Gpedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Arizona

Jump to navigation Jump to search

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Arizona. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.

Adding a new AfD discussion
Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:
  1. Edit this page and add {{Gpedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
  2. You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Arizona|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.
Note that there are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.
Removing a closed AfD discussion
Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.
Other types of discussions
You can also add and remove links to other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Arizona.
Further information
For further information see Gpedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.

This list is also part of the larger list of deletion debates related to US.

Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at:
Purge page cache watch


Arizona

C.W. Jick Myers

C.W. Jick Myers (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 · WP Library)

Survived PROD, so we're here. The source is the only non wiki mirror I can find, and the position it confirms provides no inherent notability. Star Mississippi 15:40, 27 January 2022 (UTC)

  • Comment. He ran for the state legislature in 1958. After that, he is in the news quite a bit from 1969-1975 related mostly to state government positions where is is often quoted (this includes more that just energy czar) or mentioned. Not seeing much in-depth. Last mention is in 1975 where he announced he was quiting that position to seek a job in Washington. MB 18:49, 27 January 2022 (UTC)

Fight Ready

Fight Ready (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 · WP Library)

Cassiopeia talk 22:52, 20 January 2022 (UTC) Subject is a mixed martial arts gym. Most of the sources are from UFC which is not and independent sources for the owner of the gym are related/affiliated to UFC. The rest of the sources are about other fighters, the owner and interview pieces instead of the gym/company which either make the source not independent or relevant. The article fails WP:NCORP and WP:GNG. Cassiopeia talk 22:53, 20 January 2022 (UTC)


Comment - If it helps, I have removed all UFC.com sources and replaced them.-Imcdc (talk) 02:31, 21 January 2022 (UTC)

  • Weak Keep I see two sources that qualify to meet WP:GNG which is pretty week, given the sources are local and/or in a source I can't verify as reliable. It has had some notable people train there, but that falls under WP:NOTINHERITED, although it does say something about the quality of gym. Papaursa (talk) 04:15, 27 January 2022 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, plicit 23:42, 27 January 2022 (UTC)

MMA Lab

MMA Lab (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 · WP Library)

Subject is a mixed martial arts gym. Most of the sources are from UFC which is not and independent sources for the owner of the gym are related/affiliated to UFC. The rest of the sources are about other fighters, the owner and interview pieces instead of the gym/company which either make the source not independent or relevant. The article fails WP:NCORP and WP:GNG Cassiopeia talk 22:48, 20 January 2022 (UTC)

Comment - If it helps, I have removed all UFC.com sources and replaced them. -Imcdc (talk) 02:23, 21 January 2022 (UTC)

  • Weak Keep There are some independent sources that focus on the gym itself, although most of the mentions are in passing. Papaursa (talk) 04:06, 27 January 2022 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, plicit 23:40, 27 January 2022 (UTC)

2021 Youth Hunger Strike in Arizona and DC for Democracy

2021 Youth Hunger Strike in Arizona and DC for Democracy (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 · WP Library)

Sorry to relitigate this, but this was a two-participant AfD where the only Keep vote was from the article's creator. This article doesn't show persistent coverage or significant impact, without which it's just another protest (albeit one that made the news). It's a one-off story—it's a really, really interesting and inspiring one! But without reliable, secondary sources explicitly showing real-world impact or lasting coverage, this doesn't meet inclusion criteria. theleekycauldron (talkcontribs) (they/she) 18:16, 12 January 2022 (UTC)

Edit: I should remind all of those looking to get involved that you're not just looking for significant coverage, you're looking for persistent coverage in deciding whether this article should be included. Lots of incidents, protests, and negotiations make the news; for political theatre and events to make as standalone Gpedia articles, they need either impact or coverage that extends not insignificantly beyond the event. This could even be merged into John Lewis Voting Rights Act as part of the larger story, but unless someone can show lasting coverage in its own right, merely passing WP:GNG is not enough here. To quote WP:PERSISTENCE: a burst or spike of news reports does not automatically make an incident notable. Events that are only covered in sources published during or immediately after an event, without further analysis or discussion, are likely not suitable for an encyclopedia article. theleekycauldron (talkcontribs) (she/they) 09:44, 27 January 2022 (UTC)

The first strike wasn't just covered all over the news, including on Washington Post, but it had created the impact of keeping the most significant voting bill since 1965 alive. The Senate will start to debate the bill on Tuesday 1/18. The youth has started their second hunger strike to call attention to the bill. The number of strikers has grown from 20 to 40. Whether the bill will eventually pass or not, these strikes had made a significant impact.

Please check out the coverage of these events on the reference list. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.56.239.179 (talk) 04:17, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Extraordinary Writ (talk) 21:56, 19 January 2022 (UTC)

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Washington, D.C.-related deletion discussions. – The Grid (talk) 05:03, 23 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Keep. While the hunger strikes will have no impact whatsoever on the Senate, the citations added to the article from multiple WP:RS certainly pass the threshold we set for notability. Fiachra10003 (talk) 03:21, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Keep, regardless of political impact or (more likely) lack thereof, there are enough citations to demonstrate notability.Jackattack1597 (talk) 20:32, 26 January 2022 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I know no one like endless relists, but since the first AfD closed as no consensus, and the two recent comments are from the last 24 hours, let's give it one more week.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ajpolino (talk) 03:54, 27 January 2022 (UTC)

  • Delete this is a promotional article about an ongoing promotional effort by college students. If it becomes genuinely newsworthy, it can be re-created. The references are mostly about national news headlines unrelated to the group. It is also likely that somebody working with the group is improperly contributing to this article. User:力 (powera, π, ν) 04:22, 27 January 2022 (UTC)

Arizona Proposed deletions

<div style="font-size: x-small;">The article is a derivative under the <a href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/">Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License</a>. A link to the original article can be found <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia%3AWikiProject_Deletion_sorting%2FArizona">here</a> and attribution parties <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Deletion_sorting/Arizona&amp;action=history">here</a>. By using this site, you agree to the <a href="https://www.gpedia.com/terms-of-use.php">Terms of Use</a>. Gpedia Ⓡ is a registered trademark of the Cyberajah Pty Ltd.</div>