wear clothing that emphasizes their physical strength. Some characters such as Final Fantasy VII’s Barrett or Mortal Kombat’s Jax, have cybernetic enhancements that further perpetuates and emphasizes their physical strength, further contributing to their buck-ness University Carbondale This goes : "The first ever exhibition of crude violence in video games could be Custer‘s Revenge, in which the player supposedly 'rapes' a native American woman. However it was Mortal Kombat which first presented realistic bloody violence. “Jax grabs his opponent‟s arms, holds them up over their head, and then—with a squish—he jams them all the way into their body so only the hands are visible. He takes a moment to light a cigar. He grabs his opponent‟s mouth and rips the head in half. He puts out his cigar on the tongue as blood gurgles out. " University of Calcutta. There might be more. Tintor2 ( talk ) 20:12, 23 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Problem is some of these aren't published or show any evidence of peer review, unless the authors themselves are published/professor? -- Kung Fu Man ( talk ) 22:02, 23 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: I really don't know what makes them all published but as I revised it, they are all scholars from different Universities. The first book at the top can be bought in Amazon.com so I'm not sure if we can use them. The talk page has two articles about the MK11 ending of Jax but I guess it doesn't make it that notable by itself. Tintor2 ( talk ) 23:44, 23 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Just added a host of sources to the article. Hopefully they're up to snuff, but if not, que sera sera . sixty nine • whaddya want? • 23:51, 23 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I made some research and managed to find commentary about the character's narrative like his arms, the response in general within the fandom and whatever was his role in Special Forces. I also incorporated a scholar but the one I trusted the most based on the way it was written. The reception section stills to remove some useless listicles articles but I hope at least now thanks to that edit and Beemer's it's in better shape when it comes to notability. Tintor2 ( talk ) 18:58, 24 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep The reception section clearly demonstrates the character has received enough coverage to meet GNG. Especially the Racial characterization and response section which demonstrates the real life impact of the character. Satellizer el Bridget (Talk) 04:23, 25 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Withdraw Significant enough work has been done to show there is some notability to the subject and disprove my argument. Article still needs one massive enema and some sources weighed, but AfD's not the outlet for that, and I no longer feel it's in the same state regarding notability that I nominated it.-- Kung Fu Man ( talk ) 15:04, 25 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ). No further edits should be made to this page.

speedy keep

Rahul Varun: Here are some proofs of paid promotions of News articles [4] , He is also creating a paid Wikipedia pages through Instagram advertisements [5] -- Nitish Edits DWIa ( talk ) 20:44, 24 September 2023 (UTC) In fact the creator of this page also globally blocked with a reason of using multiple account. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nitish Edits DWIa ( talk • contribs ) 20:49, 24 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] References ^ https://filmycharcha.com/ ^ https://en.wikialpha.org/wiki/Rahul_Varun ^ https://rvrising.com/about-rahul-varun/ ^ https://instagram.com/rvrisingentertainment? igshid=MzRlODBiNWFlZA== ^ https://instagram.com/rvrisingentertainment? igshid=MzRlODBiNWFlZA== Keep All Wikipedias created by this user are notable. Please prove that articles are eligible for payment. Dear administrator, a new member who does not have a user page yet, explaining the rules of Wikipedia.Dear Admin, do you think this user might be running a single account? Please check all the pages created by me are fake, delete this page or fix my account. Angiemacc48 ( talk ) 07:11, 27 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log ( step 3 ). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2023 September 28 . — cyberbot I Talk to my owner :Online 01:37, 28 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers and India . Shellwood ( talk ) 08:41, 28 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Journalism and Bihar . Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 13:36, 28 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ). No further edits should be made to this page.

speedy keep

List of Book of Mormon places: There are no secondary sources about places in the book of mormon, leaving this as a partial list as derived by individual interpreters from the book of mormon. This should be deleted until reliable secondary sources write something meaningful here Big Money Threepwood ( talk ) 05:56, 23 April 2024 (UTC) striking confirmed blocked sockpuppet, Atlantic306 ( talk ) 19:02, 28 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Religion , Christianity , and Latter Day Saints . Big Money Threepwood ( talk ) 05:56, 23 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep Valid list, presumably with defined WP:LSC . Not all entries need to be notable, and the presence of Mormon archaeology and Historicity of the Book of Mormon as topics point to these being a sufficiently discussed set to merit inclusion. Jclemens ( talk ) 08:07, 23 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions . WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 10:57, 23 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep , disagree with the nom, as a good number of the list items are notable enough for their own article - Zarahemla , Cumorah , Nahom among them. This list fulfills WP:LISTPURP , being informational and navigational in nature. Rollidan ( talk ) 22:28, 23 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep This is the same as List of biblical places or the many other such things at Category:Biblical places , or Category:Significant places in Mormonism , or in any of the subcategories in Category:Religious places . D r e a m Focus 04:17, 24 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep , I think there is enough significant coverage of these subjects as a class (which is the key bit for lists, not whether each is individually notable) to merit a stand-alone list article. Horse Eye's Back ( talk ) 18:32, 24 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ). No further edits should be made to this page.

speedy keep

Air France KLM Martinair Cargo: Delete. Looks like promotion and advertisement 25lucky ( talk ) 10:42, 13 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies , Aviation , France , and Netherlands . WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 11:43, 13 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ). No further edits should be made to this page.

speedy keep

Gayane Umerova: Unclear significance of a living person to create a biography on Wikipedia. Will be more relevant to include bio on the official websites of the organizations the person is associated with. Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log ( step 3 ). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2023 July 29 . — cyberbot I Talk to my owner :Online 21:07, 29 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] This woman several times was Commissioner of the National Pavilion of her country at Venice biennales, plus is Director of the Art and Culture Development Foundation under the Cabinet of Ministers of the Republic of Uzbekistan, and the Secretary General of the National Commission of Uzbekistan on UNESCO Affairs under the Cabinet of Ministers. I believe it is quite a position. -- Shakko ( talk ) 21:13, 29 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women , Arts , Visual arts , and Uzbekistan . Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 21:50, 29 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment Garrymove1 , did you create your account just to nominate this article for deletion? Just curious. L iz Read! Talk! 01:33, 30 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ). No further edits should be made to this page.

speedy keep

Basauna: Does not appear on the 2011 census tables, found here: https://censusindia.gov.in/census.website/data/census-tables I am also unable to find any sources demonstrating notability. Tooncool64 ( talk ) 21:10, 27 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bihar-related deletion discussions . Delta space 42 ( talk • contribs ) 21:11, 27 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Withdraw Did find a mention of the village on one of the census tables. Tooncool64 ( talk ) 21:30, 27 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] @ Tooncool64 : If you want to withdraw a nomination, you can go to Preferences - Gadgets, enable XFDcloser and you will be able to close the discussion in two clicks. Delta space 42 ( talk • contribs ) 22:07, 27 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions . CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 22:19, 27 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions . CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 22:19, 27 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ). No further edits should be made to this page.

speedy keep

Math-O-Vision: There is a brief description in a book titled Effective Digital Learning Environments [33] , as part of a list of random educational websites, and other than that I could only find very brief mentions, mostly in the context of Alan Alda . Helpful Raccoon ( talk ) 03:47, 18 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Mathematics and United States of America . Helpful Raccoon ( talk ) 03:47, 18 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film , Events , Education , and New Hampshire . WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 04:29, 18 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions . WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 04:29, 18 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] I keep missing sources during my searches... An article here [34] provides significant coverage. I might stop doing these nominations for now. Helpful Raccoon ( talk ) 06:12, 18 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ). No further edits should be made to this page.

speedy keep

Yimnashana hamulata: Hongsy ( talk ) 05:04, 26 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Animal-related deletion discussions . Hongsy ( talk ) 05:04, 26 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep Taxonomy is a little confused due to synonymy and subgenus ( Tinkhamia hamulata , Tinkhamia hamulata hamulata , Yimnashana (Tinkhamia) hamulata hamulata ...) but appears to be valid, and present in the sources we usually take as reliable [24] [25] [26] . -- Elmidae ( talk · contribs ) 07:02, 26 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organisms and China . Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 09:19, 26 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep I have no idea why Hongsy claims it doesn't have a valid name. As the BioLib entry makes clear, it was first described as Tinkhamia hamulata and then transferred to the genus Yimnashana , where Tinkhamia may be treated as a subgenus. Peter coxhead ( talk ) 08:16, 27 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I've now added information from the original paper that transferred the species from Tinkhamia to Yimnashana . Peter coxhead ( talk ) 09:46, 27 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep. Clearly meets WP:NSPECIES with a valid name/sourcing, especially after Peter coxhead's edits. KoA ( talk ) 14:13, 28 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep - notable. Meets WP:NSPECIES -- A. B. ( talk • contribs • global count ) 17:17, 28 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ). No further edits should be made to this page.

speedy keep

Bradley Porteous: JTtheOG ( talk ) 19:43, 13 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople , Cricket , and South Africa . JTtheOG ( talk ) 19:43, 13 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : Crearly fails WP:SPORTCRIT . Not enough sources online to establish notability. -- Tumbuka Arch ( talk ) 22:03, 13 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep - SIG , COV exists. He has played the highest level of South African domestic cricket. -- JP ( Talk ) 07:50, 14 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep Appears to be other WP:GNG passing sourcing in a simple search such as this along with what JP has found. Rugbyfan22 ( talk ) 09:13, 14 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep . Has played at a sufficient level, making enough appearances, plus there are sources to satisfy WP:GNG . AA ( talk ) 10:47, 14 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ). No further edits should be made to this page.

speedy keep

Sandy Beasley: Invading Invader ( userpage , talk ) 00:27, 13 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople , Women , Olympics , and Canada . Invading Invader ( userpage , talk ) 00:27, 13 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep . In addition to the Fort Worth Star-Telegram feature story ( [13] ), there's also sigcov from The Vancouver Sun , Hood County News , and the Delta Sports Hall of Fame . BeanieFan11 ( talk ) 00:32, 13 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] This one looks pretty clear. Would you be willing to withdraw this, @ InvadingInvader : ? BeanieFan11 ( talk ) 00:39, 13 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Sure, hopefully you can expand it (which I'm confident you can) Invading Invader ( userpage , talk ) 00:46, 13 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ). No further edits should be made to this page.

speedy keep

Beloit and Madison Railroad: On January 17, a one-sentence AfC draft was submitted and rejected.

speedy keep

Maghāriya: The main source currently supporting it, the Jewish Virtual Library, is unreliable, and itself covers it in a listicle. The only other mentions of the subject anywhere are extremely trivial, typically just mentioned in a list alongside other minor sects, such as in the in this source . This does not provide any scope for the meaningful expansion of the topic, which ultimately fails to establish its notability due to the sheer triviality of its coverage. Iskandar323 ( talk ) 10:26, 14 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Withdrawn by nominator: Suitable and verifiable supporting tertiary sourcing was found. Iskandar323 ( talk ) 06:15, 15 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History and Judaism . Iskandar323 ( talk ) 10:26, 14 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep . This is page has a subject that has no potential to grow beyond a stub. How can you possibly know that? Sects of major religions are certainly notable. Sourcing is sparse, but sufficient. -- Necrothesp ( talk ) 10:39, 14 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] @ Necrothesp : What source have you found that suggests otherwise? The only source with substantial coverage is an unreliable one. Every other mention I have seen is in trivial list form. What sources have you found that establish WP:GNG , and offer the possibility of anything more than a perpetual stub? Iskandar323 ( talk ) 10:42, 14 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Some religions have hundreds if not thousands of minor sects. I fail to see how the blanket inclusion of sects, no matter how minor or unheard of, actually conforms with the notability guidelines. Iskandar323 ( talk ) 10:50, 14 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The source you claim to be unreliable itself lists a number of sources. Have you checked all of these? -- Necrothesp ( talk ) 11:52, 14 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I've checked the legible 1967 one, and it fails verification. I haven't delved much into the foreign language 19th-century sources or those simply without any titles (or pages) at all. Iskandar323 ( talk ) 12:01, 14 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep , it's not a major topic, but a Google books search brings up quite a lot of mentions, other encyclopaedic works have chosen to give them at least some mention, and I don't think we should delete based on the idea that the sources are in foreign languages and/or 18th century; some fields of research evolve slowly, and there is no obligation to publish knowledge in English. There is also some discussion of them half way down this blog-thread at earlywritings.com [47] where more sources might also be gleaned by a future editor. They're not huge, but it looks to me as though they have their small and documented corner of theological history, and we should reflect that. Elemimele ( talk ) 12:59, 14 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The first source on the blog is the same as the Jewish Virtual Library material, which appears to be plagiarized from the Encyclopaedia Judaica given the presence of disembodied and unlinked notes such as (For the modern period see *Subbotniki; *Somrei Sabat.) . However, if this is the case, it would seem to suggest that there is a solid Encyclopaedia Judaica entry, though obviously taking the word of a plagiarizing unreliable source on the matter is itself a dubious proposition. The second source interestingly presents a different spelling, the Magarites, for what would appear to be the same group, although no source I can find seems to mention both names in tandem, making it WP:SYNTH -y to assume they are the same. There are certainly a few other snippets of information floating around the internet, if not yet really tied together by any modern source into a cohesive secondary analysis. Iskandar323 ( talk ) 15:19, 14 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The Jewish Virtual Library page doesn't plagiarize the Encyclopaedia Judaica, it explicitly states that it's reproducing the Encyclopedia Judaica : "Source: Encyclopaedia Judaica. © 2008 The Gale Group. All Rights Reserved." We shouldn't have ended up at AFD for this. Jahaza ( talk ) 21:02, 15 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] It's an unreliable source, so it cannot be relied upon to faithfully reproduce anything, even when it is claiming to breach the copyright of material it has no rights to (a problem in its own right, and a reason why gunrel may actually be overly generous for the JVL). The lack of any guarantee of information fidelity is sort of the point with unreliable sources. Iskandar323 ( talk ) 21:15, 15 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Once you knew that there might be an Encyclopaedia Judaica article, you should have looked for it before listing it for deletion. The article is available in a free and properly licensed version from Encyclopedia.com [48] . You could have easily discovered this by visiting the Encyclopaedia Judaica Wikipedia page. This is not the first time you've listed Judaism topics for deletion that turn out to have major reference work coverage. Jahaza ( talk ) 03:29, 16 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] @ Jahaza WP:AGF - useful information that since 2022 much of the 2007 edition is at encyclopedia.com - useful information that you could have easily delivered in a civil way. Try that next time. Iskandar323 ( talk ) 04:14, 16 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep . If necessary, can be merged to Jewish religious movements . But I don't really see a problem with short articles. All good encyclopedias have them. Note that Google distinguishes beween ā and a. Srnec ( talk ) 20:26, 14 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment: It turns out that there is a Jewish Encyclopedia entry for this , which is a tertiary public domain source that can serve as an adequate anchor for the page to replace the unreliable JVL. Given that this source exists, it's surprising that it was not used in the first place. I will now be withdrawing the nomination. Iskandar323 ( talk ) 06:13, 15 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep - This article is solid (if short). It does not meet any criteria in WP:DEL-REASON . Cheers, Last1in ( talk ) 14:09, 16 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ). No further edits should be made to this page.

speedy keep

Arikomban: Terribly written NPOV violation. Withdrawn. Drowssap SMM ( talk ) ( contributions ) 18:07, 25 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Animal , Asia , India , and Kerala . Drowssap SMM ( talk ) ( contributions ) 18:07, 25 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] AFD is for deciding whether administrators should exercise the administrator-only deletion tool. It is not for things that you can quite easily deal with yourselves with the tools that you have, such as by reverting to Special:Permalink/1159804585 and trying to develop the article from there again. Uncle G ( talk ) 20:13, 25 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep . Proquest has 254 hits for the name, seems likely to meet GNG. Espresso Addict ( talk ) 23:27, 25 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : Nomination reason seems ridiculous. Is nominating for deletion is the procedure to deal with articles having NPOV issues. I don't think it is. Use appropriate tags instead or try to clean the mess up. The subject has received coverage from international medias such as BBC and CNBC [8] . Why should BBC cover about a rogue elephant from India if it is not that much important. This elephant is the subject of an upcoming Malayalam movie which is under pre-production. This itself implies the importance of this elephant. Besides there are plenty of coverage to meet Wikipedia's notability standards. 111.92.124.104 ( talk ) 04:44, 26 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep - extensive media coverage is available; but by all means roll this back to a non-embarassing state. The version suggested above by Uncle G seems reasonable. There seems to be a year-long three-sided skirmish going on at the article about who can add the most cringeworthy POV material, that has to stop. -- Elmidae ( talk · contribs ) 08:49, 26 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ). No further edits should be made to this page.

speedy keep

Moshe Berent: If no one steps up to address these major issues in response to this nomination for deletion, the article should go. Patrick J. Welsh ( talk ) 16:19, 23 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators and Israel . Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 16:29, 23 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors , History , Politics , and Social science . WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 19:20, 23 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment . Not my field but GS seems to show quite healthy citations (152,77,64,46,42). A search in JSTOR shows a number of meaty comments suggesting possible notability. Espresso Addict ( talk ) 21:14, 23 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep . Scholarly record strong for this low-cited field. Xxanthippe ( talk ) 21:33, 23 October 2023 (UTC) . [ reply ] Comment: "Burnett" or "Barnett" is used as Berent's last name in some translations. -- A. B. ( talk • contribs • global count ) 23:11, 23 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per Xxanthippe 's analysis plus a review of translated versions of the the refs in this article plus the Russian and Hebrew Wikipedia's. I did not find any article profiling Berent but there are many reports on the stir he's created, attacking his fellow academics for not supporting Benjamin Netanyahu. Lack of inline citations is a problem to fix but not a reason to delete. -- A. B. ( talk • contribs • global count ) 23:33, 23 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep extensive reviews of his work available, which include significant biographic details (eg review of A Nation Like All The Nations ). Regards, -- Goldsztajn ( talk ) 01:48, 24 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep . Per all above. Plus, nomination in defiance of WP:NEXIST . Plus WP:SNOW . gidonb ( talk ) 06:33, 25 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep . Berent is quite notable in Israel, especially online. When initially creating this article by translating it from Hebrew, I skipped reworking the lengthy external links section into references. I hoped somebody more footnote-experienced would eventually do it, in either the original or the translation. Guybas ( talk ) 07:10, 27 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ). No further edits should be made to this page.

speedy keep

Rodania: Unless someone can find more information in Swiss or Belgian publications I think this might not be notable. BuySomeApples ( talk ) 02:26, 11 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and Switzerland . BuySomeApples ( talk ) 02:26, 11 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment Rodania seems to be a place name, so coverage is hard to find. I have this in Belgian news [29] , [30] . Will continue to look. Oaktree b ( talk ) 02:47, 11 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep This as well [31] . Oaktree b ( talk ) 02:56, 11 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep - There seems to be more coverage in Belgian than Swiss outlets, but the brand itself seems to be have quite a bit of local lore around it [32] . Superboilles ( talk ) 19:10, 11 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep . There are enough sources to support the subject's notability . E.g. La Voix du Nord "La voiture Rodania disparaît du paysage des courses belges" ; Paris Match "Rebonjour, Rodania" ; Le Soir "Les montres Rodania redeviennent belges" & "La marque de montres Rodania change de mains" ; etc. - The Gnome ( talk ) 12:36, 16 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ). No further edits should be made to this page.

speedy keep

Akshayapureeswarar Temple: Boleyn ( talk ) 16:01, 11 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Asia-related deletion discussions . CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 16:10, 11 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Hinduism-related deletion discussions . CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 16:10, 11 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions . CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 16:10, 11 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Religion-related deletion discussions . CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 16:10, 11 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Tamil Nadu-related deletion discussions . CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 16:10, 11 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions . Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 22:16, 11 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep . How on earth would a 14C building not be notable? In any country with a decent heritage listing system this would definitely be listed and meet WP:GEOFEAT . It's unfortunate it's in India, which doesn't, but it's still covered by WP:SYSTEMIC . -- Necrothesp ( talk ) 14:56, 12 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Withdraw nomination Necrothesp is right, I was too focused on the sourcing rather than the overall picture. Happy to be corrected. Boleyn ( talk ) 16:35, 12 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ). No further edits should be made to this page.

speedy keep

Raquel Evita Saraswati: It's possible that this issue might arise again in 2023. This AfD might have occurred at some point anyway, given the nature of the topic. I think she has now achieved sufficient notability, and we can write based on what reliable sources say, regardless of the subject's wishes. In my research, I found numerous in-depth references in reliable sources such as The Intercept , Philadelphia Magazine , Philadelphia Inquirer , USA Today , and The Juggernaut . Skeus ( talk ) 16:40, 25 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep I think Intercept and USA Today give clear GNG; subject is not a private figure and quite regularly participates in public events and speaks to the media. That said, we should be quite careful about the other sources, like the Metro, in the article with clearly biased headlines. I think there may be something to say about stubbifying the article. Fermiboson ( talk ) 16:47, 25 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions . Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 16:47, 25 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note that I asked you to submit this as a draft, not move it to mainspace and then nominate it for AFD yourself. 331dot ( talk ) 16:58, 25 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I don't think draftspace submission is obligatory. Skeus ( talk ) 17:00, 25 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] That's not the point. I said that you had the option of deletion review or running the draft through AFC to establish that things had sufficiently changed since the last AFD. I undeleted it on the condition that you use AFC. An AFD that you started yourself is improper because you don't want it deleted. 331dot ( talk ) 17:05, 25 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Close as the nominator doesn't want the article they wrote deleted. 331dot ( talk ) 17:13, 25 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sexuality and gender , Islam , and Pennsylvania . WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 18:55, 25 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ). No further edits should be made to this page.

speedy keep

Afsar Ali Ahmed: 06:34, 23 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions . PARVAGE talk! 06:34, 23 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep as per WP:POLITICIAN . Mehedi Abedin 07:23, 23 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per above. Ahmed served in the Sangsad , which makes him notable. 〜 Festucalex • talk 10:19, 23 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ). No further edits should be made to this page.

speedy keep

Ali Bilgin: Any sources online were just statistics. JML1148 ( talk | contribs ) 07:08, 13 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Football , Germany , and Turkey . JML1148 ( talk | contribs ) 07:08, 13 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment I would recommend withdrawing this nomination. The player had a long career in professional football, players of this calibre don't fail WP:GNG . I found two usable German newspaper articles through a quick web search and added them to the article, I'm sure there's more in Turkish. Coverage from before 2010 is likely to be found through offline resources. Kind regards, Robby.is.on ( talk ) 08:46, 13 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] There's definitely stuff here, mistake on my part, and I will withdraw this. I think I made a typo that may have affected my search. JML1148 ( talk | contribs ) 10:41, 13 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep I would be very surprised if someone who made 60+ appearances including Champions League for one of the best supported teams in Turkey would not be notable, and that doesn't seem to be the case here. For instance [18] [19] [20] came up very early in the source search - the UEFA link isn't really sigcov, but his transfer was important enough to be on the UEFA website, for instance. SportingFlyer T · C 09:23, 13 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ). No further edits should be made to this page.

speedy keep

Sex and the Other Man: I found no reviews on Rotten Tomatoes . Per WP:NEXIST , the sources have to be “suitable” and none of the sources are suitable or reliable enough. I did a WP:BEFORE and found one suitable and reliable review from TV Guide . Needs one more suitable and reliable review in order to be eligible. The Film Creator ( talk ) 08:06, 17 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions . The Film Creator ( talk ) 08:06, 17 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep . Added sources to the page, including TV Guide mentioned above. See for yourself. - My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 08:38, 17 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Excellent work, User:Mushy Yank . I speedy withdraw this nomination. The Film Creator ( talk ) 08:47, 17 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ). No further edits should be made to this page.

speedy keep

TKP/ML Reconstruction Organization: I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2024 March 18 . — cyberbot I Talk to my owner :Online 22:44, 18 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations , Politics , and Turkey . Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 23:02, 18 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ). No further edits should be made to this page.

speedy keep

Indian Computer Emergency Response Team: I searched for sources using all alternatives: "CERT," "CERTIN," and "CERT India," but couldn't find anything that satisfies WP:CORPDEPTH. Dafydd y Corach ( talk ) 07:32, 20 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and India . Shellwood ( talk ) 13:13, 20 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep. It appears to be a government agency, not a company. Article needs some cleanup, but I don't think it's worthy of deletion. Gottagotospace ( talk ) 14:01, 20 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ). No further edits should be made to this page.

speedy keep

Megan Dowd Lambert: We need evidence of substantive discussion of the subject (not her works) in multiple reliable independent published sources to retain this article. A loose necktie ( talk ) 07:54, 12 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators , Authors , Women , Massachusetts , and Vermont . Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 08:00, 12 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Oh. Wow. The nomination is beyond inappropriate. It is not accurate. It needs to be withdrawn by the nominator or at the very least part of it stricken. I said she meets WP: CREATIVE #3 when I created the article. She exceeds that. We've got coverage of her education, career, personal life. That coverage is in both Contemporary Authors and Something about the Author , which are beyond independent of her--they are 2 of the most respected publications in the field. We have where she's lived and some of what she's accomplished. We have how many links to reviews, some of them starred reviews , further satisfying CREATIVE #3? What is it you are not seeing @ A loose necktie ? Do you want to know where she went to high school, her date of birth (which many authors and others keep private for identity security reasons and which is irrelevant to notability)? The article is also lacking her hair color, eye color, height, and political and religious beliefs. Do you envision The Atlantic or CNN going into which Beatle or New Kid or Backstreet Boy was her favorite when she was a teen? Or do you think stub articles on notable women authors and academics should not exist? DiamondRemley39 ( talk ) 09:33, 12 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Wow. It sounds like you are looking for a fight. I am not up for it. A loose necktie ( talk ) 10:24, 12 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] In cases such as this one, when it's been pointed out you were, at best, unaware of subject-specific notability guidelines and did not complete the required WP:BEFORE , you may be more comfortable not responding. That's okay. Mischaracterizing sources and scope of the article in a nomination statement is a problematic. Problematic nomination statements should, can, and will be called out. However, curiously echoing my "wow" and then choosing to withdraw from the debate with what is treading close to incivility ("It sounds like you are looking for a fight") is.. . eh. @ A loose necktie , please assume good faith of editors. You created a debate and placed an invitation to it on my talk page. I wrote about your points . You wrote about me . Who is looking for what here? DiamondRemley39 ( talk ) 11:58, 12 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep . I'm seeing enough reviews for a solid pass of WP:NAUTHOR . One would expect that sources about an author would mainly discuss their written work; routine facts can be filled in per WP:SPS , or (better, and as in this article) by profiles in a bibliographic encyclopedia. Russ Woodroofe ( talk ) 10:18, 12 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Speedy keep per WP:CREATIVE and nomination statement mischaracterizes article and sources. Problematic. DiamondRemley39 ( talk ) 12:00, 12 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep Meets WP:Author . Thriley ( talk ) 12:01, 12 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep Per WP:Author . ULPS ( talk ) 13:23, 12 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per AUTHOR and a poor overall nom rationale; the books are enough to clinch her N and I would not hope we need so much detail about her life over her published works. And if you're not up to defend your nom at all, Loose, I suggest withdrawing it so we don't have to deal with any further incommunication from that decision; you nominate, you defend and listen. Nate • ( chatter ) 13:40, 12 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep The whole argument that book reviews "don't tell us anything about the author" makes no sense. People are noteworthy because of their accomplishments; an author's accomplishments are their books. XOR'easter ( talk ) 13:49, 12 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ). No further edits should be made to this page.

speedy keep

The Mammoth Dictionary of Symbols: First AfD so if I'm not doing something I'm supposed to please let me know. Star action ( talk | contribs ) 03:23, 26 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions . WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 04:16, 26 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources . Wikipedia:Notability (books)#Criteria says: A book is presumed notable if it verifiably meets, through reliable sources , at least one of the following criteria: The book has been the subject of two or more non-trivial published works appearing in sources that are independent of the book itself. This can include published works in all forms, such as newspaper articles, other books, television documentaries, bestseller lists, and reviews. This excludes media re-prints of press releases, flap copy , or other publications where the author, its publisher, agent, or other self-interested parties advertise or speak about the book. Sources Bouch, Gareth (1996-04-26). "The Mammoth Dictionary of Symbols – Nadia Julien (Robinson, £5.99)" . Hull Daily Mail . Archived from the original on 2024-03-26 . Retrieved 2024-03-26 – via Newspapers.com . The review notes: "What makes the book so good is the comparative nature of the explanations (because many symbols mean different things in different cultures) which encourages you to look for other links which then takes you on to a different symbol. Soon you're a long way from where you started. Intriguing, informative and thoroughly enjoyable." Hill, Geoff (1996-05-27). "Symbolic meanings: The Mammoth Dictionary of Symbols by Nadia Julien. Robinson Publishing, £5.99" . Belfast News-Letter . Retrieved 2024-03-26 – via British Newspaper Archive . The article notes: "And, when the frog croaks, it is claiming divine protection for all living creatures. Gone over the edge? No, I've been reading a dictionary of symbols. If you want to know the significance of everything from an abyss to the zodiac, it's in here." Brown, Douglas (1996). "The Mammoth Dictionary of Symbols". Reference Reviews . 10 (6): 7. ProQuest 215220430 . The article notes: "I think I would call this paperback "fat" rather than "mammoth", but "The Fat Dictionary of Symbols" would not do, and it is actually part of a fairly mammoth series that includes The Mammoth Book of Zombies and The Mammoth Book of Killer Women. It was first published in Belgium in 1989, and contains hundreds of entries on entities of symbolic significance, from "Abyss" to "Zodiac". In her introduction Nadia Julien writes that she has drawn on ..." "The Mammoth Dictionary of Symbols". American Reference Books Annual . Vol.  28. Libraries Unlimited . 1998. p. 288. ISSN 0065-9959 . This entry verifies that Libraries Unlimited 's American Reference Books Annual reviewed this book. Lang, Jovian P. ; O'Gorman, Jack (2000). Recommended Reference Books in Paperback (3 ed.). Engelwood, California: Libraries Unlimited . p. 208. ISBN 1-56308-583-6 . Retrieved 2024-03-26 . The book notes: "This exceptional source is for those seeking an explanation of signs and symbols found in the majority of works about parapsychology and the occult. Brief entries can be found on the meaning of specific symbols as they are used by both religious and ethnic groups. Illustrations, although in black-and-white, are beneficial." Smith, Tim (March 1996). "The Great Library". Arcane (4). Future Publishing : 88–89. I don't have access to this review. The Wikipedia article says: Tim Smith reviewed The Mammoth Dictionary of Symbols for Arcane magazine, rating it a 3 out of 10 overall. Smith comments that "Definitions such as: 'There is a tradition that says that swallows receive the souls of dead kings', or: 'Footwear is an indispensable item of dress in temperate regions', further undermine this as a reference work. That said, it could make a decent enough bog-read if only so you can fill in the gaps yourself." There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow The Mammoth Dictionary of Symbols to pass Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline , which requires "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject". Cunard ( talk ) 06:49, 26 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per sources found by Cunard. BOZ ( talk ) 06:51, 26 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep thanks to Cunard's sources. Toughpigs ( talk ) 17:14, 26 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ). No further edits should be made to this page.

speedy keep

Night Corridor: ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk ) 21:19, 16 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Wholly agreed with keep in light of the Routledge source in particular, as well as numerous other mentions in foreign language sources. Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film and Hong Kong . Shellwood ( talk ) 22:18, 16 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Added sources to the article, including the review in Variety . See for yourself. Keep , obviously. - My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 23:40, 16 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : The Variety article indicates notability, as does the Routledge International Encyclopedia of Queer Culture citation. A Google Books search shows that it's discussed in a French book, L'homosexualité au cinéma by Didier Roth-Bettoni, but the preview doesn't show me anything past the first sentence. It also appears to be very widely-discussed on film blogs including MonsterHunter Movie Reviews , Love HK Film , Cinespot and Unseen Films . (These may be what the OP characterizes as "numerous fan-pages".) These are also only the sources that can be immediately found in English (and French); I'd expect further sources exist in Chinese. I believe that WP:NEXIST applies here. Toughpigs ( talk ) 03:44, 17 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources . Chow, Vivienne (2003-08-17). "Indie tricks" . South China Morning Post . Archived from the original on 2024-01-17 . Retrieved 2024-01-17 . The article notes: "Director Julian Lee Chi-Chiu's new film Night Corridor is a miracle. With only a $500,000 grant from the Arts Development Council, Lee managed to blow this independent creation up to a seemingly big budget production. ... Night Corridor is an alternative film adapted from Lee's novel of the same title, filled with homosexual psycho-thriller elements which did not interest any of the local film investors. With no cash, Lee made every effort to lure the best talents in town to work with him. ... Now the film is not only finished, it is also popular. All screenings at the Independent Film Month at Broadway Cinematheque have been sold out. It goes on general release from August 21 at Cinematheque." Weissberg, Jay (2004-05-11). "Night Corridor" . Variety . Archived from the original on 2024-01-17 . Retrieved 2024-01-17 . The review notes: "The cinematic equivalent of fusion cuisine, gothic tale “Night Corridor” proves that too many influences spoil the soup. Novelist-photographer-filmmaker Julian Lee serves up this devilish brew with plenty of eerie mystery and Lynchian obfuscation, but the offerings intrigue rather than satisfy. Don’t expect much H.K. sauce in the mix, although there are generous helpings of “Rosemary’s Baby” and “The Ninth Door” stirred in alongside Japanese-style horror. Locals stayed home last fall; offshore, this is a specialty vid offering." Scott, Matthew (2003-08-13). "Daniel's dark awakening" . South China Morning Post . Archived from the original on 2024-01-17 . Retrieved 2024-01-17 . The article notes: "For Hong Kong audiences and Wu's legions of fans, used to seeing him in mainstream fare such as the mega-successful Love Undercover (2002), Night Corridor certainly is "different". Director Lee took his inspiration from the creepy painting Nightmare (1781) by Swiss-born artist Fuseli and thus the film (like Wu's central character) charts a course somewhere between clarity and confusion. Being an independent effort made with a limited budget, the film at times suffers from the restraints inherit to this kind of production. And that is something to which Wu readily admits. ... For Hong Kong audiences, Night Corridor might be about as non-commercial as you can get - it touches on homo-erotica, as well paedophilia, and comes with a Category III restriction. Wu is under no illusions about the audience the film might attract, or of its place in the whole scheme of things here." Pei, Ya 皮亞. "《妖夜迴廊》雙生兒妖夜之死" ["Night Corridor": Death of Twins Yaoye] (in Chinese). Hong Kong Film Critics Society . Archived from the original on 2024-01-17 . Retrieved 2024-01-17 . The review notes: "《妖夜迴廊》大膽走進最危險的國度，鑽營港產片少見的類型，說一個永遠也沒有盡頭的妖夜傳說，剪接紛紛亂亂，如夢魘般重複著人物說話動作情節的關節眼，最後只打上四個大字：死因不明。問題在那裡，心知肚明吧。" From Google Translate: ""Night Corridor" boldly enters the most dangerous country, explores a genre rarely seen in Hong Kong films, and tells a never-ending legend of the demonic night. The editing is messy, and the joints of the characters' words, actions, and plot are repeated like a nightmare. In the end, there were only four big words: cause of death unknown. The problem is there, you know it. " Gau, Ling-cam 玖零叁 (2015-03-15). "《妖夜迴廊》－李志超的情慾惡夢" ["Night Corridor" - Julian Lee's erotic nightmare]. inmediahk.net [ zh ] (in Chinese). Archived from the original on 2022-02-21 . Retrieved 2024-01-17 . The article notes: "李志超Julian在去年尾辦了回顧展後就離世，留下未拍的自傳和多少經典作品。 上星期在其生前好友在西環設的《「識情。 賞美」李志超靈感展覽》買了他寫的《妖夜迴廊》小說。 《妖夜迴廊》後來由Julian自己執導拍成影像版本，找來吳彥祖主演和監製，演員有惠英紅、蔣怡、高雄、谷峰，是香港獨立電影的其中一部經典。 所以在看書前決定先看電影版本。 " From Google Translate: "Julian Lee passed away after a retrospective exhibition at the end of last year, leaving behind an unfilmed autobiography and several classic works. Last week, I bought the novel "The Corridor of the Night" written by him at the "Julian Lee Inspiration Exhibition of "Understanding Emotions and Appreciating Beauty" set up by his friend during his lifetime in Sai Wan. "Night Corridor" was later directed and made into a video version by Julian himself, with Daniel Wu starring and producing. The actors include Kara Wai, Coco Chiang, Eddy Ko, and Chan Sze-man. It is one of the classics of Hong Kong independent films. So I decided to watch the movie version before reading the book." Chung, Winnie (2003-12-13). "Asian Oscars set for an affair with Hong Kong film - Infernal Affairs up for 12 awards at annual Golden Horse event in Taiwan" . South China Morning Post . Archived from the original on 2024-01-17 . Retrieved 2024-01-17 . The article notes: "Hong Kong films are expected to grab the limelight in Taiwan tonight at the 40th annual Golden Horse Awards, Asia's equivalent of the Academy Awards. ... Infernal Affairs star Tony Leung Chiu-wai is the hot favourite in the best actor category. Leung is up against his Infernal Affairs co-star Andy Lau Tak-wah, Daniel Wu for indie film Night Corridor and Simon Yam Tat-wah for PTU. ... Hong Kong actresses Kara Hui Ying-hung and Candy Lo Hau-yum were nominated in the best supporting actress category for their work in Night Corridor and Truth or Dare: 6/F Rear Flat." There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow Night Corridor ( traditional Chinese : 妖夜迴廊 ; simplified Chinese : 妖夜回廊 ) to pass Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline , which requires "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject". Cunard ( talk ) 12:06, 17 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ). No further edits should be made to this page.

speedy keep

Five Minutes to Love: I found no reviews on Rotten Tomatoes . I did a WP:BEFORE and found nothing suitable or reliable enough to pass WP:NEXIST . The Film Creator ( talk ) 00:48, 18 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions . The Film Creator ( talk ) 00:48, 18 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment , found a review at DVD Talk, under the name "The Rotten Apple" [36] Donald D23 talk to me 00:54, 18 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep . Meets WP:GNG . Also seems to meet WP:NFO #2. This has plenty of coverage in contemporary zines and related books, eg: There's a full review by Erich Mees in Ecco Magazine issue 19, page 18, 1993. Ecco has a masthead with editor and copy editor listed. Good size review in The Phantom of the Movies' Videoscope: The Ultimate Guide to the Latest, Greatest, and Weirdest Genre Videos , Joe Kane. 2000. p. 505. Short capsule review in Famous Monsters of Filmland , Issue 200, May 1993, p 109. Magazine has a full masthead. — siro χ o 01:48, 18 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep - I've added an external link to the AFI (American Film Institute) page for the film's original title "The Rotten Apple". There's a great lot of information about this film at AFI: History, Details, Credits Synopsis, Genre, etc. On the one hand, this movie is a sort of testament to what a leap upward Rue McClanahan made to the Golden Girls. On the other hand, it's in league with a lot of low-budget films of that era. — Maile ( talk ) 20:19, 18 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I withdraw this nomination per consensus. The Film Creator ( talk ) 21:47, 18 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ). No further edits should be made to this page.

speedy keep

Dagobah: BEFORE fails to find anything helpful. At best this WP:GNG -failing topic can be redirected (merged?) to List of Star Wars planets and moons . Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | reply here 12:00, 25 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements and Science fiction and fantasy . Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | reply here 12:00, 25 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep I believe this is notable after all: Vom Artushof zum Palast der Saelde , p. 33-35 has two-and-a-half pages discussing Dagobah in the context of Joseph Campbell 's hero's journey ; Myth, Media, and Culture in Star Wars: An Anthology , p. 38-39, is very similar if shorter; " Wizards and Jedi: A Comparative Analysis: Between Merlin and Mentors in Star Wars " compares Dagobah to a location of an Arthurian story; and there are shorter mentions, like " 'From sequel to quasi-novelization: 'Splinter of the mind’s eye' and the 1970s culture of transmedia contingency’ " with a piece of creative background. Daranios ( talk ) 15:19, 25 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I am not seeing much about the planet itself. Plot summaries, yes, but analysis? And let me note that stuff like "A prototype of Luke's symbolic experiences in the Dagobah cave appears in Kurosawa's Drunken Angel" is not about Dagobah but about Luke Skywalker. Luke is notable, but not all places he adventured at are. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | reply here 09:37, 26 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] And while you are right that "Wizards..." compares Dagobah to a location of an Arthurian story, this comparison is one-two sentences long. Maybe three-four if we are being generous. SIGCOV is a problem. If there is not much else to say than "Dagobah has been compared to location associated with Merlin from Arthurian myths", this is good stuff to mention in a list - we don't need a dedicated article for a sentence of analysis. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | reply here 09:40, 26 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I cannot read the German text, if you think lenghtier analysis is presented there, I'd ask you to summarize it here (and after that, add it to the article). I am amenable to changing my views, but right now I don't see enough analysis to merit keeping a stand-alone article, I fear. -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | reply here 09:41, 26 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Vom Artushof... : Luke has to undertake an ardous journey to become a hero, modelled after Campbell's heros journey, with the setting complementing the plot: One station is planet Dagobah, which is "an impressive example of the interplay of space and plot" .... the incredible power of planet Dagobah .... hidden in fog and coulds at the edge of the galaxy, uninhabitabet, persumed uninhabitable, teeming with life... despite or because of the nativeness and inviolcy of nature, Dagobah is a place incomparable in touching the force of the universe... dark side is present...place of hiding for Yoda, place of instruction for Luke... Despite Dagobah being hostile to life, this planet is suitable like no other to influence the progression of the hero through its spacial conception, being remote and full of untouced-untamed nature.... isolated place of power. George Lucas means Dagobah as a place removed from distraction by human civilization to help to focus Luke's individual power and where he has to learn to face his own fears...connection to nature on the planet connects with original energies of the galaxy connects with individual power. This connection of location and plot goes back to anciend creation myths via medieval texts. Daranios ( talk ) 10:51, 26 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] And another secondary source, Interpreting Star Wars: Reading a Modern Film Franchise , p. 85-86, 91, does analogous analysis - Dagobah "fits well" as place to where the hero retreats "from society to a world of more primal symbols where he must conquer his own darkenss" from Campbell's schema - and has additional commentary: "richly constructed a semiotic environment", the Dagobah set evoking "the forest of our subconscious and the jungle of the mind"; "...the dark swamp infested by reptiles is our unconsciousness...", "no other environment attempts such imagery as Dagobah is constructed of"; "Dagobah would also come to be the basis for ... the notion that the film constitutes a form of mythology". Out-of-universe comments on the Dagobah set are strewn through a few sources, like Star Wars FAQ . So together in my view there is plenty enough material to fullfill WP:WHYN . Daranios ( talk ) 10:39, 27 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] @ Daranios Not bad. I'll ping @ Presidentman who may want to take a look at those sources as well. I am prepared to withdraw my nom, but it would be nice if someone would add a sentence or two to the article, with the sources cited. Any chance you can find few minutes for that? Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | reply here 02:32, 28 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] @ Piotrus : Yeah, I can add at least a bit one of these days. Daranios ( talk ) 15:15, 28 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The German source and the Interpreting Star Wars look sufficient to me. Not sure about the Star Wars FAQ as I cannot access it in full. I'll withdraw my redirect ! vote for now. Presidentman talk · contribs ( Talkback ) 13:54, 28 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] * Redirect to List of Star Wars planets and moons . My BEFORE also didn't turn up anything. The sources provided above appear to be mainly passing mentions rather than significant coverage . Presidentman talk · contribs ( Talkback ) 21:15, 25 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep Per Daranios. The Dagobah training sequence is such an iconic moment in film that it's hard to believe there is not coverage out there, per WP:NEXIST . ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ ( ᴛ ) 22:06, 25 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per Daranios. seems rather notable, with decent coverage. Drowssap SMM ( say hello ) 01:02, 26 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Withdrawing . Sources seem to have been located and User:Daranios promised to add something to the article as well. -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | reply here 03:30, 29 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ). No further edits should be made to this page.

speedy keep

Keti Chomata: This leaves a sole article from Lifo newspaper, definitely not enough to establish notability. Fails WP:NBASIC and all 12 criteria for WP:SINGER . No relevant newspapers articles and google results can be found online either. SpaceEconomist192 ✐ 15:41, 18 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log ( step 3 ). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2023 June 18 . — cyberbot I Talk to my owner :Online 16:01, 18 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers , Bands and musicians , Women , and Greece . Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 16:11, 18 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep . You simply have to search in Greek (or whichever minor, in e.g. number of speakers, modern language you deal with) to find relevant stuff, it's as simple as that. So unless the real criterion is either Anglophones know about it or it doesn't exist, please refrain from such hasty proposals. PS. I'm adding more and/or fixing refs now. Thanatos | talk | contributions 19:09, 23 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment The subject might be more known in Greece but this is the English Wikipedia and it must be relevant to the Anglophone speakers which is definitely not the case. Furthermore after looking through the Greek results, Keti Chomata only has a couple of articles about her and most of them are quite short, just having 2 or 3 paragraphs or a video, the rest of the articles results are just mere passages of her name, the same applies to the books, just passages of her name and definitely not enough to establish notability. SpaceEconomist192 ✐ @ SpaceEconomist192 : this is the English Wikipedia and it must be relevant to the Anglophone speakers ← That is absolutely not how it works. All we care is that something is significant according to reliable sources —not that those reliable sources are in English. -- Tamzin [ cetacean needed ] (she|they|xe) 23:46, 23 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I didn't say it needs English sources, I'm aware of WP:NOENG . I already refuted the premise that the subject had reliable sources in Greek. SpaceEconomist192 ✐ Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, L iz Read! Talk! 16:23, 25 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep as well as the Lifo article the first three references in the Greek wikipedia article here show significant coverage directly about her. It also states that she had a number of hit singles from her 18 released albums. There is enough coverage to pass WP:GNG so that deletion is unnecessary in my view, Atlantic306 ( talk ) 22:09, 25 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ). No further edits should be made to this page.

speedy keep