Wikipedia:XfD today

Shortcuts

This page transcludes all of the deletion debates opened today on the English-language Wikipedia, including articles, categories, templates, and others, as a convenience to XfD-watchers. Please note that because this material is transcluded, watchlisting this page will not provide you with watchlist updates about deletions; WP:DELT works best as a browser bookmark checked regularly.

Speedy deletion candidates[edit]

Candidates for speedy deletion

Association of Malaysian Optometrists

Blau-Weiß Brühl

Draft:Coral reef preservation

Draft:David Harber

FC Schüttorf 09

Draft:Jongvhanosaurus

Draft:Laxmi Narayana Maharana

User:Leonardo Jurić

Draft:Md Rifakat Siddiqui

Draft:Mindness 3D Studio

User:Munavath.SriRamulu

Articles[edit]

Recent AfDs: Today Yesterday

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

< May 05	May 07 >

Guide to deletion

Purge server cache

Bandhan Mutual Fund[edit]

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

Trivial coverage according to WP:ORGTRIV. Citations are collections of paid news which are highly pervasive and deeply integrated practice within Indian news media WP:NEWSORGINDIA. The primary issue arises from the editor's attempt to pass off two financial products (exchange traded funds), namely BANDHAN S&P BSE SENSEX ETF (BSE:540154) and BANDHAN NIFTY 50 ETF (NSE:IDFNIFTYYET), as company's own stock market listings, which they are not, thereby failing to adhere to WP:LISTED. A comparable effort was observed in the AFD discussion of Aditya Birla Sun Life Insurance, wherein the company tried to be part of NIFTY 50 without proper validation. In a nutshell, the company falls short when it comes to meeting WP:NCORP, WP:CORPDEPTH, WP:ORGIND. To put it mildly, they couldn't hit the broad side of a barn with a banjo and their depth is about as shallow as a puddle in the Sahara. TCBT1CSI (talk) 12:24, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and India. TCBT1CSI (talk) 12:24, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Finance, Companies, and Maharashtra. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:40, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 13:28, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 11:20, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Universidad Del Pacífico – Ecuador[edit]

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

This article has been erased several times on Spanish Wikipedia (and is nor creation protected) for repeated efforts to promotionally recreate it. This suggests serious WP:PROMO risk. In addition, the sources here aren't notable, all are either WP:ROUTINE, or lacking WP:DEPTH. Allan Nonymous (talk) 13:13, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Allan Nonymous (talk) 13:13, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Schools and Ecuador. Owen× ☎ 13:37, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Universidad Del Pacífico – Ecuador article deserves to remain on Wikipedia because it contributes to the encyclopedia's mission of providing comprehensive information about educational institutions around the world

Misunderstanding of notability: The repeated deletion attempts might be due to a misunderstanding of the university's notability. We should strive to improve articles with proper sources rather than deletion.

Improve the sources: If the sources used previously were not notable, we can find alternative sources that meet Wikipedia's criteria. There are plenty of reputable Ecuadorian news outlets about the university's achievements, programs, or events, even though most of these would be reptitive and not part of an encyclopedic entry.

Scholarly articles, news coverage, and government websites can be good starting points for finding reliable sources.

Comprehensiveness of Wikipedia: Wikipedia is an encyclopedia that strives to be comprehensive. Deleting an article about a university in Ecuador limits the information available to users about higher education in the country. The following List of universities in Ecuador used to include articles for each of the accredited institutions in the country. As of April 29th 2024 it seems that most of these articles have been deleted.

Notability

In general, most legitimate colleges and universities are notable^[1] and should be included on Wikipedia. For notability of sub-articles, see relevant advice below. ... It is also important to bear in mind that anyone can set up an institution and call it a "college" or, in many countries, a "university", so that it is essential to be clear whether an institution warrants inclusion in Wikipedia based on that institution's use of these terms.

Government websites listing UPACIFICO and other universities as an accredited institution or mentioning its programs. Were part of the article prior to edits on April 29 2024.

Enhancing the Article's Quality:

A collective effort can be made to find and add high-quality sources that meet Wikipedia's notability criteria. Despite this information being deleted because it was in "ugly tables"The article's content can be expanded to include information about the university's: History and mission Academic programs and faculty expertise Research activities and achievements Student life and campus facilities Accreditation status

Addressing Promotional Concerns:

We can collaborate to ensure the article presents a neutral and objective viewpoint. Promotional language can be replaced with factual descriptions of the university's academics, research, and student life. Editors can focus on providing verifiable information about the university's history, faculty, programs, and accreditation status.

With regards to the concern regarding repeated promotional recreation on the Spanish Wikipedia, this shouldn't automatically lead to deletion on the English version as the translation of this article into spanish does automatically reflect the existance of the article in wikipedia.es. The editing communities on each language version have some autonomy.

Independent Efforts: I translated the article into Spanish, demonstrating it wasn't a mere copy-paste attempt. Additionally, you mentioned finding the article created by other editors, further suggesting independent interest in the university. In my last edit on the Spanish Wikipedia my edit focused on adding a recognition which I had added to wikipedia.en, not promotional language, this led to the pages deletion, and blocking of my wikipedia.es account. Let me reiterate that wikipedia.es has a delitionist policy rather than a broader inclusionist perspective regarding knowledge.

Inconsistent Treatment: If you check [Universidades de Ecuador] All universities in Ecuador have entries on the Spanish Wikipedia. The Universidad Del Pacífico – Ecuador which has been deleted (and now reroutes to the English entry) seems inconsistent with this practice.

Proposal for Moving Forward:

Perhaps a communication channel can be established between the Spanish and English Wikipedia editors to discuss the university and ensure consistent treatment. I am more than willing to translate the Univerity entries in Spanish back into English in order to once again have a List of universities in Ecuador with entries to the different Universtites.

HarveyPrototype (talk) 17:05, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 11:19, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2023–24 Porsche Carrera Cup Middle East[edit]

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

Reviewed during NPP. Stats-only article for a season with no sources other than themselves about a series which doesn't have an article. GNG sourcing of the season per se is unfindable and unlikely to exist. The series itself would probably be a good topic for an article. But there is nothing here to move to it. North8000 (talk) 13:05, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Middle East-related deletion discussions. Owen× ☎ 13:32, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Motorsport-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:29, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. The series are new. I'm guessing an offshoot of the Porsche Carrera Cup Germany? The lack of sources is dire, but are you sure none of this was written about? Geschichte (talk) 21:00, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

First to reinforce, this article is not about the series, it's stats for 1 season of the series. There is no article for the series. On your question, I'm never sure that something doesn't exist but I looked and couldn't find any real coverage of the season, much less GNG coverage. North8000 (talk) 00:01, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 11:19, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ellicott Dredges[edit]

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

It exists, but I don't think it has the significance or coverage to meet N. Boleyn (talk) 12:19, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Engineering, and Maryland. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:30, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 11:18, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

MIAX Pearl Equities[edit]

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

Fails WP:NCORP. References are company news and routine annoucements. scope_creep^Talk 11:18, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A Quick Shave and Brush-up[edit]

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

No evidence that this is a notable film. Can be redirected to George Albert Smith (filmmaker)#Selected filmography. Fram (talk) 07:53, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film and United Kingdom. Fram (talk) 07:53, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe merge all these old ones into 1900 in film? Hyperbolick (talk) 08:34, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That seems like agood idea. Carnival200 (talk) 13:11, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
a good* Carnival200 (talk) 13:12, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to George Albert Smith (filmmaker)#Selected filmography: As I mentioned ~~in my ES~~/ in the OLDPROD template on article TP/ when I Dpdd the article (and on creator's TP). Not opposed to K. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 12:57, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, it seems that you didn't mention this in this case (you did mention a redirect target in some others though). Fram (talk) 13:30, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Let me check. Not in my ES, that's right. But please have a look at the OLPROD template on article TP. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 13:38, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, hadn't seen that. First time I see someone adding extra info there (not saying that's a bad thing, just something I didn't expect). Fram (talk) 13:54, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 11:13, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A Wreck in a Gale[edit]

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

No evidence that this 43-second film is notable, hasn't received significant attention. No good redirect target found. Fram (talk) 07:47, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film and United Kingdom. Fram (talk) 07:47, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Meets WP:NFILM as I mentioned in my edit summary when I "PROD-conned" it. See the guideline. Shown at festival more than 5 years after production. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 12:55, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- That line in NFILM gives only a presumption which needs to be supported by reliable sources indicating that it meets WP:GNG. A screening on a niche festival which shows more than 500 such rediscoveries each year is hardly a clear indication of importance, more of being a curio of passing interest. Fram (talk) 13:01, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  Thank you for sharing your opinion. I'll stand by my Keep, if you allow me, as I find this short clearly does meet the inclusionary criteria (not only a "line"), which is quite clear. It also proves, btw, that this short has received the "significant attention" you mentioned in your rationale. What you call a "niche festival" has indeed been a very important film event for almost 40 years. You are free to call this "a curio of passing interest" but the film has been screened at a very notable festival (much) more than 5 years after its production and that is, I'm afraid, a fact. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 13:17, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. N:FILM says "meeting these criteria is not an absolute guarantee that Wikipedia should have a separate, stand-alone article entirely dedicated to the film," and that is true here, where there are no reliable sources to describe the notability of this film beyond its mere existence. Dclemens1971 (talk) 13:27, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 11:12, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ladysmith – Naval Brigade Dragging 4.7 Guns into Ladysmith[edit]

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

No indication that this is a notable film (well, a 31 second static shot). Apparently not only have we no idea who actually made it (just the producre), but we also don't know what is being shown according to this. Perhaps some list for this and many similar non-notable shorts may be feasible, but at the moment I don't see a good redirect target. Perhaps William Kennedy Dickson filmography, which gives an idea of the number of such ultrashort films that were made (and is clearly incomplete, as e.g. this very one isn't on that list). Fram (talk) 07:42, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film, History, Military, South Africa, and United Kingdom. Fram (talk) 07:42, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to William Kennedy Dickson filmography: As I mentioned when I DPd the page (and on creator's TP) -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 12:56, 29 April 2024 (UTC) (Entry is now in the target; sources can be added if R is the path chosen)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 11:11, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rick Jay Glen[edit]

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

No sources at all, lacks notability, extreme amounts of fluff - looks very much like just a self-promo page. Hornpipe2 (talk) 03:50, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Television, Video games, Comics and animation, and California. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:27, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(comment) having some doubts over whether the IPv6 editor, and also the user "rickory", have a conflict of interest going on with this Hornpipe2 (talk) 06:39, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sources added. Content has been edited and cut down to remove fluff. 2601:644:9280:7C80:B58D:218D:9C58:17C8 (talk) 20:13, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

looks WP:REFBOMB - User talk:2601:644:9280:7C80:B58D:218D:9C58:17C8 what is your connection to the subject of this article? Hornpipe2 (talk) 12:14, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 11:04, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Esteghlal B F.C.[edit]

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

Empty article without any sources or material Shahin (talk) 11:03, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. Shahin (talk) 11:03, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Atlus USA[edit]

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

Reads like a video game essay, insufficient standalone notability. Only source I found that might have sufficient coverage is the Game Informer one, suggesting merger with Atlus. IgelRM (talk) 02:07, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games and Companies. IgelRM (talk) 02:07, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Seems quite notable, cites over 77 sources, many of which are secondary. I will note that if language is an issue, just tag it. thetechie@enwiki: ~/talk/ $ 02:18, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I could have tagged for style but generally interviews, which are a large part of the sources, don't give sufficient notability. IgelRM (talk) 17:32, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: A fairly in-depth article that explains its significance outside of the parent company; several dozen hits when looking at a cursory Google Books search. I do not see a strong reason to delete. Why? I Ask (talk) 02:51, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I am assuming you are referring to "notable in its localization approach in preserving as much of the original", but I struggle to find a notable source for that and mentioned Game Informer article doesn't say it. It would help me if you could pick an example book with significant coverage. IgelRM (talk) 17:53, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
~~Keep~~ Neutral: I know I'm biased, and if things go another way I'll accept the decision. If style and writing is the issue, then it needs a rewrite. Or maybe trimming down in places like that huge game list. --ProtoDrake (talk) 06:57, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
(Biased means article creator here for outsiders) It only makes sense to rewrite if it is notable. The game list seems fine although ideally it should be sourced and maybe spun-out to a separate page. IgelRM (talk) 18:02, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:05, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Toadette^Edit! 03:19, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Somewhat off-topic but the name in the lead was changed from "USA to "West" (as well as on the Atlus article), which does not appear to an official name. IgelRM (talk) 18:27, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Can the keep editors give WP:THREE for those of us who don't want to slog through 77 (!) references? -- asilvering (talk) 05:08, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Tagging @Thetechie: @Why? I Ask:. I mentioned relevant Game Informer article above, so maybe two? IgelRM (talk) 10:55, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - per above, article passes WP:GNG smoothly. Videogameplayer99 (talk) 22:56, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge, concur with others below, fails WP:THREE, see discussion on my talk Me Da Wikipedian (talk) 01:32, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Atlus. After (briefly) looking through the 77 sources and Google Books, I'm simply not seeing significant coverage of Atlus USA in reliable, secondary, independent sources. The article clearly has plenty of sources, but they're all trivial mentions (not significant coverage) or interviews (not secondary or independent), plus a few primary sources from Atlus. A few sources do border on significant coverage of Atlus, the parent company, but not Atlus USA, the subject of this article. The only source that is unequivocally significant coverage of Atlus USA is Game Informer, as mentioned above. Will gladly change my mind if anyone can point to two more sources that actually demonstrate SIGCOV. Woodroar (talk) 12:47, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Deliberating a possible merge: History section (except staff section, which does not appear notable) to Atlus; Localization approach section (mostly about localizing SMT) to Megami Tensei; Publishing section and third-party list into an additional section on List of Atlus games. IgelRM (talk) 19:02, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge I've been going back and forth on this one, but Woodroar more or less said where I ended up. The GameInformer is a huge in-depth source, but as I went through the rest, I simply could not find anything else. A few passing mentions in relation to games ("And Atlus USA is translating" and the like), and many of the non-interviews/non-primaries seemed to not mention Atlus USA at all. Calls for the !Keeps to provide at minimum three are unanswered at this time. -- ferret (talk) 13:15, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I'm just curious, is there policy/precedent for not spinning out regional branches like this? Nintendo of America for example doesn't have a standalone article even though it seemingly could. I know WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS isn't an argument for or against deletion, I'm just wondering if there was some previous consensus on this. CurlyWi (talk) 17:20, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think ideally every single article is as comprehensive as possible, so I would need to ask why (maybe because of the section length?) and what a spin-out would improve. IgelRM (talk) 18:02, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per above. The article doesn't have enough in-depth sources to exist on it's own, most articles are about the Japanese developer. Swordman97 ^{talk to me} 03:42, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 11:03, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of movie theaters[edit]

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

This appears to be an underinclusive and unnecessary duplication of Category:Cinemas and movie theaters by country, which includes many more theaters which are not on this list. I don't believe this page is particularly useful as a stand-alone list. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 02:46, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. Metropolitan90 (talk) 02:55, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:32, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. This is an absurdly incomplete list. Taking France as an example, the creator seems to think that Paris is all there is in France, unaware that the oldest cinema still in operation after 125 years, is in La Ciotat (https://edencinemalaciotat.com/le-plus-ancien-cinema-du-monde/). Similar problems apply in other countries, for example Chile, which apparently has just one cinema, though I saw Jurassic Park and The Color Purple in two different ones. Even if the list was made complete it would still be pointless. Athel cb (talk) 15:47, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- This is obviously only a list of notable movie theaters that have articles because they are historic or otherwise significant, which is a typical criterion for SALs. It needs some clean-up and is likely missing many, but I don't think we have an article on the oldest theater in La Ciotat so of course it's not on here. Reywas92^Talk 16:22, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  OK. I failed to notice the qualification "notable enough for Wikipedia articles," but it's still a ridiculous list. You are right that there is no "article on the oldest theater in La Ciotat", but there damn well should be. Athel cb (talk) 16:43, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  Perhaps you could make it? Then we should consider how List of oldest cinemas is not an article, but certainly notable. Conyo14 (talk) 22:11, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  Perhaps I will, but I'm not sure my knowledge is sufficient. La Ciotat is about 45 minutes drive from where I live (at least, it would be if I still drove significant distances). I've passed the Eden Cinema, but I've never been inside. Athel cb (talk) 17:05, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  
  I would note that Category:Cinemas and movie theaters by country is, of course, organized by country -- which is how this list is organized too. The difference is that there are a number of cinemas which Wikipedia has articles about, but which are not listed here on List of movie theaters. So this list is trying to fulfill the same function as Category:Cinemas and movie theaters by country, but not as well since it doesn't include all of the movie theaters that already have Wikipedia articles. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 15:46, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and improve. With some work and dedication it has the potential to be an informative list of historical/notable theaters. Archives908 (talk) 01:55, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm kind of leery of a page like this, though. The amount of work it would need to maintain would be kind of exhausting. I think that a far more manageable option would be for the page to limit itself to something like "oldest movie theater" by country, with the further requirement being that the theater would either have to be still operational OR the building itself would still have to be standing, in the case of a company that's now defunct but the building still stands. Otherwise this is a page that could potentially contain hundreds upon thousands of theaters. It would also be kind of prone to people coming around to list their mini (non-notable) theater as well. I'm not using that as an argument to delete mind you, just say that a page like this needs to be more limited out of necessity to make it more encyclopedic. ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (｡◕‿◕｡) 18:17, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Allows an organised overview with photographs and notes, which a category cannot do. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 08:35, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 11:00, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Higher Education and Research Opportunities in the UK[edit]

AfDs for this article:

Articles for deletion/H.E.R.O. (Higher Education and Research Opportunities in the UK)

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

Defunct goverment website without any claim to notability. previous AfD was "no consensus" but keep arguments didn't seem to go past USEFUL (even then I can't tell if they were saying that the article is useful or the website itself) and the article has not had any sources since then.

The generic name makes searching difficult, but I find it highly unlikely that what was only ever an information portal would have seen significant coverage. I did find all of one entry in a directory which doesn't really establish anything. -- D'n'B-t -- 10:54, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education, Websites, and United Kingdom. -- D'n'B-t -- 10:54, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Public infrastructure[edit]

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

Merge to Infrastructure.Most infrastructure around the world is public.There is no need to create additional article just for public infrastructure. Moreover, the article is not long and the content can be completely covered by Infrastructure.日期20220626 (talk) 00:45, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Architecture, Engineering, and Transportation. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:34, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 10:47, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Adam Bierman[edit]

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

No evidence of notability I can see, seeking delete and redirect rather than just BLAR due to promotional nature and it being most likely UPE spam. Alpha3031 (t • c) 10:16, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and United States of America. Alpha3031 (t • c) 10:16, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Arizona and California. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:47, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sirimongkol Rattanapoom[edit]

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

Nothing has been written that suggests notability, and any argument like there being sources that are full-length can shake the elephant in the room, the Catch-22 if you will: if this player is so notable, why isn't he playing? He's played zero minutes this season in Belgium's amateur third division. He has no international appearances, and in all due respect it's easier to be chosen for Thailand than for Brazil or Spain. He's 22 this month, so if he's some special player who passes WP:GNG without any professional appearances, when are they going to come? I know people like to make articles about teenagers at big clubs, based on hype press, but a 22-year-old at an amateur Belgian club is clearly a different kettle of fish. While I disagree with the old WP:NFOOTY regulation that a player was notable as soon as they made one professional appearance, it's a good measure at least. Also bear in mind that [1] this source comes from King Power, the Thai company that owns his Belgian club, so it is not independent anyway. Additionally, the creator made this article as an incomprehensible quote farm from Google Translate, suggesting an unfamiliarity with Thai sources. [2] Unknown Temptation (talk) 09:53, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Thailand. Shellwood (talk) 10:04, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Plunder of Murshidabad (1742)[edit]

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

Fails WP: NOTABILITY. The event is a part of the Maratha invasions of Bengal, and the prelude of First Battle of Katwa. Not much coverage in WP:RS, except some scattered lines. Not enough coverage in reliable sources for an article; and "Plunder of Murshidabad" is WP:OR as such an event is not named by any Historians. Imperial ^[AFCND] 09:05, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Military, Bangladesh, and India. Imperial ^[AFCND] 09:05, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:48, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of songs about Dubai[edit]

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

The deletion reason is the same as Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of songs about Ahmedabad, Madras, Oslo etc.: The list fails WP:INDISCRIMINATE, WP:LISTN and WP:OR. There is little to nothing worthwhile in this list, be it content or context - the mishmash sources or the songs' lack of standalone notability don't help. Geschichte (talk) 08:44, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Music, Lists, and United Arab Emirates. Shellwood (talk) 08:50, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:48, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of songs about Bangalore[edit]

AfDs for this article:

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

Previous AFD was a mass nomination that ended in keep, for many reasons, except for the article's actual merits. Because there are none.

The deletion reason is the same as Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of songs about Ahmedabad, Madras, Oslo etc.: The list fails WP:INDISCRIMINATE, WP:LISTN and WP:OR. There is little to nothing worthwhile in this list, be it content or context. Geschichte (talk) 08:37, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Music, Lists, and Karnataka. Shellwood (talk) 08:51, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:48, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nisar Ahmed (politician)[edit]

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

Fails WP:NPOL and WP:GNG. Didn't win the election, never elected into an office. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 08:41, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians and Pakistan. Shellwood (talk) 08:48, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Looks like the subject might not meet WP:POLITICIAN since there's no record of them being elected to parliament. Also, not seeing much coverage, so not even passes WN:GNG either. —Saqib (talk | contribs) 09:55, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Delete: This should be speedily deleted and the author should be warned\blocked as after the AFD of Hakeem Nisar Ahmad, the author of that article created the same article under different name space. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 10:19, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
But the author is an admin. You can't really say anything to them without consequences, you know? —Saqib (talk | contribs) 10:32, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

House of Wisdom for Conflict Resolution & Governance[edit]

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

Delete or merge into Ahmed Yousef. Fails WP:NORG. Only fleeting mentions of this organization in RS, and an official testifying before the UK Parliament does not establish notability. Longhornsg (talk) 00:46, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and Palestine. Longhornsg (talk) 00:46, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:34, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Desertarun (talk) 08:21, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hero Envy[edit]

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

I'm not sure if the subject of the article is notable. There are at least two newspaper articles about this series, in the Leominster Champion and in the Telegram & Gazette, however, both are local sources (Worcester County, Massachusetts), and both articles are from August 2006. Hero Envy is also present in the book Internet Comedy Television Series, 1997-2015, where about 130 words are dedicated to the summary of the plot/characters, and about 75 words of additional commentary (mainly about the spin-off). The article also cites Nerd Caliber, but that doesn't seem like an RS. Perhaps I've missed something, though. toweli (talk) 08:19, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Comics and animation and Internet. toweli (talk) 08:19, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Massachusetts-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:49, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Alex Lane (actor)[edit]

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

Subject does not appear to possess roles that adequately satisfy WP:NCREATIVE. Most sources currently present in the article say the same thing, in which subject is mentioned once to declare being a co-producer. I cannot find satisfactory GNG sourcing online. —Sirdog (talk) 07:42, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. —Sirdog (talk) 07:42, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Belgium and United States of America. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 09:11, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:50, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Məlikzadə[edit]

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

A one sentence page that fails WP:GNG. It has been like that for around 10 years now. Duke of New Gwynedd (talk | contrib.) 20:18, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography, Asia, and Azerbaijan. Duke of New Gwynedd (talk | contrib.) 20:18, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: On the map, it shows up north of Gülüzənbinə and has enough houses that I don't doubt (contrary to about a hundred AFDs on US locations) that it's populated. However, they are very close to eachother and a case might be made that these are constituent parts of a larger village. Geschichte (talk) 21:10, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- @Geschichte: in the two articles I found, Məlikzadə and Gülüzənbinə were mentioned as 2 different villages. The frustrating thing is that most likely a very different spelling would have been used in Soviet and pre-Soviet times, I can't find how it was written then. --Soman (talk) 22:35, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - for a village, there is no requirement for much more info that what is available in the article. It's a village, it has coords, it is located in a municipality. Here there is mention (WP:RS?) on Gypsy population being resettled in Melikzade in by Shah Abbas the Great as a measure to suppress local rebellions, seems it is was of the main sites of Gypsy population in Azerbaijan. [3] confirms same point, and affirms that they are Persian speakers. --Soman (talk) 23:43, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- add Keep, a separate village should be ok for notability per WP:NPLACE. --Soman (talk) 22:39, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Separate village. Satisfies WP:GEOLAND. -- Necrothesp (talk) 10:21, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 06:02, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

TalkLocal[edit]

AfDs for this article:

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

Fails the notability guideline for companies. Previously deleted at AfD but I could not verify whether G4 applied. There is some not-totally-worthless Washington Post coverage [4] [5], but (1) the company is Maryland-based and so WaPo coverage is not as significant as it otherwise would be and (2) we need multiple independent sources. The rest are either unreliable or non-independent. My source checks covered both "TalkLocal" and its former name "Seva Call". – Teratix ₵ 05:56, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Websites, and Maryland. – Teratix ₵ 05:56, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

KYNM-CD[edit]

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

Subject does not meet the GNG. Mvcg66b3r (talk) 03:56, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and New Mexico. Mvcg66b3r (talk) 03:56, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, This article needs reducing, not deleting. Searched the station, and was able to pick up a source from the LPTV Report, and even then, the article seems to have enough to justify saving it. --Danubeball (talk) 20:46, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Extraordinary Writ (talk) 05:53, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

KQDF-LD[edit]

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

Subject does not meet the GNG. Mvcg66b3r (talk) 03:52, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and New Mexico. Mvcg66b3r (talk) 03:52, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Keep. This was actually one that I myself slid in some extra sources in back when the whole HC2 mass destruction thing was happening. Still think it deserves to stay kinda. Danubeball (talk) 20:24, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Extraordinary Writ (talk) 05:53, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Queen Killing Kings[edit]

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

The article has some sources, but I could not find sustained coverage and to me it appears that it doesn't meet the criteria laid out at WP:NMUSIC. I think the community should decide whether this band merits having their own page. Keivan.f^Talk 05:49, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Connecticut. Shellwood (talk) 08:51, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Arora Akanksha[edit]

AfDs for this article:

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

Fails WP:NPOL as a former candidate who got exactly 0 votes. Since her 2021 run, she did absolutely nothing that is notable, so I'm renominating this article for deletion. All the sources fit squarely in WP:BLP1E territory. Mottezen (talk) 04:52, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians, Women, and Canada. Mottezen (talk) 04:52, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Not passing WP:NPOL does not mean that she cannot be notable through any other criteria. The previous AfD from 2021 was kept on WP:GNG grounds; can you clarify why you think that result was incorrect? Curbon7 (talk) 05:09, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
In the previous nomination, the 2021 United Nations Secretary-General selection was not yet completed. While, most !keep voters in the previous AfD did not even acknowledge the BLP1E issue, those that did exaggerated her importance in the election.

Example for exaggerated importance: even if the coverage relates to one event (where both the event & the role of the subject is significant); such articles are usually kept. and Invoking WP:BLP1E here isn't right because she pretty clearly has a significant role in the selection. Remember, she got no votes and no country endorsements, so her role in the event was insignificant. Even the UN ambassador for her own country didn't reply to her request for a meeting to discuss her candidacy.

Of note: about a year after the end of her campaign, her campaign website https://unow.org/ went down, and her last campaign post on facebook was before the 2021 selection. Arora moved on to become a lecturer. Mottezen (talk) 05:45, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hovhannes Mkrtchyan[edit]

AfDs for this article:

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

Fails WP:NSKATE; medal placement at the junior level or bronze/silver medals at the senior-level national championships explicitly do not meet the requirements of WP:NSKATE. Ineligible for PROD. Bgsu98 (Talk) 04:11, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and Armenia. Bgsu98 (Talk) 04:11, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Angela Maxwell[edit]

AfDs for this article:

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

Fails WP:NSKATE; medal placement at the junior level or bronze/silver medals at the senior-level national championships explicitly do not meet the requirements of WP:NSKATE. Bgsu98 (Talk) 03:58, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Women, and Texas. Bgsu98 (Talk) 03:58, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Gerhard Lomer[edit]

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

Nothing shows the notability. Of the three sources; two are written by the subject and the other by their employer. -- NotCharizard ^🗨 03:42, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. -- NotCharizard ^🗨 03:42, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Canada, and New York. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:09, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
keep I have added a number of citations. There are many, many more available.
A BEFORE search, if one was done, would have revealed numerous sources about the article subject. For example, this search[6] should have been a clue that notability would be shown. I used archive links so there wouldn't be a paywall issue. Per WP:NEXISTS even without citations in the article this nomination would have been without foundation. Oblivy (talk) 05:30, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep -- the quote from a reliable source "undoubtedly the single most important individual in the history of Canadian library education" is enough to show notability unless there are significant reasons to doubt the independence. -- Michael Scott Asato Cuthbert (talk) 08:04, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
McNally wrote that in 1996, and at the time he was chair of the Canadian Library Association. It looks like Quebec Library Association (of which Lomer was honorary president until 1970) did not become a member of the rebooted national group until 2016. So even though McNally certainly has some pro-librarian bias I don't see anything that would call his independence, or that of the publisher, into question. Oblivy (talk) 10:01, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yuga Labs[edit]

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

This stub's information on Yuga Labs' ownership of Bored Ape and CryptoPunks NFTs, doxxing of its founders, and new CEO hiring are all covered in more detail at the existing Bored Ape article. I propose redirecting this article to Bored Ape (which was how Pppery originally created the article in June 2022), as the latter already has more information on the company. BluePenguin18 🐧 ( 💬 ) 03:41, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Visual arts, Companies, and Internet. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:11, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Maicol Azzolini[edit]

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

Italian rugby player who fails WP:GNG and WP:SPORTCRIT. I found this interview and a couple of transactional announcements (1, 2, 3), but nothing substantial. JTtheOG (talk) 02:57, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Rugby union, and Italy. JTtheOG (talk) 02:57, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep I think there is just about enough here to suggest a WP:GNG pass. Obviously a lot of team announcements and transactional stuff, but there are a few bits in there that could pass WP:GNG. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 09:07, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ahmada[edit]

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

lack of notability Minmarion (talk) 02:53, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Afghanistan. Minmarion (talk) 02:53, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Aida Vee[edit]

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

lack of notability. little to no 3rd party articles detailing artist Minmarion (talk) 02:50, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Music, Africa, and Uganda. Minmarion (talk) 02:50, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 09:13, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

CD Country[edit]

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

Subject does not meet the WP:GNG due to a lack of WP:SIGCOV. Let'srun (talk) 19:50, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Music and Radio. Let'srun (talk) 19:50, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 02:32, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Los Zodiac[edit]

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

This was hard to assess, especially as there are varying spellings used. I couldn't find enough to show it meets WP:NBAND / WP:GNG. Survived 2005 AfD ([[7]], but standards very different then. Boleyn (talk) 10:39, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Peru. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 10:45, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:53, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Peruvian rock:

From this it seems like there is some level of coverage in 2018's Demoler. El rock en el Perú 1965-1975 by Carlos Torres Rotondo
There may be some leads from this: "Very little has been written about the History of Rock in our environment. Only sketches (as some newspapers usually publish) and some studies such as the one done by Jose Miguel Gonzalo Garcia, entitled Development of Youth Music in Peru, give us a brief idea of this whole matter. But the closest thing to a treatise on the so-called underground current or alternative music comes from the university works of which I mention (but always from a giraffe perspective, based more on journalistic data or conversations with subways, than on personal experiences), the job that my friend Miguel Lescano did at the beginning of the 90s, or the Underground Rock -10 Years of Wild Operas by Alvaro Olano Dextre. All of them are the first formal attempts to capture a history of underground rock. Someone will try to object to me by saying, what about Pedro Cornejo's book? I'm sorry to contradict you little brother, but the Game without Borders - Approaches to Contemporary Music that Pedro published in 1994 is not considered, not even by Pedro Cornejo himself, a total work, at least it is not what many (like me) expected from Pedro Cornejo Guinassi, graduate in Philosophy, professor at La Católica, participant in the first years of underground rock, editor and collaborator of alternative publications and other publications."
es-wiki does not have an article for them, and nor are they actually covered at es:Rock_del_Perú or es:Historia_del_rock_en_el_Perú
They are not the Los Zodiacs from Getxo in Spain who had a song in a Pepsi ad (see this from El Correo)

I can't see what's in Torres, etc, but there's otherwise a dearth of reliable sourcing for the band other than being one of a number of early 60s Peruvian rock bands. Unless adequate info is discovered in Torres or other RS, redirect with retention of history and categories seems the sensible option. ^~Hydronium^~Hydroxide^~(Talk)~ 12:08, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 02:32, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of Premier League overseas broadcasters[edit]

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

WP:NOTTVGUIDE applies here. The subjects are not described as a group, failing WP:LISTN. No context to assert notability either. Also, sources are primary sources, nothing but news announcements and none of those assert notability. Those arguing for a keep claiming how useful it is, shall be advised to refer to WP:USEFUL. SpacedFarmer (talk) 15:58, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, Football, Lists, United Kingdom, and England. SpacedFarmer (talk) 15:58, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 18:29, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found please ping me. Giant Snowman 18:31, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Upon a search, I just get WP:PRIMARY sources from NBC, CBC, and tweets announcing who does which games. It's trivia and can be placed into the main broadcasting article. Conyo14 (talk) 22:23, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Relevant information and sources have been added to the article that will help give it more notability. [8], [9], [10], [11]--Claudio Fernag (talk) 07:59, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
WP:LISTCRUFT still applies, you think an article on some junk list makes a list notable, think again. SpacedFarmer (talk) 11:57, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 02:16, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Airbiquity[edit]

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

All sources for this company are WP:ROUTINE coverage. Allan Nonymous (talk) 16:32, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Computing, Software, Transportation, and Washington. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 16:34, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Lean keep very difficult to find under all the regurgitated press releases but the Seattle Post-Intelligencer has done a couple of more substantial pieces on the company,^[2]^[3] which looks to have been more prominent in the 2000s. (I don't think the articles are still available online – if anyone would like me to email the full text to review, let me know). I'm not yet fully convinced of notability – we would want to see decent coverage from more than one source – but the situation is not quite as bad as it looks. – Teratix ₵ 06:48, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ "Wikipedia:College and university article advice". Wikipedia.
^ Cook, John (21 October 2005). "Ex-startup Airbiquity experiences a rebirth". Seattle Post-Intelligencer.
^ Cook, John (22 January 2008). "Airbiquity rebounds with funding, deals". Seattle Post-Intelligencer.

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 17:55, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. I opened all of the refs, they are routine press releases, 404, tangential and such. Nothing to establish notability. A 1997 startup that had 50-100 employess before being bought up recently and has now disappeared. Desertarun (talk) 19:03, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Did you look for sources that weren't in the article? – Teratix ₵ 04:25, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 02:15, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Al-Tash Garrison[edit]

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

Cannot find any sources besides the one 2003 report. Given it seems to lack official government recognition, WP:GNG applies over WP:NPLACE and I can find basically nothing about this place. Allan Nonymous (talk) 17:33, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Iraq. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:33, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep but rename. There was a refugee camp there and I believe it was notable per 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and other sources. I think “garrison” is just a mistranslation of “مخيم” and the intended meaning is “refugee camp”. Mccapra (talk) 06:14, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The problem here is that, since this place is not government recognized, WP:GNG applies. The first four here are primary sources, 5 is WP:ROUTINE coverage, and 6 about another camp and only mentions this one in passing. Allan Nonymous (talk) 13:03, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 17:56, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Rename to Al-Tash refugee camp. Several thousand people lived here, the refs are good and satisfy gng. Desertarun (talk) 19:07, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Policy based input please
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 02:14, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Paul Melo e Castro[edit]

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

Orphan article with no evidence of notability. Lecturer does not meet WP:PROF and an h-Index of 4 means the research output had little impact. Tried to find book reviews to see if the subject could meet WP:NAUTHOR but I was only able to find this one and I don't think it's enough to qualify for notability. No evidence of WP:SIGCOV as well. Contributor892z (talk) 17:44, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Authors. Contributor892z (talk) 17:49, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 22:32, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting list for Literature. Contributor892z (talk) 19:28, 1 May 2024 (UTC) [reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 02:14, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Honorary Chaplain to the King[edit]

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

This page is fundamentally flawed. The position of Honorary Chaplain to the King is a military appointment, for serving regular and reserve chaplains in the British and some Commonwealth armed forces. However much of the text refers to Chaplains to the King, who are members of the Ecclesiastical Household of the Royal Household, and are civilians, usually senior parish priests. I do not believe that the article can be repaired. As an alternative to deletion it would have to be wholly rewritten. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ncox001 (talk • contribs) 10:58, 27 April 2024 (UTC); listed on the log at 21:19, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Royalty and nobility, Christianity, and United Kingdom. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 22:23, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The inaccuracies can easily be ironed out but the topic is notable. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:38, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 10:13, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Fails GNG. Nothing found in article or BEFORE that meets WP:SIRS addressing the subject directly and indepth. If sources are found that provide direct and indepth coverage, ping me. // Timothy :: talk 03:14, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 02:00, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The nominator's contention is incorrect - Honorary Chaplain to the King is NOT a military appointment. In recent times a number of HCs have been appointed from the forces but many are also appointed who have no link to the forces. All are absolutely part of the ecclesiastical household. As such, the assertion that the article "cannot be repaired" is flawed. It should be improved, perhaps by starting here (p304) which details the creation of the position in 1881.----Pontificalibus 06:57, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Park Scholarships[edit]

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

Subject is not independently notable (and notability is not inherited from its unquestionably notable parent organization). ElKevbo (talk) 21:57, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education and North Carolina. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 22:19, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 10:19, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 01:51, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: I have not found significant coverage of this scholarship in reliable sources. voorts (talk/contributions) 02:45, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Supermium[edit]

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

Supermium is essentially just Chromium backported to Windows XP. Is this really notable enough for its own article? Seems like it could just have a short mention in the Chromium page. Bringing up the phrase "Supermium" on Google news just reports two articles related to the program, and two related to a Spotify subscription tier. There are several videos made on it however on YouTube (though, mostly by small creators). HolyNetworkAdapter (talk) 01:49, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. HolyNetworkAdapter (talk) 01:49, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, it also seems like the article was originally created by a sockpuppet, if that contributes anything. HolyNetworkAdapter (talk) 01:53, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:12, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Josh Fusitua[edit]

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

I am unable to find enough coverage of the subject, a New Zealand rugby union player, to meet WP:GNG or WP:SPORTCRIT. JTtheOG (talk) 23:45, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Rugby union, and New Zealand. JTtheOG (talk) 23:45, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Think there's just about enough when sourcing snippets are combined, such as this, this, this among others. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 18:51, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- For future reference, a database profile and two primary sources do not come close to meeting GNG. JTtheOG (talk) 18:59, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as per JTtheOG, can't see any thorough coverage of this person. David Palmer aka cloventt (talk) 02:14, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep This is a young player at the beginning of his career and he is playing regularly for the Blues now. There are already more sources available about this player than used for this stub and it is foreseeable that there will be more written about him in the future. Ruggalicious (talk) 23:26, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- @Ruggalicious: Which sources did you find? JTtheOG (talk) 03:29, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 01:41, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Akade[edit]

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

No clear notability. Creation tends to indicate an undeclared conflict of interest. — billinghurst sDrewth 22:56, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and West Bengal. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:14, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, voorts (talk/contributions) 01:30, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jaars-Townsend Airport[edit]

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

Non-notable private airport. Coverage in secondary sources is nil. Could be redirected to JAARS. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 14:14, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Aviation and North Carolina. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 14:14, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
redirect to JAARS#JAARS Base per nom. There's no independent notability. Mangoe (talk) 02:51, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If this article does not meet the notability criteria then I second Mangoe’s suggestion L.arlanda27 (talk) 06:03, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 01:30, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jacques Fick[edit]

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

Poorly sourced rugby BLP; subject made one pro appearance. Having a hard time finding the necessary sourcing to meet WP:GNG or WP:SPORTCRIT. JTtheOG (talk) 23:23, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Rugby union, and South Africa. JTtheOG (talk) 23:23, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Looks to fail WP:GNG. No suitable redirect per WP:ATD. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 18:46, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, voorts (talk/contributions) 01:29, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Shaun Squires[edit]

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

Rugby BLP that fails WP:GNG. I am unable to find much of anything approaching WP:SIGCOV. Best thing that came up was three sentences here. JTtheOG (talk) 23:17, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Rugby league, and England. JTtheOG (talk) 23:17, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Undecided: Career lasted for quite a few years, got potential for expansion, but currently not sourced enough to remain on mainspace. Mn1548 (talk) 12:58, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fails WP:SPORTBASIC, no significant coverage. J Mo 101 (talk) 17:35, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, voorts (talk/contributions) 01:29, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Indiana University Informatics & Communications Technology Complex[edit]

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

Most substantial source cited is a student newspaper article from time of construction. Further searches suggest that neither original construction or recent developments appear to have generated significant independent coverage. All coverage is from university or contractor press releases, or passing mentions as location of various departments. No indication building meets WP:GNG or WP:NBUILD. Triptothecottage (talk) 23:17, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education, Technology, and Indiana. Triptothecottage (talk) 23:20, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 10:18, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Info - Note to closer for soft deletion: This nomination has had limited participation and falls within the standards set for lack of quorum. There are no previous AfD discussions, undeletions, or current redirects and no previous PRODs have been located. This nomination may be eligible for soft deletion at the end of its 7-day listing.

Logs: 2024-04 ✗ deleted

--Cewbot (talk) 00:02, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, voorts (talk/contributions) 01:29, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pakistan audio leaks controversy[edit]

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

per WP:SINGLEEVENT. This fails WP:GNG. —Saqib (talk | contribs) 13:16, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. —Saqib (talk | contribs) 13:16, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events and Politics. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 13:22, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. This isn't about a single event, and coverage has been ongoing for months and months at this point (see here, here, and here). The article needs an update, but as usual, AfD isn't clean-up. Cortador (talk) 14:22, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

But this article discusses audio leaks involving Pakistan's prime ministers, but the sources you provided doesn't pertain to prime ministers. --—Saqib (talk | contribs) 15:04, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The article starts with the sentence "The Pakistan audio leaks controversy stems from several leaked audio conversations involving Pakistan's prime minister Shehbaz Sharif and former prime minister Imran Khan among others." Emphasis mine. The second article talks about "the recent audio leaks involving politicians, judges, and their relatives", confirming that sources treat the audio leaks controversy as one event, whether or not a given leak featuring a (former) prime minister or not. Cortador (talk) 06:12, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete While the topic has indeed received extended coverage over a significant period, the accumulation of sources does not inherently justify the retention of an article. The core issue pertains to notability and whether the subject matter has sustained coverage that adds substantial information. The main concern is the notability and consistent, in-depth coverage. The provided references don’t seem to enhance the topic’s comprehension. While it’s true that the AfD isn’t just for clean-up, it does allow for evaluating an article’s significance. In this instance, the article seems to fall short of the expected encyclopedic depth and quality. samee converse 02:50, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It is a delete but you really should copyedit your generated tokens from an AI prompt. Recent ChatGPT models are trained on guest post spam and they will obvously spill out crap like this - avoid it all cost or you will loose your reputation [12]. If you still want to use chatbot then use the advanced model of Claude instead. At least it is objective and concise like Wikipedia. 111.119.37.78 (talk) 02:27, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Fails WP:Notability. Also lack of depth. Wikibear47 (talk) 00:10, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Would like to point out that WP:SINGLEEVENT (cited in the nomination) explicitly doesn't apply here as that is for articles about people, not articles about events. Elli (talk | contribs) 17:20, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Seems like this should procedurally closed then for lack of a valid reason for deletion. Cortador (talk) 15:47, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Let's allow the AfD to run its course. As Samee pointed out, the primary concern still revolves around WP:N and consistent, in-depth coverage as demanded per WP:GNG. Lets not forget WP is not an indiscriminate collection of information. --—Saqib (talk | contribs) 16:00, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 15:15, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 01:28, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Taipei Economic and Cultural Office in Atlanta[edit]

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

Lacking secondary sources specifically about the consulate. Fails WP:GNG and WP:ORGCRIT. AusLondonder (talk) 16:34, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bilateral relations, Organizations, Taiwan, United States of America, and Georgia (U.S. state). AusLondonder (talk) 16:34, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete This is a defacto consulate, and not the same level as an embassy. Fails GNG and WP:ORG. LibStar (talk) 23:44, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There are articles regarding the Taiwanese offices in Ho Chi Minh City and also São Paulo. Would those also fall under this blanket reason? Toadboy123 (talk) 04:32, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
if they fail GNG, yes. LibStar (talk) 04:35, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Toadboy123 embassies, consulates and other diplomatic offices must meet WP:GNG which requires "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject" AusLondonder (talk) 06:28, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge/redirect to Taipei Economic and Cultural Representative Office in the United States#Consular districts by missions, where the subject is already mentioned, per Wikipedia:Deletion policy#Alternatives to deletion. I did not find significant coverage in reliable sources in my searches for sources. A redirect with the history preserved under the redirect will allow editors to selectively merge any content that can be reliably sourced to the target article. A redirect with the history preserved under the redirect will allow the redirect to be undone if significant coverage in reliable sources is found in the future. Cunard (talk) 09:01, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What is there to merge? Also of course ATD is only part of the deletion policy. The eighth point at WP:DEL-REASON which describes valid criteria for deletion, states "Articles whose subjects fail to meet the relevant notability guideline" is a valid reason to delete. AusLondonder (talk) 14:56, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I support a redirect (with the history preserved under the redirect). A redirect gives editors like Toadboy123 (talk · contribs), the article's creator, the option of doing a selective merge of content to Taipei Economic and Cultural Representative Office in the United States#Consular districts by missions. Taipei Economic and Cultural Office in Atlanta discusses the subject's location; how it was established on 1 March 1979, the day after the signing of this communiqué; what its former name was; what states it represents; and the cultural center it oversees. Some of this content could be merged to the target article. Cunard (talk) 05:55, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 01:28, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tythan Adams[edit]

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

I am unable to find enough coverage of the subject, a South African rugby union player, to meet WP:GNG or WP:SPORTCRIT. JTtheOG (talk) 19:02, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Rugby union, and South Africa. JTtheOG (talk) 19:02, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep' There's this and a few other bits from his time in Scotland, just enough for a keep for me but close. No suitable redirect per WP:ATD. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 18:47, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Cavarrone 15:24, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 17:54, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 01:27, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Max Silvestri[edit]

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

Not notable - no significant coverage of the subject and possibly promotional Pprsmv (talk) 19:21, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, Entertainment, United States of America, and Rhode Island. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 22:28, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Not a strong keep, but there appears to be sufficient notability - The sources in the article currently are not useful due to being interviews or dead links, but there are some reviews of his work that can be found with minimal effort that tend to indicate notability (Exclaim, The Diamondback, Vulture) - There are also interviews, Q&As and other sources, but generally they are not as strong as the 3 reviews above to establish notoriety. Shazback (talk) 19:38, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 01:26, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rome Chambers[edit]

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

Played a single, unremarkable game over 120 years ago. No other information can be found on him and the MLB's own website has the exact same info. Extremely doubtful that this player meets notability standards. Lindsey40186 (talk) 01:26, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Baseball, and North Carolina. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:45, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Some newspaper coverage: [13] [14] [15] [16] [17]. BeanieFan11 (talk) 01:54, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. In-depth SIGCOV over 100 years after his death: [18] / [19]. BeanieFan11 (talk) 01:57, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment If final outcome is not keep, then it should be redirected to Atlanta Braves all-time roster#C. Rgrds. --BX (talk) 02:38, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - besides the newspaper coverage found by BeanieFan above, Chambers is also profiled in The Rank and File by David Nemec, and thus meets GNG. Hatman31 (talk) 04:09, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fayse Goh[edit]

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

the article appears to be very promotional. I also searched up the name, and it appears to plagarize his youtube channel's description. Gaismagorm (talk) 20:02, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Music, and Malaysia. Gaismagorm (talk) 20:02, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Info - Note to closer for soft deletion: This nomination has had limited participation and falls within the standards set for lack of quorum. There are no previous AfD discussions, undeletions, or current redirects and no previous PRODs have been located. This nomination may be eligible for soft deletion at the end of its 7-day listing.

Logs: 2024-04 ✍️ create

--Cewbot (talk) 00:02, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 01:26, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Miss Washington USA[edit]

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

This article is not ready for main space and should be draftified, at least. The references that exist do not add anything beyond individuals who won pageants in two recent years out of a claimed more than 50 years of events. There is not one reference for the pageant organization itself even to back up the claimed ownership or year it was formed. ☆ Bri (talk) 16:19, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Beauty pageants and Washington. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 16:22, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Subject does not meet the WP:NORG due to a lack of sourcing about the pageant itself. Let'srun (talk) 22:19, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Draftify or delete?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:54, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, voorts (talk/contributions) 00:57, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of career achievements by Shaquille O'Neal[edit]

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

This is an indiscriminate collection of trivia that is a clear WP:NOTSTATS violation. The most pertinent info is already in the main article so there is no need for any type of merge. Let'srun (talk) 00:45, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Basketball and Lists. Let'srun (talk) 00:45, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. There's no need for this article. All the information is covered in the main Shaquille O'Neal article, and the poor sourcing doesn't demonstrate that a merge for the missing parts is necessary. Cortador (talk) 06:57, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment For reference, there's recent NBA-related AfDs Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of career achievements by Dennis Rodman, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of career achievements by Kevin Garnett, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of career achievements by Larry Bird, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of career achievements by Dwight Howard, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of career achievements by Carmelo Anthony, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of career achievements by Chris Paul.—Bagumba (talk) 07:35, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of career achievements by Kevin Durant[edit]

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

This is a collection of indiscriminate trivia that falls into WP:NOTSTATS. Let'srun (talk) 00:41, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sports, Basketball, and Lists. Let'srun (talk) 00:41, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment For reference, there's recent NBA-related AfDs Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of career achievements by Dennis Rodman, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of career achievements by Kevin Garnett, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of career achievements by Larry Bird, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of career achievements by Dwight Howard, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of career achievements by Carmelo Anthony, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of career achievements by Chris Paul.—Bagumba (talk) 07:36, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files[edit]

Categories[edit]

NEW NOMINATIONS[edit]

Category:Whai players[edit]

Propose renaming Category:Whai players to Category:Tauranga Whai players

Nominator's rationale: Whai (basketball) is now Tauranga Whai. I created the category when the team name did not have "Tauranga" in it. The team name is now officially "Tauranga Whai". DaHuzyBru (talk) 10:51, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Dual men's international footballers[edit]

Propose renaming Category:Dual men's international footballers to Category:Dual international men's footballers

Nominator's rationale: They are men's footballers who are dual internationals, the current order does not make grammatical sense. An alternative would be Dual internationalists (men's football), mirroring how the female players cat has been named‎ Crowsus (talk) 09:06, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Anarchism task force participants[edit]

Propose renaming Category:Anarchism task force participants to Category:WikiProject Anarchism participants

Nominator's rationale: It has been years since the anarchism taskforce of WikiProject Philosophy was expanded into its own dedicated WikiProject, but this category has yet to be updated to reflect that. This proposed move is a simple update to reflect the category's current use by WikiProject Anarchism. Grnrchst (talk) 08:28, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rename per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:54, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:18th-century German male violinists[edit]

Propose renaming Category:18th-century German male violinists to Category:18th-century German violinists

Nominator's rationale: I think we should broaden this category to include violinists of all genders. Non of the othe 18th-century violinists are diffused by gender and there isn't a 18th-century german violinists category. Mason (talk) 03:49, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rename and re-parent per nom, despite the fact that the French 18th-century violinists are also diffused by gender. It is rather the French males that should be upmerged. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:57, 6 May 2024 (UTC) Marcocapelle (talk) 04:01, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Poisoned Romans[edit]

Propose merging Category:Poisoned Romans to Category:Ancient Roman murder victims and Category:Victims of intentional poisonings

Nominator's rationale: Duel upmerge as Non-defining intersection between nationality and method of death. Category:Victims of intentional poisonings isn't diffused by nationality. If not merged, it should be renamed Poisoned ancient Romans. Mason (talk) 16:10, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose "Category:Victims of intentional poisonings isn't diffused by nationality." Why the heck not? Murder victim categories are typically subdivided by nationality. Dimadick (talk) 16:46, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Well, are you going to diffuse it by nationality? I did't consider the category populated enough to need diffusion. Mason (talk) 17:02, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rename to Category:Poisoned ancient Romans per Category:Ancient Roman murder victims. The latter has enough articles to merit diffusion by type of murder. Marcocapelle (talk) 04:49, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I am not seeing any opposition to the rename (noting it was suggested in the OP and seconded by Marcocapelle). Further comments – both about the rename and the merge – would be appreciated, but if there are none I would close this as rename with no consensus on whether this should exist or not.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk · he/him) 02:11, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:American family lawyers[edit]

Propose merging Category:American family lawyers to Category:American lawyers

Nominator's rationale: Non-defining intersection between occupation, type of law, and nationality. Lawyers are not typically defined by whether they practice family law. Similar to Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2024_April_22#Category:Canadian_criminal_lawyers Mason (talk) 01:16, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support in principle, there isn't even a Category:Family lawyers. But delete instead of merge because the articles are already in another subcategory of Category:American lawyers anyway. Marcocapelle (talk) 04:04, 6 May 2024 (UTC) Marcocapelle (talk) 09:03, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Tokyo Musashino United FC[edit]

Propose deleting Category:Tokyo Musashino United FC (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: WP:OCEPON * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 00:59, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, redundant category layer with only one subcategory. Marcocapelle (talk) 04:05, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Striking vote considering below comment. Marcocapelle (talk) 09:12, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related page discussions. Giant Snowman 09:04, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - I have expanded, so there's sufficient content to justify keeping. However, needs a move per WP:C2D to Category:Yokogawa Musashino FC to match the parent article name. @Pppery and Marcocapelle:. Giant Snowman 09:08, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirects[edit]

Ancient United States[edit]

Ancient United States → Pre-Columbian era (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

It's a bad redirect, folks. Remsense诉 08:49, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Why? Blaze The Movie Fan (talk) 08:53, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sucking peepee[edit]

Sucking peepee → Fellatio (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Peepee sucking → Fellatio (talk · links · history · stats)

I think the title makes it obvious why. Yes, it's technically pointing to the correct page, but seriously. I doubt "Sucking peepee" is really an encyclopedic redirect to have. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 23:41, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Redirects are allowed to be "unencyclopedic". This is an unambiguous redirect, so it's valid. Fieari (talk) 23:51, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Being a comprehensible synonym isn't sufficient grounds to include an expression. Yes, redirects are cheap—very cheap—but that doesn't mean we need to go Full Neelix and include every possible comprehensible synonym that no one would ever use. If there are actually instances of people searching for this, I'd be fine with it; but are there? Google Trends says no. (That one spike today is me just checking.) Please delete this, before someone decides that if this works, then so does hoovering hoohaa, lapping labia, tonguing twat, and savoring snatch, none of which are on Google Trends.^{[citation needed]} (Actually, I didn't bother to check; but wouldn't it be something if one of them *is* on Trends, whereas sucking peepee is not? Then what are we gonna do?) Mathglot (talk) 05:37, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom and Mathglot. Can successfully get to this target from a plethora of different searches, including but not limited to, Google. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 07:22, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Unlikely/unhelpful search terms. Hey man im josh (talk) 18:57, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
torn between voting to delete based on "peepee" being a general term for the thing that expels the bladder juice (i'm sure there's a better term for that), and to keep based on it being funny
ultimately though, i'd say retarget them to sexual intercourse or a more general target. can't check for a specific target at the moment, my isp would have me killed within the next 3 hours cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 17:56, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Utopes. Jay 💬 18:05, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Mathglot; we don't need redirects for every euphemism people might invent. And when it comes to sex acts, there are a lot. Crossroads ^-talk- 23:30, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom Okmrman (talk) 00:44, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per WP:CHEAP and as plausible search terms, and tag with {{R from colloquial name}}. To respond to concerns in the nomination, redirects are allowed to be unencyclopedic - I’m not aware of a policy/guideline that disallows such redirects, and WP:RNEUTRAL states that perceived lack of neutrality in redirect names is not a sufficient reason for their deletion. Arguments have been made above regarding the likelihood of these as search terms — however, google:"sucking+peepee" tells me that the phrase is one that is in use on the wider Internet, and these therefore strike me as plausible search terms (engaging WP:R#K3). The question I’m asking myself is ‘could these redirects potentially refer to articles besides the current target?’ - and, from what I can see, they seem fairly unambiguous.
Would I have created these redirects myself? Probably not. However, are they problematic such that they require deletion? My answer to that question is no — and therefore, my !vote is to keep: just because Wikipedia doesn’t need these redirects doesn’t mean that the project and/or readers are harmed by their existence. To respond to Mathglot’s and Crossroads' concerns regarding potential other redirects being created, pandora’s-box-style arguments are a form of WP:OTHERSTUFF: if such redirects are created, they can be judged on their own merits (including deletion per WP:R#D8 if a novel or very obscure term without a mention in the article) - and the currently nominated redirects should be judged on their own merits likewise. All the best, ‍—‍a smart kitten_[meow] 10:50, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If your argument is based on a google search telling you that "that the phrase is one that is in use on the wider Internet" I would have to respond, "Do you have any idea how small a number 49 results is on the entire internet?" That is functionally equivalent to zero. Some statistician among us might estimate the number of unique English bigrams on the internet with over 49 hits, and that number would be enormous, but they don't all rate redirects, only the ones searched for possibly do. There is no evidence that anybody searched for this bigram (at least, before this thread was started). Mathglot (talk) 23:07, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If it would help, I could link individual pages which use this term. In my mind, the question is whether or not this is a novel or very obscure phrase, and - based on the usage I found from the search - my opinion is that it doesn’t meet that bar. (As a side note, I’m unsure where 49 results originates from - for me, the search returns ~1,700.) Given the size of the internet, lots of terms could be said to have a usage functionally equivalent to zero; however, if a redirect from such a term would potentially be helpful, and its existence wouldn’t be problematic, I don’t see why it couldn’t exist - just because a phrase is insignificant compared to the internet as a whole, doesn’t necessarily mean that that phrase is novel or very obscure. While evidence of usage can be a factor in favour of keeping, a lack of usage is not a reason to delete a redirect. All the best, ‍—‍a smart kitten_[meow] 10:26, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - per {{R from colloquial name}}.See Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2024_April_25#Kissing_pussy GobsPint (talk) 22:18, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
And you voted 'Keep' there, per... this discussion. Hmm. Mathglot (talk) 23:15, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - if a reader wants information on these topics, the current target is where they will find it. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 17:58, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – an Unlikely and unhelpful search terms. Drdpw (talk) 18:46, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Useless. Wikipedia is not a profanity de-censorer. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 18:20, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Keep or delete? (I count 9 deletes and 4 keeps.)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Duckmather (talk) 07:07, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: per Mathglot. What next? Tongue poking the one eyed snake? Does every possibility need to exist regardless of whether it is likely or helpful? TarnishedPath^talk 07:50, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Scranton lax[edit]

Scranton lax → University of Scranton#Athletics (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

No mention of "lax" or a lax team at the target, inferred from history. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 03:59, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: We mention they have a facility that they use for lacrosse a regulation-size field for men's and women's soccer which also can be used for other sports such as lacrosse and they do have both men and women's lacrosse. So improving the article would be fine; but there's no reason to delete this redirect even as-is. Skynxnex (talk) 14:03, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Duckmather (talk) 07:05, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rkkody[edit]

Rkkody → Heaven's Gate (religious group) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

No mention of this former cult member at the target article, in any form, it seems. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 01:08, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. He is actually mentioned. According to CBS News this was Chuck Humphrey's cult name. Humphrey is mentioned here. I could add a mention this was his name in the group, if you'd like? PARAKANYAA (talk) 01:43, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Keep or delete?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Duckmather (talk) 07:02, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Shuggie[edit]

Shuggie → Hugh (given name) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

No mention of "Shuggie" as a nickname at the target article. Could also be confused with Shruggie. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 04:39, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguate. Shuggie and Shug are Scottish diminutives of Hugh, but we can't forget about Shuggie Otis. - Eureka Lott 05:59, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Duckmather (talk) 06:59, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Supplemental Result[edit]

Supplemental Result → PageRank (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

A topic not discussed at the target page, as "supple" nor "supplement" ever appear at the target page. Was BLAR'd in 2017 as being based on almost entirely unreliable sources, but does not serve its purpose as a good redirect if there is no content to be read about this at PageRank. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 05:12, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Google's Supplemental Results (technically still there - just not labeled as such) were not relevant to an article about the PageRank algorithm. Technically, the Supplemental Results are all the low-value content for which Google makes room available in its index, but they're not likely to be selected for competitive (high-interest) queries. Nor are the pages likely to be recrawled or refreshed very often. The only real connection anyone from Google ever confirmed was that these types of pages usually had very little PageRank. It would be more appropriate to redirect the page to the article about Google and add something there, assuming a suitable resource could be found (probably one of Danny Sullivan's articles from Search Engine Land from around 2006-2010). Michael Martinez (talk) 06:30, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Here is an article from 2007: Google Dumps The Supplemental Results Label (searchengineland.com) Danny Sullivan now works for Google but in 2007 he was just a journalist covering search engines. Michael Martinez (talk) 06:33, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Further thoughts on page history?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Duckmather (talk) 06:58, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Modmin[edit]

Modmin → Fark (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

No mention of this term at the target article. Almost assuredly has a plethora of other uses outside of... just Fark. The portmanteau of "mod" and "admin" is likely to come up in a number of other more relevant contexts related to moderation and administration. Cautiously though, this term has zero mentions on all Wikipedia, so I'm hesitant to just "retargeting and calling it good". Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 06:56, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hey man im josh (talk) 14:31, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Weak retarget to wikt:modmin, which seems to be the most useful target (according to my google search). Duckmather (talk) 04:38, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget: to wikt:modmin. I guess. Not exclusive to fark but seems to pop up enough. StreetcarEnjoyer (talk) 00:26, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. If there were incoming links, wikt would have been a useful target. Jay 💬 14:18, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Delete? Retarget?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Duckmather (talk) 06:57, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

SuperCops Vs Super Villains[edit]

Task Force:Khatarnak Khalnayak → SuperCops Vs Super Villains (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
SuperCops vs Supervillains → SuperCops Vs Super Villains (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Hum Ne Li Hai...Shapath → SuperCops Vs Super Villains (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Hum Ne Li Hai- Shapath → SuperCops Vs Super Villains (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Supercops vs Supervillains → SuperCops Vs Super Villains (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Hum Ne Li Hai - Shapath → SuperCops Vs Super Villains (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Misspelled alt titles. Someonewhoisusinginternet (talk) 06:25, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep both "Supercops vs Supervillains" redirects, which are perfectly plausible search terms. No opinion on the others for now. CycloneYoris ^talk! 20:10, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There are two more redirect with the same alt title (SuperCops Vs SuperVillains & Super Cops Vs Super Villains) and these I mentioned above are misspelled cause the letter C and V in "Cops" and "Villains" are written in small letter instead of capital. Someonewhoisusinginternet (talk) 02:44, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I noticed. But miscapitalization is not that big of a deal, and not enough reason to warrant deletion. That is why {{R from miscapitalisation}} exists. CycloneYoris ^talk! 21:11, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What about the other 4 redirects I mentioned above? Someonewhoisusinginternet (talk) 04:06, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Further thoughts on the other 4 redirects?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Duckmather (talk) 06:51, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Harley Quinn (pornographic actor)[edit]

Harley Quinn (pornographic actor) → Bailey Jay (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

I can't determine why this redirects here. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 16:39, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: it seems like her screen name used to be/occasionally was, based on the IMDb [20] page and (all following links may contain pornography) [21] and just general Google search results showing video titles that mention both names "Bailey Jay" "quinn". Now, redirects don't need quite the same level of reliable sourcing to exist so I'm still on the fence if this is useful enough to exist and if a mention of the name could be added in the article. Skynxnex (talk) 20:29, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Duckmather (talk) 06:50, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

New Red Room[edit]

New Red Room → Red Room 2 (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
New Red Room The Broken Dolls → Red Room 2 (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
New Red Room: The Broken Dolls → Red Room 2 (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Red Secret Room 2 → Red Room 2 (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Far too ambiguous; a redirect from new (movie name) to the movie's sequel probably isn't necessary. Throw New Red Room The Broken Dolls and New Red Room: The Broken Dolls in there as unnecessary, and Red Secret Room 2 as no sources discuss the movie with this title. I'll try to learn the batch nomination thing. NotAGenious (talk) 16:53, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Japanese title is New Red Room: The Broken Dolls. The article about the film on the Italian Wikipedia is Red Secret Room 2.--LadybugStardust (talk) 17:04, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Further thoughts on LadybugStardust's findings?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Duckmather (talk) 06:49, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Antisemitism in the Australian Greens[edit]

Antisemitism in the Australian Greens → Australian Greens#Accusations of antisemitism (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Not mentioned in main article Australian Greens. Not a plausible search term, appears to be an attempt at a POV-fork. AusLondonder (talk) 14:58, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 16:35, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The section this pointed to was removed just two days ago, and there are ongoing discussions at the talk page. It may be better to wait until consensus is reached on whether or not to include this content before having an RfD. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 17:59, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Procedural close: Wait for the talk page discussion to finish. voorts (talk/contributions) 01:54, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: per nomination, it's not mention in the article and I doubt that it will be back given that the sourcing was a bunch of op-eds from politicians opposed to this particular party. That's unless some sourcing can be found from academic sources which are subject matter experts, which I highly doubt. TarnishedPath^talk 11:27, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Delete, or wait for the talk page discussion to end?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Duckmather (talk) 06:47, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's ended. One editor proposed inserting poorly sourced content, two editors opposed. There's been no further discussion in four days. AusLondonder (talk) 08:59, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ruby on Iaails[edit]

Ruby on Iaails → Ruby on Rails (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Similar to Ruby on Яails, this is another typo (from Eubot), so I also suggest deletion. Duckmather (talk) 04:05, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Unnatural misspelling, gets 1-2 views per month. Air on White (talk) 05:25, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Meant to post this for the similar nomination today, my bad. This one actually got 0 views in the past 90 days. Air on White (talk) 05:27, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ruby on Яails[edit]

Ruby on Яails → Ruby on Rails (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Pretty much a textbook instance of a unnatural typo (the creator wrote in their edit summary "someone lock this so Willy can't do anything bad" though), so I suggest deletion. Duckmather (talk) 04:04, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Gets 1-2 views per month. Air on White (talk) 05:26, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Virtual technology[edit]

Virtual technology → Technology#Virtual technology (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

This redirect targets a section that doesn't exist. Also, "virtual technology" is not the same thing as "technology" in general. I would guess that a more useful place to point this to would be something like Computing or Virtual world or Virtual reality or similar. However, this phrase also seems inherently vague so I would understand it if anyone !voted for a delete. Duckmather (talk) 04:02, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Drove[edit]

Drove → Drovers' road (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Yet another confusing vocabulary word redirect, since "drove" is also the past tense of "drive". I suggest either disambiguating between driving and drovers' road or retargeting to wiktionary. Duckmather (talk) 03:54, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think your first suggestion sounds good. Richard New Forest (talk) 09:10, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Templates and Modules[edit]

Miscellany[edit]

Deletion review[edit]

[1] "Wikipedia:College and university article advice". Wikipedia.

[2] Cook, John (21 October 2005). "Ex-startup Airbiquity experiences a rebirth". Seattle Post-Intelligencer.

[3] Cook, John (22 January 2008). "Airbiquity rebounds with funding, deals". Seattle Post-Intelligencer.

[1]

[2]

[3]

v t e Wikipedia community
For a listing of current collaborations, tasks, and news, see the Community portal. For a listing of ongoing discussions and current requests, see the Dashboard.
General community topics	Administration News The Signpost Goings-on In the media Meetups Mailing lists Wikipedians Statistics The Wikipedia Library Centralized discussion Village pump Idea lab Policy Proposals Technical Miscellaneous WMF Holidays Bots
Contents and grading	Requested articles Most-wanted articles Images needing articles Articles needing images Articles for creation WP:AFC/R WP:AFC/C Creation Help Vital articles Articles for improvement Peer review Good article nominations Featured article candidates Lists Pictures Topics Article translation Pages Main Page Errors
WikiProjects and collaborations	Directory Culture and the arts Geographical History and society Science, technology and engineering Wikipedia assistance and tasks Patrols Recent changes Counter-Vandalism Unit Version 1.0 Editorial Team Accessibility Organizations category
Awards and feedback	Reward board Contests A nice cup of tea and a sit down Charitableness WikiLove Compliment before criticism Kindness Campaign Thanks!
Maintenance tasks	Task Center Open tasks Backlog Category Admin category Edit requests Category Database reports Category tracker Dusty articles Special pages New pages Recent changes Controversial issues
Administrators and noticeboards	Administrators' noticeboard Incidents Edit warring Vandalism Admin dashboard Admin requests Closure Page protection User permissions Sockpuppets Open proxies Revision deletion Oversight Request Usernames Changing Title blacklist OTRS Bureaucrats' Requests for adminship and bureaucratship Arbitration Committee Requests Enforcement
Content dispute resolution	Requests for comment Third opinion Dispute resolution noticeboard Biographies of living persons Conflict of interest External links Fringe theories Neutral point of view No original research Reliable sources
Other noticeboards and assistance	Regional notice boards Requests for help Category Asking questions Teahouse Help desk Reference desk Adopt-a-user Copyright assistance Copyright investigations Text problems Media questions Resource requests Mergers History mergers Moves Page importation Spam Blacklist Whitelist Bots Education General sanctions Editor sanctions Long-term abuse
Deletion discussions	Guide Admin Today Articles Templates Files Categories Redirects Miscellany Speedy Proposed BLP Review Undeletion Arguments to avoid Arguments to make Article Rescue
Elections and votings	Requests for comment (meta) Wikimedia Foundation elections WP Democracy Voting is not evil Milestones
Directories, indexes, and summaries	Departments Edit summary legend Editor's index Essays FAQs Glossary Abbreviations Help Manual of Style Simplified Rules Five pillars Policies Guidelines Shortcuts Templates Citation templates Tips Today Tools Wiki markup
Media Category Templates