Wikipedia:XfD today

Edit links
Deletion discussions
Articles
Templates and modules
Files
Categories
Redirects
Miscellany
Speedy deletion
Proposed deletion
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

Candidates for speedy deletion
Anıl Ulaş Övençoğlu
User:BoomboxTestarossa/M.I.C.R.A.: Mind Controlled Remote Automaton
Cartoon Network (Canadian TV channel)
Draft:Fuldi Estate
User:Fuzzy510/CoachNorfolk
User:Fuzzy510/CoachNorthAlabama
Draft:Ignissta Software Technology
Draft:Keables
User:Miuc123/sandbox
Ossama hassanein
Draft:Prajwal Bhandari
Draft:Reborn Tamizhan
User:RodRabelo7/common.js
User:Sbriner1901
User:Sbriner1901/sandbox
Talk:WBHV (AM)
User:Yeganeh.ak

Articles

< March 26 March 28 >

Purge server cache

Jardine Motors Group

AfDs for this article:
Jardine Motors Group (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · NYT · TWL)

I've looked through all of the sources and there was nothing secondary or tertiary in sight. WP:NCORP says there needs to be multiple articles in reliable secondary or tertiary sources covering the organization in significant depth to meet the notability requirements for businesses, otherwise you just end up with spammy brochure pages like this one. BigheadBigheadBighead (talk) 09:10, 27 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Mesen Selekta

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

Fails WP:NMUSIC Bexaendos (talk) 08:46, 27 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Project K (film)

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

This is an unreleased film. There is nothing in this article that shows significant coverage of production of the film, only run-of-the-mill reports of rumors, development (director, producer), cast members, filming, etc that is written about every unreleased film. Unreleased films are notable only if the production itself is notable. Recommend moving to Draft: space where it can continue to be developed and when the film is released, it can be submitted for review for moving to mainspace. Tousif ❯❯❯ Talk 01:06, 27 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Missin' You (It Will Break My Heart)

Missin' You (It Will Break My Heart) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · NYT · TWL)

Tagged as {{unreferenced}} since 2008 and still unreferenced to this day. A Google Books search finds three bare mentions naming it in lists of songs; a Google web search finds the lyrics, but I'm not spotting anything to suggest it's notable enough for its own article as opposed to just being listed in Ken Hirai discography (where it's already listed—good job us). I checked Wikipedia:Notability (music)#Songs to make sure this wasn't a situation where just verifiably existing was enough for an article. I notice that page also advises "Notability aside, a standalone article is appropriate only when there is enough material to warrant a reasonably detailed article; articles unlikely ever to grow beyond stubs should be merged to articles about an artist or album." -sche (talk) 08:19, 27 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Walker Baylor

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

I don't see how Walker Baylor is notable. My redirect to his son Robert Emmett Bledsoe Baylor was reverted, so AfD can decide. Apart from the obituary, all sources seem to refer to him as "the father of", not about him personally, and just spend one line on him: e.g. this book, this book, or this book. Even this book, a detailed account of his military unit, gives only some small bits of information, and doesn't support the claim that he was a major of the unit (but only a captain). As it is a self-published book (authorhouse.com), it doesn't really count as a reliable source anyway. Fram (talk) 07:29, 27 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Under the Boardwalk (upcoming film)

AfDs for this article:
Under the Boardwalk (upcoming film) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · NYT · TWL)

Fails WP:NFF. A tweet claims this film is in post-production, but it is an unreliable source. There is no reliable source to indicate that it has reached the threshold equivalent to principal photography, that is, that the bulk of the budgeting is committed. There is no source confirming pre-production. The sources for who is writing songs is mere mentions. There is no secondary source commentary on this future film to meet the WP:GNG and bypass WP:NFF. SmokeyJoe (talk) 07:17, 27 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Replying to that close, this film is not a film, it is a future film in development hell with tweets attempting to give it credence. This is not material that can be merged elsewhere. A redirect to a page that mentions failed films is not a good redirect, because that page would not describe this non-film. —SmokeyJoe (talk) 07:23, 27 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
What information there is belongs at https://www.imdb.com/title/tt10551654/, and none of it is reliable enough for Wikipedia. SmokeyJoe (talk) 07:29, 27 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Thanks for the ping. As the previous AfD was "no consensus" with relatively sparse participation, I have no problem with another AfD a month later. As a courtesy, you might ping the participants in the previous discussion. --Randykitty (talk) 08:35, 27 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Delete article about a future film for which reliable sources don't say that it has entered into the equivalent of principal photography, and the production of which does not meet GNG anyway—per nom. There are strong reasons to delete, and the no consensus AfD failed to deliver.—Alalch E. 08:31, 27 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Draftily this article, because it needs multiple reliable citations.
CastJared (talk) 09:06, 27 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Matt Purcell (businessman)

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

BLP doesn't seem to meet WP:NBIO - lacks in-depth coverage in independent sources. MrsSnoozyTurtle 07:03, 27 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Michael Genovese (artist)

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

Fails WP:NARTIST and WP:GNG. 4 pageviews in 30 days for an American BLP is very low. Edwardx (talk) 17:24, 19 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

*Keep I’m seeing sufficient coverage, both in depth and continuing, that I’m not comfortable with deletion. Page views may be low, but irrelevant as sourcing is sufficient in my mind. Jo7hs2 (talk) 17:46, 19 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Keep, although at the present it's more of a resume than an encyclopedic article, the sources are enough to keep, and hopefully at some point the page will expand. Randy Kryn (talk) 11:59, 20 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Delete WP:ARTIST lists 4 criteria (of which one need to be met), and I'm not convinced that the article in its current form demonstrates that. Perhaps if additional context is provided to supplement the "single sentence article" it might aide in convincing me that WP:ARTIST is met. MetricMaster (talk) 09:01, 23 March 2023 (UTC) This user has made 47 edits to Wikipedia. Their contribution history shows that 38 of these were to AFD discussions. The account exists for votestacking and has been blocked.Reply[reply]
  • Delete The subject of the article fails WP:ARTIST. Internet search shows user-generated content or websites for group shows, but no reliable independent sources. It doesn't matter how many views the page gets. The subject is not notable. WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 01:08, 25 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Comment Reviewed the sources. Mostly local and quite a few dead links. Please note that the coverage ends at 2016, so there has been no effort or interest in keeping this article up-to-date by any editor. WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 17:23, 26 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Delete - can't find enough in-depth coverage to pass WP:GNG, and I'm not seeing anything to show they meet WP:NARTIST.Onel5969 TT me 18:07, 26 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Discounting the blocked sockpuppet there does not appear to be a strong consensus one way or another. As a suggestion, perhaps elaboration on which specific sources show notability and/or why they are insufficient would help form consensus?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Aoidh (talk) 06:34, 27 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Frank Carrone

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

Fails WP:GNG and WP:CRIME. The article only lists two sources, both of which are books. I've never read these books and don't know how much they discuss Carrone, but it's evident from the titles that neither one is about him. I could not find any additional sources. Based on this, I don't believe he meets notability requirements. Baronet13 (talk) 20:36, 19 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Crime, and New York. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 21:51, 19 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Weak procedural keep. "I've never read these books and don't know how much they discuss Carrone" describes the problem: We really do need to look at sources to assess their quality and depth. We can't just assume books are poor sources without reading them. Books are big things; a book might not be entirely dedicated to Carrone, but nevertheless contain an in-depth discussion of his life, and it's our job to check that before we delete an article. If there had been a third book, this would have been a strong procedural keep, as I'm biased towards three good sources for an article. Elemimele (talk) 12:04, 20 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    I agree that it is nigh-on impossible to judge whether a book has significant coverage of a topic without reading it, but it is possible to judge reliability. These two Google Books results don't scream "reliable" to me. They look like "true crime" dramas written in the breathless style so beloved by that genre. Phil Bridger (talk) 22:30, 20 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Delete Fails WP:PERP and provides no other claims of any notability. That is good enough for me. Rogermx (talk) 13:41, 20 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Keep and Procedural close: without prejudice on future AfD: “I've never read these books and don't know how much they discuss Carrone” The nom has failed to show any valid reason for AFD or do a BEFORE or explore ATD.  // Timothy :: talk  22:50, 22 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    The problem is that I couldn't find any evidence this guy even exists outside of allegedly being discussed in these two books (even that much can't be proven), which leads me to believe he could be a composite character, a pseudonym or maybe a hoax. It's strange that there don't seem to be any news reports about an allegedly notorious gangster. Baronet13 (talk) 06:40, 23 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Keep "I've never read these books and don't know how much they discuss Carrone" isn't a good reason to raise AfD IMHO. As per @Rogermx: if WP:PERP is reason enough, it should have been the AfD MetricMaster (talk) 08:52, 23 March 2023 (UTC) This user has made 47 edits to Wikipedia. Their contribution history shows that 38 of these were to AFD discussions. The account exists for votestacking and has been blocked.Reply[reply]
  • Comment I have a simple question for @TimothyBlue:, @MetricMaster:, @MElemimele: and anybody else who wants to keep this article: can you find any evidence that Frank Carrone actually exists? Baronet13 (talk) 18:07, 23 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Comment: The relevant policy guidelines that would determine the appropriate outcome (i.e. keeping versus deletion) in this case are WP:CRIME and WP:PERP. The issue at hand is whether the coverage that exists on the subject passes the WP:SIGCOV threshold in a manner that would satisfy CRIME and NPERP. If the nature of coverage is sufficient to demonstrate notability under these guidelines, there will be a case for keeping. The case for deletion would require that the sources fail to amount to significant coverage, thus failing to demonstrate notability. Shawn Teller (talk) 20:53, 25 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    The reliability of the sources has to be taken into consideration as well as the amount of coverage in them. Phil Bridger (talk) 21:30, 25 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    It's worth noting that one of the two cited sources is a book written by an associate of Frank Carrone (assuming Carrone actually exists, which nobody has been able to verify yet) and is, therefore, not independent of him. That means there is, at most, one established example of coverage in independent secondary sources. Whether or not this is WP:SIGCOV is actually irrelevant, as multiple independent sources are required for WP:GNG. Baronet13 (talk) 23:42, 25 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Aoidh (talk) 06:31, 27 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Delete Article's a mess, those two book sources aren't referenced within the article - and the first of them is actually titled The Life and Crimes of a Mobster, not a gangster. Nominator could have done better than leading with 'I didn't read no sources' but makes a good point about association - there's also this out there, derived from WP, which just adds citogenesis to the reasons to delete this unsourced, unverified - and virtually unverifiable - article. Outside of these two 'sources', WP:BEFORE throws up nothing - which doesn't really scream 'notorious gangster' to me... Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 08:14, 27 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Jahzara Claxton

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

Fails WP:GNG. Some sources exist but not enough to meet WP:SIGCOV. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 16:21, 12 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Keep A quick google search provided these sources about this two-sport athlete. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9. Even has a foreign article about her here. 10. Updated article with these and other sources - previous revision to current. Courtesy ping to @GiantSnowman: as requested above. Prominent figure in St Kitts sports, receiving a great deal of coverage with various news articles and a television appearance. Very good candidate for meeting Wikipedia:YOUNGATH. (PS you AfD'ed her on her birthday lol) RedPatch (talk) 23:15, 12 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Keep, passes GNG with significant coverage above.--Ortizesp (talk) 05:49, 13 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Leaning Weak keep. Of the above sources, #1 is by a Social media coach and consultant, #5 is written by the Minister of Sport on a Government run St. Kitts Nevis Information Service (SKINS), #6 and #7 are the same announcement from SKINS and #9 is an interview (PRIMARY). The rest might look good on the surface but when I go through the sources the feel rather thin. They are also from a span of 11 months so maybe WP:TOOSOON applies. Alvaldi (talk) 09:58, 13 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Yeah, I came to a similar conclusion when reviewing these sources. The tour reception pieces are largely primary, e.g. Samal Duggins – the Minister of Agriculture of St Kitts and Nevis, felt extremely proud while welcoming Jahzara Claxton; the reports on the minister's financial contribution are almost entirely quotes/describing what someone said/repeating stats from a non-independent source without analysis; and the pieces on her call-up to the U19 cricket team are also deficient (the one that includes the opinion statement She is an exceptional sports lady, and we salute her certainly cannot be considered independent). For YOUNGATH subjects local sources (and I don't see how newspapers from a community of <50k and ~100 mi2 -- roughly equivalent in population and area to Casa Grande, Arizona -- can be considered anything other than "local") are almost always excluded from notability consideration; this leaves just the Guatemalan article, which is pretty barebones and mostly in the context of a match recap. I would definitely support draftifying until we see whether her performance on the West Indies women's U19 T20 squad garners more diverse coverage. JoelleJay (talk) 16:58, 13 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    After giving it some thought, I'm switching to Draftify. It is just to soon at the moment. Alvaldi (talk) 17:38, 20 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Given the last two comments, I'm relisting to determine whether this article should be Kept or Draftified.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 21:34, 19 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Comment Draftify - I don't believe there is SIGCOV of her football exploits, but perhaps there is something from her time in cricket. As noted above, there is some coverage of her selection to the West Indies' under-19 cricket team, but none of it looks in-depth to me. Maybe someone that follows cricket might have a better read? Jogurney (talk) 13:57, 20 March 2023 (UTC) Updating. Jogurney (talk) 19:56, 20 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Draftify. Per the discussion above. JoelleJay (talk) 16:55, 20 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Keep - @GiantSnowman:, Per RedPatch and Ortizesp. WP:HEY also applies here. Thanks, Das osmnezz (talk) 14:40, 21 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Keep per @RedPatch: MetricMaster (talk) 08:47, 23 March 2023 (UTC) This user has made 47 edits to Wikipedia. Their contribution history shows that 38 of these were to AFD discussions. The account exists for votestacking and has been blocked.Reply[reply]
  • Keep. I am more swayed by the keep arguments over the draftify. StickyWicket (talk) 21:10, 26 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Disregarding the blocked sockpuppet comment, the first relist doesn't show a change in consensus one way or the other. Hopefully relisting it again will help shape consensus towards a result.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Aoidh (talk) 06:25, 27 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Warfare theater of Rudniki Forest

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

The article name yields no results on Google Books and Google Scholar. It is a neologism and a clear case of original research with minimal content as well. Following WP:DEL-REASON, it's a case of number 6. Cukrakalnis (talk) 22:00, 19 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, History, Military, Germany, and Lithuania. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 22:11, 19 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Keep: I'm skeptical a proper WP:BEFORE search was conducted, considering a perfunctory search using a more accurate term returned this online source by Yad Vashem, as well as this book and this journal article. The article needs a rename, as the current name is an editor creation not reflective of reliable sources, but it is a bit misleading to state that a search returned nothing if you searched using an incorrect term. In addition, there are clear potential merge targets that have not been considered as WP:ATDs, such as Jewish resistance in German-occupied Europe and Jewish partisans. Curbon7 (talk) 22:26, 19 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    @Curbon7 There are no articles on Wikipedia titled "Warfare theater of ..." That's clearly a neologism. The article's scope is unclear, while also being very much WP:OR, because there is no such thing as "Battle of Rudniki Forest", etc. in WP:RS. Cukrakalnis (talk) 21:01, 21 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Yeah obviously that was a unilateral page move made by a single editor. Curbon7 (talk) 23:27, 21 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Merge to a proper location as suggested above unless some serious sourcing can be added and the article written in something approaching proper format and style. If enough information is added, I can see changing to Keep if the action proves notable on its own. Intothatdarkness 16:25, 21 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Weird title, there was of course warfare in Rudniki forest, it was one of the main partisan bases in the region, Soviet, Polish and Jewish partisans were stationing there for sure; and there was a Battle of Surkonty, but it already have an article. Since there is no much to merge really, I think we should delete Marcelus (talk) 21:22, 21 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Merge to a consensus target(s). It seems this is a poorly source fork, that could be much better covered in related articles. There are several viable options for a target, no reason it can't be adapted to more than one. This title is not a good candidate for a redirect, but if there is a consensus for one, I have no objection.  // Timothy :: talk  21:56, 22 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Some merge targets have been proposed, but there's no consensus for where the article should be merged to (if consensus results in a merge).
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Aoidh (talk) 06:20, 27 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

FBC Třinec

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

Notability has not been proved. An insignificant club that does not play a professional competition. The page has already been speedy deleted once (17 December 2022) and has now been restored with the same scope and content as before. FromCzech (talk) 06:12, 27 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Martín Canales

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

Doesn't meet the old WP:NFOOTY guidelines as doesn't appear to have played in a professional league. Doesn't meet WP:SPORTCRIT or WP:GNG — NZFC(talk)(cont) 23:26, 19 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Note: removed American Football sort category as it does not apply to this subject. Frank Anchor 16:07, 20 March 2023 (UTC) Reply[reply]
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and Football. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 00:49, 20 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 01:11, 20 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found please ping me. GiantSnowman 19:23, 20 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Weak keep This is a dubious one. Santiago Morning is a professional team playing in the Chilean second league which is surprisingly or annoyingly named Primera B, suggesting it is better than it is. FWIW that is a professional league. I don't think he is a notable player though but passes barely our standards. --Bedivere (talk) 21:21, 24 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    No, he does not. 'Our standards' are WP:GNG, it doesn't matter about the level of play. GiantSnowman 15:36, 26 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Keep - Per Bdivere. @GiantSnowman:, I found [1], [2], [3], and [4] al of which go into his background, among many more sources. Thanks, Das osmnezz (talk) 14:50, 26 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    First source looks OK, the rest less so. Not enough I don't think. GiantSnowman 15:36, 26 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Delete. GNG is not met. 1 is an interview in local news with little secondary content Red XN. 2 is a trivial sentence prepending a quote from him Red XN. 3 is from the same paper as #2 and contains a passing mention + quote Red XN. 4 is another one-sentence passing mention Red XN. JoelleJay (talk) 19:30, 26 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Aoidh (talk) 06:12, 27 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Caaqil Dheryodhoobe

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

Scattered youtube videos are all there is about this individual. Non-notable military person? The article is poorly written and I can't tell what the individual being discussed has or hasn't done. Oaktree b (talk) 03:52, 13 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Theres a footnote source mentioning "the wise caaqil dheryodhoobe" in a passage mentioning garaad wiilwaal where both are known legends? The source itself is a western source that even studied from somali government stories? There are alot more stories and examples i can add in the page on the mans life by translating the links from laashin.com and himilonetwork.com Abshir55 (talk) 04:55, 16 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 07:03, 20 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 05:26, 27 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sundad, Arizona

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

Having a greaqt deal of trouble with this one, as sources tend to assume that ruins of buildings equal ghost town. There was a mine here, and it's not beyond possibility that the foundations seen are all of mine buildings. Many sources say there was a TB sanatorium here, but otehrs say that they only though about putting one here and that it was never built. Almost all of them say "not much is known about Sundad". The elaborate rock patterns, BTW, appear to be new. I couldn't find any documentation of the "Sundad" sign before 2006. Mangoe (talk) 03:44, 13 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Speedy Keep due to lack of deletion rationale WP:SKCRIT, although even if there was a rationale, I'd argue to keep, because there was a mine here and some history, which I've added. I wish the links here worked, so we could get more info. https://www.sciencebase.gov/catalog/item/53d82203e4b06f0f87b75b2c WP:GEOLAND has a really low bar and this passes it. CT55555(talk) 05:14, 13 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
One gets tired of the ritual language after doing several hundred of these, but as it appears it must be uttered: this fails WP:GEOLAND because it cannot be shown from reliable sources that it is a settlement. Mines must meet WP:GNG, and I can just barely determine that there was a mine here, much less that it meets any criterion for notability. Mangoe (talk) 20:09, 13 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Keep: Known location
Justwatchmee (talk) 23:44, 14 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Delete - Whatever this place was, it hasn't received enough significant coverage to meet GNG. –dlthewave ☎ 15:40, 14 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 07:00, 20 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Delete per WP:GEOLAND, which only gives near-automatic notability to legally recognised populated places. We have no evidence that this place is or was legally recognised. If it isn't then it has to pass the WP:GNG, which it clearly doesn't. The Keep rationales above which argue the place should be kept because a source includes it in a list of populated places, describes it as a "known location", or says somebody lived there once are inconsistent with the core policies of WP:V and WP:NOR, and if this wasn't an article about a place they would not be taken at all seriously. Hut 8.5 19:01, 20 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Speedy Keep per Onel5969's analysis above. Twinkle1990 (talk) 08:28, 21 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Your vote doesn't really make much sense. Simply name dropping a town doesn't provide enough coverage per WP:GEOLAND, so voting speedy keep on such an edge case isn't helpful. Why? I Ask (talk) 11:07, 21 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Keep Notable former mining settlement with encyclopedic content. Plenty of hits in Google Books.♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:41, 22 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 05:26, 27 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Glen Buick

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

Ambassadors are not inherently notable. No significant coverage to meet WP:BIO. LibStar (talk) 03:06, 13 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 03:23, 20 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 05:23, 27 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sahaj Paath

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

This article is a duplicate of the same topic of the Sadharan Paath article with an alternative title. I have merged the existing text to the Sadharan Paath article and request this one to be deleted as per Wikipedia rules. ThethPunjabi (talk) 04:52, 27 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The Prime Show with Aiman

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

Fails notability. None of the references in the article address the subject, or are promotional material, so there is no SIGCOV. References themselves are not IS RS for notability. BEFORE showed promotional material, database listings.  // Timothy :: talk  04:27, 27 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Nusantara (TV program)

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

Fails notability. None of the references in the article address the subject, or are promotional material, so there is no SIGCOV. References themselves are not IS RS for notability. BEFORE showed promotional material, database listings.  // Timothy :: talk  04:25, 27 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Piet Van der Merwe

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

Fails GNG and BIO.  // Timothy :: talk  04:13, 27 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Speedy delete He built a dam and had a child that rode horses, is his claim for notability? Not even close to GNG. Oaktree b (talk) 04:22, 27 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Ben Muller

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

Fails GNG and BIO.  // Timothy :: talk  04:11, 27 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

SoniaxFyza

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

These women do not meet any WiKipedia notability criteria, including WP:GNG and WP:SIGCOV. The page was initially referenced only with social media posts of a gossipy nature. BoyTheKingCanDance (talk) 04:08, 27 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I have added more reliable sources, and now there are multiple reliable sources on the page. I also think that since they have million(s) of followers, they would be prominent enough to have a page. Kind regards. Dwasirkaram (talk) 04:09, 27 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Delete non-notable streamers, only having coverage for saying things they perhaps shouldn't have. Having millions of subs isn't notable, as the numbers aren't audited and can be bought. Oaktree b (talk) 04:13, 27 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Dammy Twitch

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

BLP. Fails GNG and BIO. Sources in article and BEFORE showed interviews, lots of promos, and mentions in lists, nothing that meets IS RS SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and in-depth. BLPs need clearly IS RS with SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth for both content and notabilty to avoid abuse.  // Timothy :: talk  03:40, 27 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Delete Tenuous claim to notability as the videos are nominated, this person isn't. Rest of the sourcing is interviews and this appears PROMO.Oaktree b (talk) 04:16, 27 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Kenneth Charles Brown

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

Ambassadors are not inherently notable. No significant coverage to meet WP:BIO. The one source provided could be considered primary. LibStar (talk) 03:14, 27 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Can't Get Enough Tour

Can't Get Enough Tour (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · NYT · TWL)

Declined G11, previously deleted under A7, G11. Google search reveals no independent coverage. Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 02:30, 27 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Imperial Golden Crown Harmonizers

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

All I can find is a single newspaper article in the Austin Chronicle, which is great. But that alone borders on local coverage, and one good source doesn't prove it meets WP:GNG. (There are also some results when looking at Google Books, but they are single-sentence mentions.) Why? I Ask (talk) 02:23, 27 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Afshar Beylik

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

Only one source and that is non-WP:RS dead link. I'm having a hard time finding a good source for this. There are instances of "Sevindik Han", but there the state is not called the "Afshar Beylik". Best if this page is deleted or redirects to the Afshar people for now. Aintabli (talk) 00:51, 27 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Álvaro Villalón

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

Doesn't meet the old WP:NFOOTY guidelines as doesn't appear to have played for any club when it may have been in the top professional league for that country. Doesn't meet WP:SPORTCRIT or WP:GNG — NZFC(talk)(cont) 23:39, 19 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 00:27, 27 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Jack (cat)

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

PRODded by SilverTiger12 (talk · contribs) after prior AfD in November 2011, due to lack of lasting coverage for this 2011 incident. Previous AfD was closed as no consensus on November 22, less than a month after Jack was found and then euthanized, because it was not clear yet if there would be lasting coverage. There have been no improvements to this article since then, except for a source added in 2013 that devotes 3 short paragraphs to this incident in the context of many similar ones, and removing several unsourced or non-neutral paragraphs. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 00:03, 27 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Keep The coverage of this cat’s two month habitation of the airport and subsequent death was absolutely extensive. His disappearance spawned a Facebook campaign and various online, print, and television stories. The existing sourcing meets Wikipedia:GNG.
And while I’m concerned about the prior AfD’s heavy reliance on ongoing coverage when I’m not sure that’s required here under WP:NTEMP, we don’t necessarily need to address that, as I *do* see periodic coverage after. For example, this February 2017 article mentions Jack and an associated now defunct organization formed in response to what happened to him: https://www.cntraveler.com/story/is-your-pet-safe-flying-in-cargo; and this December 2022 article also mentions Jack: https://www.tripsavvy.com/british-airways-dog-air-travel-mishap-6951390. Jo7hs2 (talk) 02:39, 27 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Found another mention in 2015. https://www.yahoo.com/travel/felix-the-cat-found-after-two-weeks-spent-116663476477.html It appears his story gets repeated at least reasonably often when a pet-related airline incident occurs, which would tend to support a degree of ongoing coverage and notability. Jo7hs2 (talk) 02:43, 27 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Delete. WP:NOTNEWS, and juste because he made the news for two months doesn't negate the fact that he has no long-term SIGCOV or GNG- passing mentions since then are just that, passing mentions. SilverTiger12 (talk) 03:09, 27 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Delete cat lost in airport isn't perhaps notable. That the article is barely more than one paragraph of text tells me this isn't notable. The cat didn't live at the airport for an extended period of time and this appears almost as a memorial page to the creature. I don't find any sigcov of the event or for the animal. Oaktree b (talk) 04:19, 27 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Merge/redirect to Pet travel#Air travel, where the cat is already mentioned, per Wikipedia:Deletion policy#Alternatives to deletion. The duration of significant coverage is limited to sources published in 2011 when the cat had disappeared or had died. In sources published after 2011, the cat has received coverage in a few sentences or in a paragraph. To establish sustained notability to support a standalone article, I would have liked to seen significant coverage after 2011 such as a news article about Jack or significant coverage about the case in a book. Cunard (talk) 07:17, 27 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Files

File:Cruiser Emanuele Filiberto Duca d'Aosta.jpg

File:Cruiser Emanuele Filiberto Duca d'Aosta.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by P. S. Burton (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Image is not found at source, copyright information like the creation and/or publication date are not given. Not suitable to be moved to Commons, does not have the necessary information to meet NFCC or prove that there is no active copyright. Sennecaster (Chat) 01:42, 27 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Comment: I have updated the source to an archived version of the website. According to the source the image is from 1935 so it would have still been under copyright at the URAA restoration date. Not sure who we could check to see if it was published without a copyright notice before 1 March 1989. Possible re-license to "non-free historic image" as there isn't a free image available. Salavat (talk) 02:21, 27 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Thendral Sudum.jpg

File:Thendral Sudum.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Rajeshbieee (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

The usage of an LP record containing music violates Template:Infobox film as it is not a poster, home video cover, title card or lobby card advertising the actual film. Kailash29792 (talk) 04:32, 27 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Categories

NEW NOMINATIONS

North Carolina Central women's basketball

Nominator's rationale: "Lady Eagles" is not the WP:COMMONNAME for the women's basketball team at NCCU per the team's site (last results come from 2019) and ESPN coverage. "North Carolina Central Lady Eagles" brings up ~500 Ghits. fuzzy510 (talk) 09:04, 27 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Category:Religious festivals in Zambia

Nominator's rationale: Looking at the articles that are currently in these categories, it seems that we have "several categories" for the same articles; I suggest we narrow it down to only one category. GeographicAccountant (talk) 07:25, 27 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Categories by date

Nominator's rationale: merge, redundant category layer with two subcategories each.


Redirects

Rosalind the rover

Delete all per WP:PANDORA; we don't have redirects for English the language or Mercury the element nor do we need them. An anonymous username, not my real name 19:18, 19 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 08:07, 27 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sirish

Retarget to Allu Sirish; there is no reason I can find that it should go here. An anonymous username, not my real name 02:43, 19 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Delete: It should never have been created. Allu is a possible interest, but is not the primary topic. SmokeyJoe (talk) 03:34, 19 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Disambiguate, since it can also refer to Sirish Gurung. The current targeting is because it's the Beltalowda translation of Ceres, but this isn't an Expanse wiki and that's not an appropriate target. - Eureka Lott 04:18, 19 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Beltalowda translation of Ceres? What are people think, inserting transient recent fiction fandom into Wikipedia?!
    User:EurekaLott, can you help me understand RfD-ers? Why keep a bad redirect that should never have been made? If it hadn’t been made, would you now create it to point to a DAB? Why not let the internal search engine do its job? SmokeyJoe (talk) 04:44, 19 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    The title can plausibly refer to multiple people for whom we have articles. Why wouldn't we want to disambiguate (or to be more specific, set-indexify) it? - Eureka Lott 05:21, 19 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Because the internal search engine is a more robust solution. It picks up things people didn’t think of, and its results change as mainspace changes. With the redirect, the reader doesn’t get the internal search results. SmokeyJoe (talk) 22:21, 21 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Disambiguate per Eureka Lott. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 20:20, 19 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Delete - neither of the suggested targets are known by the mononym "Sirish", thus any resulting disambiguation page will only contain partial title matches which the guideline instructs not to include. Dab pages are not search results, we have a search engine for that. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 16:56, 20 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Creating WP:SIAs for given names and surnames is normal practice, and isn't covered under WP:PTM. Cases like this are exactly why {{Given name}} has the "type=both" parameter. - Eureka Lott 01:50, 21 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Weak Delete per Ivanvector: the argument for creating a disambiguation is not enough to overcome the reasons for deletion. The disambiguation would be unnecessary anyway. InterstellarGamer12321 (talk | contribs) 19:07, 20 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 08:06, 27 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Dissenting catholic

I created this redirect about two years ago, and I have a feeling that this redirect may have a better target than the current one. The topic of "Theological dissent in Catholicism" might be a warranted article, and the natural place would be to point this there, but I can't quite find anything on that topic precisely. Alternatives like Heresy in the Catholic Church and/or Mater si, magistra no might fit, but I'm not sure that either would be the best place to point this. Any ideas? — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 06:11, 20 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

After thinking this over a bit more, I think I weakly prefer a retarget to Mater si, magistra no. It's a slogan of the "dissenting Catholic" movement that began in the 20th century, but I ultimately would prefer to target an article on that movement should one ever become written. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 15:57, 20 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 08:03, 27 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Dewaywala ڈیوے والا

Non-English lettering 〜 Festucalex • talk 07:35, 27 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Re R3 deletion, I'm not sure how this is a misnomer? J947 † edits 08:00, 27 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Time location

Obviously the target is incorrect at the moment (haha). Very weakly prefer a retarget to spacetime over deletion. J947 † edits 06:00, 27 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Timely moment

An unhelpful redirect as it stands, redirecting to a technical unit that bears no relation to this phrase. It has no coverage on Wikipedia or Wiktionary – thus delete. J947 † edits 05:53, 27 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Wikipedia:Technical move request

Delete because it is too wordy to be used over WP:Technical moves and is the only redirect in singular form which is not usually used, making this an unlikely redirect. BhamBoi (talk) 03:16, 27 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Templates and Modules


Miscellany

Deletion review

Stone Bench Creations

Stone Bench Creations (talk|edit|history|logs|links|watch) (XfD|restore)

The article is being redeveloped here, so perhaps I could retrieve the sources if the article is temporarily restored. Kailash29792 (talk) 06:02, 27 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:XfD_today&oldid=1145394701"