Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/Today

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Purge

28 April 2025

Read how to nominate an article for deletion.

Purge server cache

Canopy (app) (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 · TWL)

The app`s article lacks sufficient coverage from independent, reliable sources to establish the app's notabili Hopkinkse (talk) 15:29, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

InCharge Energy (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 · TWL)

The article lacks sufficient coverage from independent, reliable sources Hopkinkse (talk) 15:28, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Chris Neiszner (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 · TWL)

Article about a hockey player, not properly sourced as passing inclusion criteria for hockey players. The leagues he played in, the American Hockey League and the ECHL, are specifically listed in WP:NHOCKEY as conferring notability only if the player "Achieved preeminent honors (all-time top-10 career scorer, first-team all-star)" -- but there's no claim being made here that he ever achieved any such thing in either league, and he hasn't been shown to pass WP:GNG either as the article is referenced entirely to content self-published by the teams he has played or worked for rather than any evidence of independent coverage in third-party media sources.
The article has, additionally, spent 18 full months with WP:BLP-violating nonsense like "He is currently an ambulance driver in Alberta. He once smiled, but really didn't like it. Chris also had the pleasure of providing the Rebels staff with water in their mouths." in it until I found and poleaxed it just now, which isn't a deletion rationale in and of itself but does speak to how many responsible editors have actually seen the article.
Nothing here is "inherently" notable without much more and better sourcing for it than this. Bearcat (talk) 06:23, 17 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Local coverage in the home market of the team he played for isn't sufficient in and of itself to give a minor-league hockey player a GNG-based exemption from WP:NHOCKEY. We'd have to see nationalizing coverage, not just the Red Deer Advocate alone. Bearcat (talk) 15:20, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
coverage isn't sufficient ... [for a] GNG-based exemption from WP:NHOCKEY – ?? NHOCKEY is an inclusionary criterion, not an exlusionary one (and a broken one at that -- if you meet NHOCKEY, you may be notable if you pass GNG; if you do not meet NHOCKEY, you may be notable if you pass GNG). The only thing that matters is whether he meets GNG, and national coverage is not necessary for that. BeanieFan11 (talk) 15:25, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There's no such thing as a distinction between "inclusionary" and "exclusionary" SNGs. GNG does not just count up the number of media hits and keep anybody who's surpassed an arbitrary number, without considering the context in which the media hits exist — as I've said more than once, if GNG just concerned itself with the number of sources a person had, and didn't care about whether the context of what the person was getting covered for was actually of any broad or sustained public interest or not, then we would have to keep an article about my mother's former neighbour who once got a blip of media coverage for finding a pig in her front yard. (Hell, if all GNG cared about was the number of media hits that could be found, and didn't measure for whether the context of what those hits existed for passed any notability criteria or not, then I would even be able to claim that I qualified for an article.) So media coverage doesn't just have to hit some arbitrary number of clippings, and also has to verify passage of one or more notability criteria. Bearcat (talk) 18:23, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The sport-specific sub criteria is just leftover stuff from before WP:NSPORTS2022 that wasn't participation based (all of the participation criteria was removed). None of the individual sport guidelines have been updated with replacement criteria so we're pretty much just left with skeletonized guidelines that offer unhelpful advice like likely to be notable if they've been inducted into the hall of fame. There's isn't even any guidance currently on football, gridiron football, or baseball. In regards to NHOCKEY, the only NHL guidance mentions first-round draft picks, which is obviously too strict given all of the blue links at 2017 NHL entry draft (and there's never been an overabundance of hockey players anyway). ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 18:58, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Exactly. Right now, it looks like Wayne Gretzky fails NHOCKEY. BeanieFan11 (talk) 19:24, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
He does fail NHOCKEY. I suggest an AfD. ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 19:34, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
WP:SIGCOV does not exclude local coverage, and makes no mention of national coverage. Flibirigit (talk) 15:57, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Local coverage isn't excluded from usability, and I never said it was. But local coverage is not necessarily enough to hand a person a GNG-based exemption from normal inclusion criteria all by itself — unelected candidates are not exempted from NPOL just because they can show a handful of local campaign coverage in the local media of the area where they were running without any evidence of broader significance, actors who don't otherwise pass NACTOR's achievement-based criteria are not exempted from them just because they can show a handful of "local aspiring actor gets first bit part in movie" coverage in their hometown media without any evidence of broader significance, high school and junior league athletes are not exempted from the inclusion criteria for their sport just because they can show a handful of hometown local coverage without any evidence of broader significance, local bands are not exempted from having to pass WP:NMUSIC just because they got a few hits of "local band plays local pub" in their local newspaper without any evidence of broader significance, and on and so forth.
If a person is properly established as passing an SNG on an actual inclusion criterion, then we genuinely don't care whether their sourcing is "local" or "national" — but if a person's coverage isn't establishing passage of any specific inclusion criteria, and instead you're trying to argue that they get over GNG purely on the number of media hits that exist in and of itself, then a local vs. national coverage test does come into play, because lots of people can show some evidence of local coverage in contexts that don't pass encyclopedic standards of permanent international significance. Bearcat (talk) 18:23, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
WP:BLUDGEON and WP:WALLOFTEXT may apply here. Flibirigit (talk) 21:01, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If the only coverage were a couple of articles from Neiszer's home town of Craik, Saskatchewan stating that he made it to a WHL team, I'd probably agree that he does not meet GNG. But he has much more extensive coverage from Red Deer, Alberta, which is not his home town (or even his home province) plus significant coverage from Las Vegas, Nevada, which is not even his home country. That's not to mention a lot of insignificant coverage in other newspapers in other ciites. So he actually has not only national coverage, but international coverage. Rlendog (talk) 13:11, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - Red Deer Advocate is a perfectly acceptable source for demonstrating significant coverage for notability, which has no "national coverage" requirement, and the Las Vegas Review-Journal provides an additional source of significant coverage. Rlendog (talk) 17:18, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 15:19, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
2025 European power outage (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 · TWL)

Way WP:TOOSOON and WP:NOTNEWS. It's a big event but there has been no time to get a rounded view of what has happened. JMWt (talk) 15:00, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per WP:NODEADLINES. We can re-assess notability once the dust settles but all of Iberia struggling to literally keep the lights on seems inherently notable as of now. Departure– (talk) 15:08, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia:NODEADLINES is an essay that includes at least 7 different opinions. So I don't really see what you are achieving by citing it. JMWt (talk) 15:10, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If we're in the business of talking about relevance, WP:TOOSOON has no real relevant guidance for breaking news and focuses on biography of people, films, and future occurrences. More relevant would be to quote from the counterpoint at WP:NOTTOOSOON: "Some events are clear from the get-go that an article should exist..." - Fuzheado | Talk 15:26, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, that's my essay! Departure– (talk) 15:27, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong keep as this is a ridiculous nomination to begin with. A whole peninsula has been without power for hours which has obviously affected, among other things, communication lines and the reporting of news itself. More (notable) sources will follow as power is restored. Afonso Dimas Martins (talk) 15:27, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Singing candle (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 · TWL)

Looking through the history of this article, it seems to have been an art project by the Belgian Bains::connective (an archive of their website). Their website seems to be the only source that has ever been in the article, and the article's original illustration was sourced to that site too. As you can see from that image (and old versions of the article and site), the art project also seemingly made some concerningly fringe connection with psychology/telepathy. More to the point my WP:BEFORE failed to find any coverage in WP:RSs covering this either as a feedback demonstration or as an art project, and thus I can't see this meeting WP:GNG. Cakelot1 ☞️ talk 15:00, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Seymour Rossel (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 · TWL)

I am not convinced that this very fluffy and puffy biography full of unverified detail is of a notable person. This is the only thing I found with Google News, and it's one of those vanity publications you find at the hairdresser and in the local hotels. Yes, there are a lot of books, but they appear to be self-published and they don't seem to be cited by any other authors. Drmies (talk) 14:50, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Murray Banks (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 · TWL)

Non-notable subject with one RS, couldn't find others during BEFORE. Previous AfD led to article being deleted (in 2008) and I don't believe he passes GNG now. StartGrammarTime (talk) 14:27, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete orphan, not really a biography, little in the way of google scholar Czarking0 (talk) 14:58, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Zaur Hasanov (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 · TWL)

The person is not a notable. Yousiphh (talk) 12:21, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: WP:VAGUEWAVE.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, plicit 14:23, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Dafuniks (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 · TWL)

The band does not meet criteria set out by WP:BAND and has not been the subject of coverage to meet WP:BASIC. Uffda608 (talk) 12:32, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Previous WP:PROD candidate, ineligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, plicit 14:21, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Abdi Awad Ali (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 · TWL)

He gets a lot of mentions, but I can't find any significant coverage of him in independent, reliable sources. The current sourcing barely mentions him at all. Fails WP:GNG. Onel5969 TT me 13:07, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, plicit 14:19, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
comment I see this non RS source but maybe it is useful to others to find better sources? I may also help if an arabic speaker can check al-manhal WP:TWL. Another passing mention in an RS here Czarking0 (talk) 15:25, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Matthew Baker (entertainer) (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 · TWL)

Was nominated by Badbluebus back in February, and was closed as a soft delete, with only one other editor !voting for delete. No oppose votes. There simply is not enough in-depth coverage from independent reliable sources to show that they pass notability. Fails WP:GNG. Onel5969 TT me 13:53, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, plicit 14:18, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
AlpineTransitWorld (ATW) (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 · TWL)

Roblox game with no coverage whatsoever, no indication of passing WP:NGAME. Sophisticatedevening🍷(talk) 13:53, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

National Revolutionary Council (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 · TWL)

After the July revolution in Bangladesh, it has become common practice for various individuals to form new political parties. Most of these parties have no national or regional influence, no organizational structure, no notable actions, are not eligible for registration with the Bangladesh Election Commission, and have not participated in any elections or established any offices. Prothom Alo has described such parties as merely nominal. Hundreds of parties have been formed, among which only the National Citizen Party (NCP) is considered notable. The current article is one of the many non-notable parties, as it has not received any substantial coverage from independent, reliable sources, nor is any notable person associated with it. The article is based solely on a press release announcing the party's formation. Wikipedia is not for writing about everything; this is why notability criteria were established. Due to the lack of coverage meeting WP:GNG (General Notability Guideline) and failure to satisfy WP:ORG (Organizational Notability), I propose that this article be deleted.–𝐎𝐰𝐚𝐢𝐬 𝐀𝐥 𝐐𝐚𝐫𝐧𝐢 ʕʘ̅͜ʘ̅ʔ 13:50, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Derek Johnson (conspiracy theorist) (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 · TWL)

Coverage is simple fact-check sources and routine coverage. No lasting notability that I can find Yoblyblob (Talk) :) 13:23, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Lolade Dosunmu Adeyemi (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 · TWL)

Likely fails WP Academics and ANY BIO. Old-AgedKid (talk) 13:20, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Laho (Shallipopi Song (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 · TWL)

The song is not notable; reliable sources are missing. Old-AgedKid (talk) 13:16, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I am Editing it Destinyokhiria (talk) 13:22, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Stallion Express (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 · TWL)

Fails NCORP; no notable sources with significant coverage; mainly official website links Old-AgedKid (talk) 13:15, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Blackwater Community School (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 · TWL)

Subject does not appear to be notable - simply existing or having notable alumni does not mean that a school is notable, unless the school itself has been the subject of reliable, secondary coverage. WormEater13 (talkcontribs) 13:11, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nicholas Buamah (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 · TWL)

Subject does not appear to be notable per either WP:AUTHOR or WP:GNG. WormEater13 (talkcontribs) 19:12, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× 13:05, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Johan Schmitt (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 · TWL)

LUGSTUB-a-like for a non-notable athlete who competed at the Olympic games, once. Nothing in my WP:BEFORE, though the fact that the name of the subject is literally the Dutch version of "John Smith" hardly helps. A search on RKD yields a single-paragraph description - not WP:SIGCOV. FOARP (talk) 12:17, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Alec Hudnut (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 · TWL)

Fails WP:SIGCOV, WP:BIO. Refs are routine WP:PRIMARY interviews. scope_creepTalk 11:32, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment: It appears that the deletion nomination was initiated by the same individual who originally created the article, potentially using a different account. This could constitute sockpuppetry, which is against Wikipedia's policies (see WP:SOCK).

Regarding notability, Alec Hudnut meets the criteria outlined in WP:GNG, as evidenced by significant coverage in multiple independent, reliable sources:

- Interview on Bloomberg TV via PRLog - Profile in The Enterprise World - Coverage in Supermarket News - Mention in Bloomberg

These sources demonstrate that Alec Hudnut has received significant coverage in independent, reliable publications, satisfying the general notability guideline.

Miscalculation (Israel) (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 · TWL)

Non-notable phrase, see WP:NEO. Aydoh8[what have I done now?] 11:28, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. Not enough characteristic usage to justify an article. Zerotalk 11:32, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    To answer DGW below, I agree it is not neologism. It is a common word that some people have applied to some situations. That doesn't establish independent notability. Lots of people throughout history called lots of things "miscalculations"; why is it special this time? Zerotalk 13:46, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    It is special, because this single word determined if the Gaza war occurred or not. See Helen of Troy. Dgw|Talk 14:19, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: Miscalculation is the key word of the October 7 Hamas-led attack on Israel. It happened twice, in 1973 and in 2023. It took a year and a half until the truth was revealed. I do not claim that Netanyahu was "right" or Bar was "right", but something very wrong happened in Israel due to this miscalculation. Furthermore, it is not a "neologism" but a word which exactly reflected the situation between Israel and Hamas. Israel wanted Hamas would be satisfied, and Netanyahu wrote it in his affidavit, but Hamas wanted to conquer Israel. Heads of Hamas said clearly that they would not make the attack if they knew the reaction of Israel and of the world (mainly of Trump). The history will judge. Dgw|Talk 12:35, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Joseph Lux (gymnast) (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 · TWL)

LUGSTUB-a-like with no credible assertion of an WP:NSPORTS pass.
He competed at the Olympics, but merely competing is not an indicator of notability per WP:NSPORTS2022.
He competed at the 1903 Antwerp gymnastic tournament and the 1907 Prague tournament (which were not world tournaments, since these weren't held until 1931) as part of the French team. However Lux does not inherit the notability of his team.
The article incorrectly states that Lux received individual "medals" at the 1903 and 1907 tournaments. However, there were no individual awards at the 1903 or 1907 gymnastics tournaments - these weren't awarded until much later. Scores (not medals) were conferred retrospectively after 1922, and a retrospective score given years after the event purely as a statistical artefact cannot be an indicator of notability.
Nothing found in my WP:BEFORE except the usual mirrors and false-positives for people with the same name (e.g., a prominent priest). FOARP (talk) 10:58, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ende Gelände 2020 (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 · TWL)

Not special enough to have a separate article A1Cafel (talk) 10:53, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

José Antonio Sossa (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 · TWL)

Insufficient coverage, limited to talking about BLP court cases. I compile part of the conditions of a BLP "Biographies of living persons should be written conservatively and respecting the neutrality of the subject. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a tabloid: its function is not to be sensationalist nor to be the main vehicle for the dissemination of judicial statements. Iban14mxl (talk) 19:47, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

apart from the fact that it is unknown when he was born Iban14mxl (talk) 02:34, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This isn't a reason to delete the page. Warm Regards, Miminity (Talk?) (me contribs) 12:36, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, plicit 03:42, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Benison (Beni · talk) 10:51, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Bangladesh Social Democratic Party (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 · TWL)

The article fails to meet the criteria outlined in WP:GNG and WP:NORG. The organization was established only two months ago and has not yet received any substantial coverage in reliable secondary sources. Additionally, it is not registered as a political party. The current article relies solely on a press release about its inception.–𝐎𝐰𝐚𝐢𝐬 𝐀𝐥 𝐐𝐚𝐫𝐧𝐢 ʕʘ̅͜ʘ̅ʔ 15:46, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting for further consensus. Please base the arguments on our P&Gs. Additionally, kindly mention which criteria of speedy delete is applicable in this case. (See WP:ACSD)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Benison (Beni · talk) 10:46, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: I want to explain my nomination in more detail. After the July revolution in Bangladesh, it has become common practice for various individuals to form new political parties. Most of these parties have no national or regional influence, no organizational structure, no notable actions, are not eligible for registration with the Bangladesh Election Commission, and have not participated in any elections or established any offices. Prothom Alo has described such parties as merely nominal. Hundreds of parties have been formed, among which only the National Citizen Party (NCP) is considered notable. The current article is about one of the many non-notable parties, as it has not received any substantial coverage from independent, reliable sources, nor is any notable person associated with it. The article is based solely on a press release announcing the party's formation. Wikipedia is not for writing about everything; this is why notability criteria were established. Due to the lack of coverage meeting WP:GNG (General Notability Guideline) and failure to satisfy WP:ORG (Organizational Notability), I proposed that this article be deleted.–𝐎𝐰𝐚𝐢𝐬 𝐀𝐥 𝐐𝐚𝐫𝐧𝐢 ʕʘ̅͜ʘ̅ʔ 14:04, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
François Hentges (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 · TWL)

LUGSTUB-a-like with no credible assertion of an WP:NSPORTS pass.
He competed at the Olympics, but merely competing is not an indicator of notability per WP:NSPORTS2022.
He competed at the 1903 Antwerp gymnastic tournament (which was not the world tournament, since these weren't held until 1931) as part of the Luxembourg team which placed third. However Hentges does not inherit the notability of his team.
The article incorrectly states that Hentges received "gold" in an individual event at the 1903 tournament. However, there were no individual awards at the 1903 gymnastics tournament. Scores (not medals) were conferred retrospectively after 1922, and a retrospective score given years after the event purely as a statistical artefact cannot be an indicator of notability.
Nothing found in my WP:BEFORE except the usual passing mentions, though the existence of a prominent 21st century Luxembourgish doctor by the same name complicates this. FOARP (talk) 10:46, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Bangladesh Popular Party (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 · TWL)

The article fails to meet the criteria outlined in WP:GNG and WP:NORG. The organization was established only six months ago and has not yet received any substantial coverage in reliable secondary sources. Additionally, it is not registered as a political party. The current article relies solely on a press release about its inception.–𝐎𝐰𝐚𝐢𝐬 𝐀𝐥 𝐐𝐚𝐫𝐧𝐢 ʕʘ̅͜ʘ̅ʔ 15:17, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nominator
— Cerium4B—Talk? • 21:09, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Why delete, why speedy delete per nom? The article is well sourced, it doesn't clearly explain the reason. @Cerium4B: @Somajyoti:. Macarius Ibne Mito (talk), 8:48 AM, 27 April 2025
    strong delete. Because these days in Bangladesh, many people are opening political parties on their own initiative, and the number has crossed almost 40 in just three months. There is no point in writing articles about these. If something significant happens within any of these parties in the future, then create one again.Somajyoti 13:10, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Please base your arguments on policies and guidelines of Wikipedia. Simple per nom won't count towards consensus and it will be overseen by the closer. Furthermore, strong !votes aren't valid. Make it simple and show the references and citations that are reliable demonstrating the notability of the topic, or use the policies and guidelines to say why the article should be deleted. Thanks.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Benison (Beni · talk) 10:44, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. No reason has been provided why the current sourcing is insufficient, and "There are a lot of parties in Bangaldesh" isn't a reason to delete the article. The quantity of parties doesn't matter; whether they have coverage does. Cortador (talk) 13:21, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Hello, @Cortador: My first question is: do you know the Bengali language? This is important because the article is based entirely on Bengali-language sources. My second point is that I did not say "There are a lot of parties in Bangladesh," and therefore it is not notable. Please see my original nomination again. I would like to answer your question regarding why the current sourcing is insufficient. A large number of sources alone does not establish notability. As outlined in WP:GNG, to meet the General Notability Guideline, sources must provide presumed significant coverage and must be independent of the subject. WP:PRSOURCE clearly states that "A press release is clearly not an independent source." The current article is primarily based on a press release about the party's formation. The remaining sources simply mention how many parties have been formed. Not a single source cited in the article qualifies as providing significant coverage. Moreover, the most notable publication in Bangladesh, Prothom Alo, described these parties as merely nominal. If you find any source that provides significant coverage, please point it out, and I will withdraw my nomination.–𝐎𝐰𝐚𝐢𝐬 𝐀𝐥 𝐐𝐚𝐫𝐧𝐢 ʕʘ̅͜ʘ̅ʔ 14:39, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: I want to explain my nomination in more detail. After the July revolution in Bangladesh, it has become common practice for various individuals to form new political parties. Most of these parties have no national or regional influence, no organizational structure, no notable actions, are not eligible for registration with the Bangladesh Election Commission, and have not participated in any elections or established any offices. Prothom Alo has described such parties as merely nominal. Hundreds of parties have been formed, among which only the National Citizen Party (NCP) is considered notable. The current article is about one of the many non-notable parties, as it has not received any substantial coverage from independent, reliable sources, nor is any notable person associated with it. The article is based solely on a press release announcing the party's formation. Wikipedia is not for writing about everything; this is why notability criteria were established. Due to the lack of coverage meeting WP:GNG (General Notability Guideline) and failure to satisfy WP:ORG (Organizational Notability), I proposed that this article be deleted.–𝐎𝐰𝐚𝐢𝐬 𝐀𝐥 𝐐𝐚𝐫𝐧𝐢 ʕʘ̅͜ʘ̅ʔ 14:04, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Brian Hansen (pornographic actor) (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 · TWL)

It doesn't seem like this one meets WP:GNG. The references are not SIGCOV and most of them don't seem like reliable sources. BuySomeApples (talk) 10:25, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been added to the WikiProject Pornography list of deletions.CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 12:01, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
A cleanup could be done of unreliable sources, instead of deleting the entire article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arkavirya (talkcontribs) 13:08, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Can we get a source eval?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Benison (Beni · talk) 10:39, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, passes SIGCOV Madeline1805 (talk) 13:00, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Countdown (Victorious song) (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 · TWL)

Zero in-depth coverage. Searches did not turn up enough in-depth coverage from independent, reliable sources to support meeting WP:GNG. Onel5969 TT me 09:39, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Benison (Beni · talk) 10:38, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
...Sings Modern Talking: Let's Talk About Love (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 · TWL)

No evidence of this album passing WP:NALBUM, charting, or receiving critical responses. A copy of this mainspace version is at the draftspace, so this looks more like a copy-and-paste move. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 09:46, 17 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Eddie891 Talk Work 10:03, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Tomasz Młynarczyk (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 · TWL)

No indication of significance but potentially notable. Note tag been on the article for 1+ years. I think it probably fails WP:BIO, WP:SIGCOV but don't hold me to it. scope_creepTalk 09:57, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Artists, Photography, and Poland. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 10:08, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - the article has an interesting history to be aware of. It was created by a now globally locked account, part of the "Put Radzyn on the map" campaign to promote the town of Radzyn. So I think the sources should be examined very carefully, to analyze which ones are public relations, local promotion, or advertorial content like native advertising that may look like an actual article in a publication but it actually PROMO. Holding off on !voting for now. Netherzone (talk) 14:00, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. Netherzone (talk) 14:07, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak keep - After going through all the sources in the article, and conducting an online BEFORE search, here's what I found: quite a few hits for this photographer, but they are press releases, or event announcements, and photo credits in various publications. A lot is taken directly from Wikipedia. It seems he is a much loved and respected local photographer, who has photographed a broad range of subjects. However most of the sources in the article are primary sources. Some of the citations that look like book reviews are actually synopses written by the photographer himself, and published by the Zwiazek Polskich Artystów Fotografików - Association of Polish Art Photographers, of which he is a member, so not independent. What I did find that contribute to notability are: He designed a stamp for Poland: [5]; review of one of his shows in a newspaper (which I think is local Wyborcza.pl LUBLIN): [6]; and this article, but it is unclear exactly what the publication is but appears it may be an academic journal, info: Młynarczyk, Tomasz. 2011. "Exhibition "Archive - Form And Light and Shadow". Archives – Kancelarie – Collections, No. 2(4)/ (December):195-219. https://doi.org/10.12775/AKZ.2011.007. [7] and another way to access the article: [8]. If kept, the article needs clean up. Netherzone (talk) 15:10, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Jules Lecoutre (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 · TWL)

LUGSTUB with no credible assertion of an WP:NSPORTS pass.
He competed at the Olympics, but merely competing is not an indicator of notability per WP:NSPORTS2022.
He competed at the 1903 Antwerp gymnastic tournament (which was not the world tournament, since these weren't held until 1931) as part of the French team which placed second. However Lecoutre does not inherit the notability of his team.
The article incorrectly states that Lecoutre received silver in an individual event at the 1903 tournament. However, there were no individual awards at the 1903 gymnastics tournament. Scores (not medals) were conferred retrospectively after 1922, and a retrospective score given years after the event purely as a statistical artefact cannot be an indicator of notability.
Nothing found in my WP:BEFORE except the usual passing mentions in long lists of names. FOARP (talk) 09:38, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Rajinder Gupta (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 · TWL)

Completely promotional article, paid contribs and the company he founded doesn't even have it's own article so there's no use having his. If some one searches his company's name this article doesn't pop up. The article has total 1500 views and is a stub from 10 yrs ago saluere, Ɔþʱʏɾɪʊs 09:55, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. From my observation, the article is not at all promotional and adheres to WP:NPOV. The article also has multiple reliable sources and thus passes WP:BIO. The absence of an article of the company he established is not a reason to delete this page. Same goes with the pageviews and class of the article. Warriorglance(talk to me) 11:05, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Three sources are generic profiles and don't provide in-depth coverage of the subject, and the final one just links to the most recent issue of Hindustan Times. All sources I could find online are, if anything, about Trident Group more than Gupta. Cortador (talk) 11:32, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • weak keep: The Padma Shri award seems notable. There is a limited amount of sourcing that confirms the win. [9] is typical of more recent coverage tha feels promotional. Also come coverage about the cricket association [10]. Oaktree b (talk) 13:07, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. No consensus yet.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:55, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep- From my point of view, the person is presumed notable since he has received a award by Govt. Of India as per WP:ANYBIO, by searching him, I found that their are multiple reliable sources with significant coverage on subject which confirms it's notablity. Since, we are discussing on person not on its organization, so it's not a valid point to delete as his established company doesn't have a article. VortexPhantom🔥 (talk) 12:13, 18 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: would still benefit from a bit more input
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Eddie891 Talk Work 09:31, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The Owl of Minerva (journal) (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 · TWL)

The article has been subject of multiple PRODs and notability flags. Xpander (talk) 23:29, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. It's not up to us to decide whether this is an important journal or not. Such a conclusion should be based on RS. Here we have some listings in databases that don't have the selectivity required by NJournals. Neither do some routine citations to articles published in this journal indicate notability. Fails WP:NJournals and WP:GNG. --Randykitty (talk) 22:16, 18 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: Do I read correctly that the nominator here is also the first "keep" !voter? Should this be treated as a withdrawn nom? Dclemens1971 (talk) 03:11, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: yes, I noticed this, too. In addition, the nom is rather deficient, previous PROD and notability tags is not aa good reason to take something to AfD. However, there is now also my policy-based "delete" !vote, so even if the nom can be treated as withdrawn, this should run its course. I'd be interested to hear what the "keep" !votes here think of my arguments. And some of those "keep" !votes are not very convincing either ("it's notable/significant"...). --Randykitty (talk) 07:46, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment: It's not clear why the aforementioned indexes (IBZ, IPB, MLA etc.) all fail the selectivity required by WP:NJournals.
    Xpander (talk) 11:29, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Because these databases strive for inclusiveness and are relatively easy to get into. Journals in the databases listed in the article (including those that have been added since this AfD started) did not undergo the in-depth evaluation that e.g. Scopus does before including a journal. --Randykitty (talk) 12:11, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Eddie891 Talk Work 09:31, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
NOCD (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 · TWL)

Fails WP:NCORP, routine coverage in WP:TRADES. Gheus (talk) 08:25, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Rise of Kingdoms (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 · TWL)

Fails WP:GNG. This game has got to hold the record for fewest words of review written per dollar earned, as there's been nearly nothing written about Rise of Kingdoms's gameplay. The article's reception section cites three unreliable sources and an Arkansas newspaper.

There's been slightly more written about its marketing and sales, but I don't think it's enough to hold an article about the game together. ~ A412 talk! 07:51, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Pikwitonei station (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 · TWL)

This flag stop is not notable, it is already mentioned at the population center of the same name. Moritoriko (talk) 07:47, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Pikwitonei, as that page is just as short as the station, and in the process creating a new section titled "Transportation". As for Pikwitonei Station, not much anything useful found in my WP:BEFORE search, and its existing sources are somewhat reasonably reliable (but half of them are non-independent to the station). EditorGirlAL07 (talk) 11:15, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Kinogama station (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 · TWL)

Flag stop on the Sudbury-White line, possible redirect to the unincorporated place of the same name instead. Nothing notable about this sometimes stop. Moritoriko (talk) 07:33, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Kinogama, Ontario: Barely any WP:SIGCOV found in my WP:BEFORE search. EditorGirlAL07 (talk) 10:05, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: if there is a better way to deal with articles for redirects than bringing them to AfD I would like to know Moritoriko (talk) 10:39, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Impact of sand loss on sea turtles (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 · TWL)

Wikipedia is not the place to store your term paper. Might I suggest Google Drive?  Sumanuil. (talk to me) 07:28, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"Speedy keep" is inappropriate because the article has obvious problems - rambling scope and massive duplication of content. Dissatisfaction with the nom statement (which I agree is not very informative) is no reason to toss a substandard article that will have to dealt with back into the pot. Or to put it differently, if this was to be "speedy kept" based on these spurious arguments, I would have it back at AfD with a more elaborate rationale within a day. Let's sort it out her and leave out the unproductive process-lawyering. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 13:13, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Wojciech Papis (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 · TWL)

Niche Polish politician. Never held any office or won any election. He did declare himself as a candidate for a presidential election, but it's just a publicity stunt, with no serious coverage. No pl wiki interwiki, no sources in the article that meet WP:SIGCOV. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 07:21, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know if I can even defend this article, haha. The only thing that it's useful for is Joanna Senyszyn having her Nonpartisans endorsement link here. Polish kurd (talk) 12:31, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
2024 Mari Petroleum Mil Mi-8 crash (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 · TWL)

Per WP:NOTNEWS and WP:EVENTCRIT. Per WP:GNG, "sources should be secondary sources, as those provide the most objective evidence of notability". From what I've been able to find, none of the sources were secondary since none of them contained analysis, evaluation, interpretation, or synthesis of the event itself. The event does not have in-depth nor sustained continued coverage of the event itself with coverage only briefly occurring in the aftermath of the accident. WP:EVENTCRIT#4 states that routine kinds of news events including most accidents – whether or not tragic or widely reported at the time – are usually not notable unless something further gives them additional enduring significance, which this event lacks. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 06:56, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

T2 (Saudi company) (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 · TWL)

Fails WP:NCORP. Routine investment agreements, partnerships, M&As are not enough to pass WP:CORPDEPTH. Gheus (talk) 06:50, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

XinFin (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 · TWL)

Sourced using crypto-focused publications (WP:NCRYPTO) or primary sources. Fails WP:NCORP. Gheus (talk) 06:33, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete I have been unable to find in-depth, reliable sources about XinFin. Most discussion is either in crypto publications or Indian publications that are not fully reliable. Does not meet NCORP or GNG.
Anonrfjwhuikdzz (talk) 11:08, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Tercio of Fuenclara (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 · TWL)

The same reasons as described in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tercio of Idiáquez (2nd nomination) Bubba6t3411 (talk) 06:10, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tercio of Idiáquez (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 · TWL)

Practically everything that has been written to expand the article in order to prevent it from being deleted is false (other than the Thirty Years' War section). The previous user who withdrew their AfD nomination did not fact check any of the sources or information added. The article has been expanded incorrectly and mostly falsified (though it's likely, or at least I'd like to think, that it wasn't done on purpose and the editor who expanded the article just wanted to help improve it). If you wish to help improve the article, please use proper sources which correlate with the information written. Bubba6t3411 (talk) 05:59, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Jello Biafra and the Guantanamo School of Medicine (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 · TWL)

Article seems like it is better suited to be a paragraph under Jello's article. It was started in 2009 by someone whose only two edits were this article, and the talk page has a note from someone with a COI adding content. The tone needs revision and there haven't been many reliable source references added during the life of the article. Submitting for discussion by other editors. LovelyLillith (talk) 05:06, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Csilla Molnar (model) (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 · TWL)

Not to be confused with Csilla Molnár. No significant coverage for ANYBIO and doesn't qualify WP:NMODEL. Hmr (talk) 04:52, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Humming Airways (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 · TWL)

Nothing to satisfy WP:GNG. Lack of significant coverage in reliable and secondary sources. WP:TOOSOON also. Bakhtar40 (talk) 04:17, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sultan Zauq Nadvi (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 · TWL)

This BLP article has been tagged for the use of unreliable sources since 2020. Wikipedia's strict standards for Biographies of Living Persons (BLP) require that all content be supported by reliable and verifiable sources. Upon review, I found that the article cites eight sources, six of which are entirely unreliable, including local book-selling websites, while another provides only a trivial mention. The article relies almost entirely on Nadvi, Jasim ad-Din (2019); however, no direct link is provided, and the reference appears to be from a user-generated website, which does not meet Wikipedia’s reliability standards. I considered removing the material cited from this user-generated source, but doing so would leave the article as little more than a one-line stub. Due to the lack of reliable, independent secondary sources, the subject fails to satisfy the notability guidelines outlined in WP:Scholar, WP:AUTHOR, and WP:GNG, and therefore, the article is not eligible for retention and should be deleted.–𝐎𝐰𝐚𝐢𝐬 𝐀𝐥 𝐐𝐚𝐫𝐧𝐢 ʕʘ̅͜ʘ̅ʔ 03:07, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

International Communist League (Maoist) (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 · TWL)

Fails GNG; cannot find any SIGCOV in reliable sources; cited sources are all blogs and party communications. "History" section appears to be SYNTH, as its one source makes no mention of this group that I can find, and further statements are uncited. Zanahary 18:57, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. notable as per argument above Castroonthemoon (talk) 15:32, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
What argument? Zanahary 01:57, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete – In case someone argues that niche topics may only have coverage in their niches, from my search at least, there is an absence of coverage even in other communist and socialist organisations' publications. I don't expect an international of mostly non-notable organisations to have coverage beyond their members' own works. Yue🌙 00:51, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ambrosiawater (talk) 03:06, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Fantom (rapper) (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 · TWL)

I have blocked the author as a probable UPE, but this page falls just short of G11, in my view. Nonetheless, I'm unable to find evidence that its subject meets GNG or any other applicable threshold. Vanamonde93 (talk) 16:30, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ambrosiawater (talk) 03:06, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Savitech (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 · TWL)

no wp:sigcov, fails wp:gng ProtobowlAddict talk! 16:09, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ambrosiawater (talk) 03:06, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Fifth Ward Community Redevelopment Corporation (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 · TWL)

Subject does not appear to be notable per WP:NGO upon search. The current sources are either primary or not WP:SIGCOV, and the article seems to be promotional. Also, it seems that the article creator has a WP:COI with the subject, having only made edits to the subject's article. WormEater13 (talkcontribs) 02:58, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Muhammad Shafi (cyclist) (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 · TWL)

I have limited knowledge about the notability criteria for sportspersons. That being said, the subject does not appear notable to me. How is merely participating in an Olympic event sufficient for notability, especially when there are over 5,000 participants?–𝐎𝐰𝐚𝐢𝐬 𝐀𝐥 𝐐𝐚𝐫𝐧𝐢 ʕʘ̅͜ʘ̅ʔ 02:34, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Amanda Ratnayake (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 · TWL)

REDIRECT to Miss Universe Sri Lanka. Fails WP:GNG - the winner of a national beauty pageant (see WP:1EVENT) however apart from that there is no evidence of any other significant achievements. Failed to place at international level. Dan arndt (talk) 01:51, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Giri Balasubramanium (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 · TWL)

Subject does not seem to be notable upon searching for reliable, secondary sources. Also, the creator of this article seems to have a undisclosed connection to the subject. WormEater13 (talkcontribs) 13:00, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Businesspeople, and India. WormEater13 (talkcontribs) 13:00, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Comment Notability concerns aside, which perhaps others may address first, I would note as the original contributor to the article that the claims of connection to subject are unfounded and likely unnecessary to the PROD discussion. Giri was a popular quizmaster for many competitions I attended (with hundreds of other students), over 12 years ago, and the motivation to contribute came from that. I don't believe that qualifies as a close connection. Cheers Komodo (talk) 03:29, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: A borderline WP:G11 article. Reads like promotion. None of the sources cited are reliable or do anything to establish notability. Junbeesh (talk) 08:52, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Comment: The article has been updated significantly. The promotional content was removed and factual information was re-written in a WP:NPOV tone. Further, primary and promotional materials citations were removed and independent, secondary and reliable sources from media coverage were added. Let me know if this doesn't address your WP:NOTABLE concerns or if you have any other feedback. Komodo (talk) 18:15, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: Looks like an advertisement or promotional article. Possible Wp:COI. Zuck28 (talk) 11:32, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Comment: The article has been updated significantly and content contributed by possible COI editor has been removed in this re-write. Let me know if you have further feedback. Komodo (talk) 18:15, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: Article was significantly re-written to address concerns noted above for the article -- including secondary coverage and reliable sources, though I should note that WP:AFDISNOTCLEANUP. Nonetheless, WP:NOTABILITY concerns should have been addressed as well with this coverage, but further information on why this article meets the criteria: (a) Significant coverage in reliable and independent sources: He has received coverage beyond simple announcements or listings. Sources like news outlets (Times of India, Deccan Herald snippets mentioning quizzes he hosts), articles about major events he leads (Tata Crucible coverage, TCS IT Wiz) but does not own, interviews (like in People Matters), and platforms featuring his talks (TEDx) constitute significant mentions in reliable contexts. While his company website or speaker profiles are primary or promotional, significant coverage exists independently. (b) Evidence of recognition and impact: His position as the quizmaster for the high-profile Tata Crucible quizzes since 2004 is a long-standing, nationally recognized role. Similarly, hosting the large-scale TCS IT Wiz/InQuizitive adds to this prominence. Greycaps, his company, has been described in multiple sources as one of Asia's largest in its niche. Finally, he is a frequent speaker, including on platforms like TEDx, that demonstrates a public profile and recognition in his field.
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: further discussion warranted considering changes made to article and sources utilized.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, 78.26 (spin me / revolutions) 01:46, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Carlo Alberto Capella (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 · TWL)

Fails WP:GNG, WP:NOTNEWS and WP:INDEPTH. Absolutiva (talk) 01:39, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep being the only prisoner of an entire country for several years is fairly unique. There is substantial in depth coverage from a quick seatch, and there is what appears to be sigcov in many books, not just news [19]. The news coverage also appears to be indepth. The 2021 piece is fairly indepth and a decent refutation of it being NOTNEWS. He was a diplomat, a fairly significant position, so there also appears to be coverage on that. PARAKANYAA (talk) 04:54, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Kadir Çakır (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 · TWL)

Fails WP:GNG and WP:NCURLING. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 01:07, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Fatih Ağduman (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 · TWL)

Fails WP:GNG and WP:NCURLING. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 01:05, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Michael W. Foley (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 · TWL)

Unable to locate significant coverage. The best source available appears to be a press release (no longer available directly online). Sammi Brie (she/her · t · c) 00:16, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

National Coalition for Homeless Veterans (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 · TWL)

Unable to locate any significant sufficient coverage that demonstrates notability beyond national law review. InvadingInvader (userpage, talk) 23:53, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Ineligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, plicit 00:04, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]