Wikipedia:XfD today

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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


Speedy deletion candidates[edit]

Articles[edit]

Purge server cache

New Zealand Comic con[edit]

New Zealand Comic con (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 article is substantially covered in a subsection of Armageddon Expo, which this article links to in the lede. An uninformed reader may draw the conclusion that this is the article about Armageddon, which it is not. Removing the non-encyclopedic parts of this article would render it a copy of the Armageddon subsection.

This article was nominated for PROD previously but had as far as I can tell only little opposition; the reason was that it was a unique event. MrSeabody (talk) 08:38, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unique Kings Obi[edit]

Unique Kings Obi (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 or any related SNG. Sources are either passing mention, primary or not independent of the subject. The only sources that give SIGCOV are obviously promotional paid puffs and connected to the subject. The Vanguard piece [1], and the Independent pieces [2], [3] are examples. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 02:06, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep: Subject is a notable figure in Nigeria and has enough sources to prove this. The passing mentions for were added to as an evidence to a sentence. The references about the African Creators Summit were also added to evidence the information that he is the founder of the summit Mevoelo (talk)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 02:10, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 05:00, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep - Per WP:NGRS these sources are considered generally reliable: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, and 9. Vanguard is considered generally not reliable, but with all these subject would meet WP:BASIC.Hkkingg (talk) 08:24, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    If you consider this or this a good source, then I’m afraid you do not know what a good source that is suitable for Wikipedia is. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 09:06, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • delete: Per nomination above. ᗩvírαm7[@píng mє] 09:31, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Aviram7. Why is this a speedy delete? Which WP:CSD criteria does this meet? –Novem Linguae (talk) 02:28, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Hey @Novem Linguae: Hello, I use XFD Partipcaition tool for vote on here, I simple tagged for delete but I don't known how add delete before speedy sentence, and I know all WP:AFD discussion who are currently open they will be closing after 1 Week and I fixed this issue. Happy editing!ᗩvírαm7[@píng mє] 05:25, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Sounds good. Thanks for clarifying. –Novem Linguae (talk) 07:22, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Below is source assessment of the sources cited in this article;
Source assessment table:
Source Independent? Reliable? Significant coverage? Count source toward GNG?
https://tribuneonlineng.com/unique-kings-obi-makes-it-top-5-list-of-talent-managers/ No This is more or less a vanity list No Even though Nigerian Tribune is reliable per WP:NGRS, What's journalism without bylines? ~ No
https://www.thisdaylive.com/index.php/2024/01/01/championing-collaboration-the-inspiration-behind-the-african-creators-academy/ No This is obvious from reading the piece No Even though This Day is reliable per WP:NGRS,What's journalism without bylines? No This doesn't provide WP:SIGCOV on him, rather on "The African Creators Academy" which in itself is still really not a significant coverage No
https://www.pulse.ng/business/domestic/nigerian-creative-industry-launches-the-african-creators-summit/xgzd2dd No Pieces from "PULSE MIX" are usually promo puff, paid advertorials etc. No per WP:NGRS No Of course not, this is more or less a coverage on "African Creators Summit" and not Obi No
https://www.vanguardngr.com/2024/01/lasisi-unveils-as-host-for-african-creators-summit/#:~:text=The%20organizers%20of%20the%20African,January%2025th%20and%2026th%2C%202024. I will not assess the independence of this source since it does not apply to Obi ~ Publication is marginally reliable per WP:NGRS, but this piece lacks a byline which renders the whole piece useless here on Wikipedia. No Just like Pulse Nigeria above No
https://www.vanguardngr.com/2024/01/meet-unique-kings-obi-talent-manager-digital-marketer/ No Obvious paid advertorial, promotional puffery No Ditto Yes No
https://www.thisdaylive.com/index.php/2023/04/08/the-future-of-the-nigerian-content-industry-a-conversation-with-unique-kings-obi/ No This is an interview published in a way that makes it read like a news piece. The headline says it all "A Conversation With Unique Kings Obi". "When asked about", "Obi points out", etc. No Ditto No This is not WP:SIGCOV on Obi. No
https://guardian.ng/saturday-magazine/content-distribution-in-the-digital-age-unique-kings-obis-approach-to-reaching-global-audiences/ No Promotional puffery and paid advertorial. No Promotional puffery and paid advertorial. No This is not WP:SIGCOV on Obi. No
https://tribuneonlineng.com/top-5-talent-managers-nurturing-success-in-entertainment-industry/ No This is a duplicate publication by Nigerian Tribune that I assessed first, so, Ditto No Ditto ~ Ditto No
https://independent.ng/unique-kings-obi-paving-way-for-digital-talents-to-soar/ No Promotional puffery and paid advertorial. No Promotional puffery and paid advertorial. No Promotional puffery and paid advertorial. No
https://www.premiumtimesng.com/entertainment/music/211256-okiemute-ighorodje-emerges-winner-mtn-project-fame.html?tztc=1 I am not going to assess this source as it is reliable but does not apply to Obi Ditto No Ditto No
https://independent.ng/solvent-digital-moves-to-better-customer-service-relationships/ I am not going to assess this source as it does not apply to Obi Ditto No Ditto No
https://techcabal.com/2024/01/19/african-creators-summit-2024-countdown-to-africas-foremost-creative-workshop/ No Pieces by "Partner" from TechCabal" are usually sponsored/paid advertorials. In fact, this tells the whole story of all the sources used in this article. No Sponsored contents are not considered reliable No This is not WP:SIGCOV on Obi. No
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{source assess table}}.

--Vanderwaalforces (talk) 09:43, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist. Any comment to the source analysis?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 08:12, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Elmslie typology[edit]

Elmslie typology (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 wasn't able to find significant coverage of the typology in reliable sources. I found several mentions, but they were brief. toweli (talk) 07:54, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The typology is potentially important and is often referred to but full publication and critical discussion are hard to find. In fact, this article is one of the fullest detailed explanations easily available, yet is lacking in citations back to RS original publication or critical coverage. Would suggest we need an article on this typology but serious revision is in order to tackle the source issues. Monstrelet (talk) 18:57, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep A necessary counterpart to the Oakshott system for double-edged blades. I agree that better sourcing is necessary, but I see no need to trim back to only the sourced parts. Most low-rated articles lack full sourcing.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 20:12, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 08:07, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pemmasani Chandra Sekhar[edit]

Pemmasani Chandra Sekhar (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 believe this is similar to Sanjog Waghere. A WP:BEFORE search on Pemmasani Chandra Sekhar has a lot of reliable sources, but they all focus on his candidacy in the 2024 Indian general election, making it a case of WP:BLP1E. Fails to meet GNG/NPOL. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 06:55, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Businesspeople, and Politicians. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 06:55, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Andhra Pradesh-related deletion discussions. Wikishovel (talk) 07:56, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Wikishovel (talk) 07:56, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: As per my check, I searched for coverage about the subject other then the candidacy, but I can’t found any. These sources are because of his candidacy. WP:BLP1E simply apply here. Fails WP:GNG and WP:NPOL. But I found someone who is saying “I am rather challenging the blanket assumption that (editorial) obituaries do not count towards notability.” Here. GrabUp - Talk 09:17, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Candidacy in general election is not notable. Per nom. Fails WP:NPOL. The degree of significance of the subject and of role as doctor and politician is not enough to warrant a page on the subject. RangersRus (talk) 13:44, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak redirect to Guntur Lok Sabha constituency#General Election 2024, mostly on WP:NOTPROMO grounds. Otherwise keep. I do not think the grounds for deletion raised above are policy-based. (1) NPOL avoids extending a presumption of notability to candidates, but recognizes that they are still notable if they meet the GNG. There doesn't seem to be any dispute that GNG-compliant sourcing is available. (2) The question is therefore whether BLP1E applies. But BLP1E does not apply, because a candidate in a general election for a national legislature is not someone who otherwise remains, and is likely to remain, a low-profile individual. As WP:LOWPROFILE reminds us, [p]ersons who actively seek out media attention are not low-profile, regardless of whether or not they are notable. (3) The remaining question, although not raised above, would be whether BIO1E applies. IMO it would be questionable to interpret "one event" in BIO1E/BLP1E so broadly as to encompass an entire election campaign; that would go well beyond any ordinary or on-wiki understanding of "one event". In any event, if BIO1E does apply, it counsels us to redirect to our coverage of the event, not to delete the page outright. -- Visviva (talk) 19:55, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 07:33, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lefaucheux Museum[edit]

Lefaucheux Museum (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)

There doesn't appear to be any coverage in reliable sources. toweli (talk) 06:06, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, although some speedy deletion criteria may apply given the article has clearly been written by the owner: https://forum.cartridgecollectors.org/t/so-i-founded-a-museum/59999 Traumnovelle (talk) 06:49, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wives of Hussein of Jordan[edit]

Wives of Hussein of Jordan (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)

Content fork from Hussein of Jordan#Personal life. Details are already in other articles. Unnecessary duplication. DrKay (talk) 05:52, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Royalty and nobility, and Jordan. DrKay (talk) 05:52, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists of people-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch 06:13, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete I was prepared to give this article a chance the first time I saw it but there are serious issues in terms of the reliability of its content and the extent to which it has been copied from other articles. For example, the article contains this unsourced paragraph: As known in popular culture: Sharifa Dina bint Abdul-Hamid, Princess Muna Al Hussein, Queen Alia al-Hussein, and Queen Noor of Jordan. A well-known saying for their experiences is: "Divorced, divorced, died; divorced, widowed." The epigram divorced, died, and widowed is widely known to scholars of Jordanian history, but there are a few historical nuances to consider. This is a close copy of Wives of Henry VIII, which contains the following: A mnemonic device to remember the names of Henry's consorts is "Arrogant Boys Seem Clever, Howard Particularly," indicating their "last names," as known to popular culture: Catherine of Aragon, Anne Boleyn, Jane Seymour, Anne of Cleves, Catherine Howard, Catherine Parr. A famous rhyme for their fates is: "Divorced, beheaded, died; Divorced, beheaded, survived." The epigram divorced, beheaded, died, divorced, beheaded, survived is widely known to Anglophone students of world history but there are a few historical footnotes to consider. This is a serious WP:OR issue on top of the equally serious WP:CONTENTFORK matter. Keivan.fTalk 07:26, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Anja Hirschel[edit]

Anja Hirschel (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:NPOL and WP:GNG. Subject currently doesn’t pass NPOL as city councilor, and is only contesting for a seat in the EU Parliament. Sources were insufficient to pass GNG. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 09:22, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 06:51, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. Tagesspiegel and SWP sources are sufficient for general notability. Cortador (talk) 16:01, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting as there is no consensus yet.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 05:50, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bandhan Mutual Fund[edit]

Bandhan Mutual Fund (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)

Renominating the article because it has been restored to its original state (after minimal participation in the previous AfD) and has not been modified since the date of its refund (12 May 2024). This circumstance provides ample reason to once again initiate the deletion of the article, based on the same rationale presented during the initial deletion discussion. - "Trivial coverage according to WP:ORGTRIV. Citations are collections of paid news which are highly pervasive and deeply integrated practice within Indian news media WP:NEWSORGINDIA. The primary issue arises from the editor's attempt to pass off two financial products (exchange traded funds), namely BANDHAN S&P BSE SENSEX ETF (BSE:540154) and BANDHAN NIFTY 50 ETF (NSE:IDFNIFTYYET), as company's own stock market listings, which they are not, thereby failing to adhere to WP:LISTED. A comparable effort was observed in the AFD discussion of Aditya Birla Sun Life Insurance, wherein the company tried to be part of NIFTY 50 without proper validation. In a nutshell, the company falls short when it comes to meeting WP:NCORP, WP:CORPDEPTH, WP:ORGIND." TCBT1CSI (talk) 07:37, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Not eligible for Soft Deletion (again)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 06:49, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 05:48, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WWRD-LP[edit]

WWRD-LP (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; some sources are dead links. Mvcg66b3r (talk) 05:40, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Arthur Sweetser[edit]

Arthur Sweetser (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 subject fails WP:GNG and has no particular claim to notability. JFHJr () 05:38, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mughal–Kashmir Wars[edit]

Mughal–Kashmir Wars (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 article literally has no sources or content in it. Based.Kashmiri (🗨️) 05:20, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rather than deleting the page, editors should work on it and improve it. It's an actual war provided with sufficient sources. Lightningblade23 (talk) 10:33, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The war is historically accurate. Citations and content can be added and the article can be improved but its deletion wouldn't be in good faith.EditorOnJob (talk) 12:13, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete or Draftify. Poor, unreliable and unverifiable sources excluding two by Mohibbul Hasan and Majumdar. The complete page is from source by Mohibbul Hasan from page 183 to 186 that has a mention of two wars fought in 1527 won by Kashmir Sultanates and the other in 1528 won by Mughals. Majumdar source is used for mention of Khanua battle that has nothing to do with Mughal-Kashmir wars. None of the other sources have any ascription. The page numbers on source templates for Hasan are wrong. The creator of the page should hold back from primary sources like Chādūrah, Ḥaydar Malik who was an administrator and soldier under Mughal emperor in 17th century, Baharistan-i-shahi, a Persian manuscript written by an anonymous author, presumably in early 17th century, Tarikh-i Firishta written by Muhammad Qasim Ferishta presumably between 16th and 17th century and also Babur-nama. Page is also WP:SYNTH when you read a content written "The Mughals faced the Chaks at Naushahra and, despite early success, were defeated and forced to retreat back to India." No phases of wars are supported by reliable sources. Draftify vote is if the creator can bring on reliable sources to support many phases of wars to consider the page an actual full fledged Mughal-Kashmir Sultanate wars. RangersRus (talk) 14:43, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Yet another WP:SYNTH like few other recently deleted pages revolving around the same subjects. Azuredivay (talk) 15:26, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting to assess recent contributions to the article since the deletion nomination says it has no sources and that is no longer true.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 05:34, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

FUCM[edit]

FUCM (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 wasn't able to find any coverage and the article doesn't link to anything that would establish notability. The article was created by User:Bamatfucm, and one of the founders of FUCM is Bam. toweli (talk) 05:31, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Only published independent sources I could find were: [4][5] [6], which don't establish notability.
Traumnovelle (talk) 06:58, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

1978 West Virginia judicial elections[edit]

1978 West Virginia judicial elections (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)
1980 West Virginia judicial elections (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
1982 West Virginia judicial elections (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

The West Virginia judicial election articles for 1978, 1980, and 1982 all fail WP:NOTDB. voorts (talk/contributions) 05:14, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep, as a malformed nomination. The justification given is an alias of WP:INDISCRIMINATE, which is fairly clear on what constitutes indiscriminate information, and none of the examples apply: a judicial election is not a "summary-only example of a creative work". It is not a "lyrics database". It is not an "excessive description of unexplained statistics". It is not "an exhaustive log of software updates". The third option mentions election statistics, but describes "unexplained" data taken out of context that might be too lengthy or confusing for readers: vote totals for each candidate are the opposite of that. WP:INDISCRIMINATE plainly does not apply to a straightforward description of an election. P Aculeius (talk) 11:28, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    The spirit of NOTDB is that data should be presented with independent sourcing to explain its importance. These articles are purely election results. Maybe merging them into one article with a general description of WV judicial elections would meet NLIST, but as of now, I don't think that these meet notability guidelines and NOPAGE applies. voorts (talk/contributions) 17:13, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per WP:ADHERENCE which says "the shortcut is not the policy". James500 (talk) 15:53, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I've now explained a bit more above why I think it fails NOTDB; I agree that I should have provided more of an explanation in my initial rationale. It's also not clear to me what ADHERENCE is trying to get at. The implication of linking to the policy is that I'm incorporating it by reference. voorts (talk/contributions) 17:29, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I have struck my !vote in the absence of evidence of GNG. INDISCRIMINATE does not say anything about explaining importance. NOTSTATS says "statistics that lack context or explanation can reduce readability and may be confusing", which may be what the first sentence of INDISCRIMINATE is talking about. I don't think anyone could be confused by these election results. James500 (talk) 19:24, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    The topic of West Virginia judicial elections satisfies GNG: [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12]. Only 1980 West Virginia judicial elections actually contains a single state supreme court election. James500 (talk) 20:02, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    If that article is created, I would support a merge of the Supreme Court portion of the 1980 article to that page, and redirect the rest. voorts (talk/contributions) 20:15, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I do not know if I have time to create an article on West Virginia judicial elections during this AfD. In the absence of such an article, I think that at least some of the material on the state supreme court election in 1980 West Virginia judicial elections be merged to Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia#Elections. I am satisfied that the state supreme court elections satisfy LISTN. There is also coverage of Judge Thomas E McHugh in newspapers, and coverage elsewhere such as [13]. James500 (talk) 17:58, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: An WP:ATD would be a redirect/merge to 1978 West Virginia elections, but that target does not currently exist. Curbon7 (talk) 17:35, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete all These are not notable elections - the West Virginia Circuit Courts are the lowest level of courts in the state, and we generally do not have articles for trial court elections in other states either. These barely receive even local attention, often unopposed as seen in several here. If the only source is the government's report of results, there is simply no basis for an article, as we are not a database of every minor election result. Supreme_Court_of_Appeals_of_West_Virginia#Elections could be expanded to have a subarticle for those statewide elections, but these fail WP:N. Reywas92Talk 01:48, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete all I do not think WP:NOTDB applies here - but I do not think they meet WP:GNG. SportingFlyer T·C 04:01, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Delete all: The elections in circuit court is rarely ever notable outside the county/circuit that the court is in. And sometimes not even that. West Virginia WXeditor (talk) 23:29, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I'm relisting this discussion due to the proposed Merge. But I can't close this as a Merge to a nonexistent article so there has to be some reassurance that said article will be created during this discussion or another Merge target article selected by consensus. Otherwise, this discussion will likely close as Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 05:29, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Elizabeth Young, Lady Kennet[edit]

Elizabeth Young, Lady Kennet (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 subject fails WP:GNG because only insubstantial coverage is indicated in articles that are all topically about her spouse, or published by her own school. She fails WP:GNG today and is unlikely to garner more substantial coverage in the future due to her being so dead. JFHJr () 05:11, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

360 Communities[edit]

360 Communities (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)

Doesn't seem to meet WP:NORG. jlwoodwa (talk) 04:55, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 04:58, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mark Trueblood[edit]

Mark Trueblood (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 subject fails WP:GNG and WP:NSCIENTIST. His singular discovery is not a notable event, just noteworthy (in the list where it appears). There's just not enough in unrelated third-party reliable sources about him to make an encyclopedic biography. JFHJr () 04:54, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Gemma Khalid[edit]

Gemma Khalid (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)

Significance for WP:BIO is not visible.--Анатолий Росдашин (talk) 03:18, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 04:50, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 04:55, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Vibratome[edit]

Vibratome (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 article was apparently created by a now-blocked paid editor working for a company in the industry. The content is partly how-to and partly promotional and partly trivia. Perhaps it's best to drop it entirely or trim most of it and merge anything worth keeping into Microtome#Vibrating? -- Beland (talk) 02:22, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. Beland (talk) 02:22, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Ah, my mistake; it was created by User:Davidswanepoel; the blocked User:M66JX did not start editing it until October 2023. Some spammy content was added by User:Neurolady27, who also attempted to create Precisionary Instruments. This was the company that apparently paid M66JX, so now I'm wondering if this was actually a second paid editor or account? -- Beland (talk) 02:36, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak delete: This is an important tool in histology and pathology laboratories, but most of the sources are about technique, not the machine itself. If kept, the "In media" section has to go, 100% SYNTH. WeirdNAnnoyed (talk) 14:33, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • My initial impression is that vibrating microtome is sufficiently notable that it should have an article. I don't think the article should be named after one company's trademark. I would say, weak keep and rename vibrating microtome, but I don't object to merging into Microtome#Vibrating or WP:TNT and starting afresh at Vibrating microtome. Mgp28 (talk) 21:53, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Is there more support for a possible Merge?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 04:49, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 04:53, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mont-Tremblant/Lac Ouimet Water Aerodrome[edit]

Mont-Tremblant/Lac Ouimet Water Aerodrome (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:NBUILDING and WP:GNG. Long defunct airport, Only "reference" stated is the Nav Canada Wikipedia article, which make no mention of this airport, and is improper as Wikipedia is not a reliable source.

Note: this is TC LID CST9, NOT Mont-Tremblant/Saint-Jovite Airport (TC LID: CSZ3), so if you are determining if there are any WP:RS to find, they are different airports. Zinnober9 (talk) 02:15, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Travel and tourism, Transportation, and Canada. Zinnober9 (talk) 02:15, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. The 15 March 2007 Canada Flight Supplement mentioned in the article is a valid reference. Eastmain (talkcontribs) 05:45, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Aviation-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch 06:14, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - The nominator is mistaken about the source. The information is not sourced from, or claimed to be sourced from the Nav Canada Wikipedia article, but rather the Canada Water Aerodrome Supplement. The link to the Wikipedia article is for clarity as the CWAS does not appear to be available online other than for purchase from Nav Canada. - ZLEA T\C 07:06, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Redirect. This is a 2005 article created when Wikipedia was much smaller, articles like this were welcomed, and notability was perhaps a bit looser. However, there was never any ideas as to the fate of abandoned aerodrome articles. Some have been redirected to "List of airports in province", others to List of defunct airports in Canada, and others still remain. The only thing this aerodrome has going for it in terms of notability is that there was a death associated with it. Doesn't really make it notable. As per the others the source is the printed, water, version of the Canada Flight Supplement. I owned copies but haven't bought one in a few years. CambridgeBayWeather (solidly non-human), Uqaqtuq (talk), Huliva 15:16, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 04:48, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect. User:Hamterous1 (discuss anything!🐹✈️) 18:24, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: If this article was Redirected, what would be the target articles? This needs to be identified if you are suggesting a Redirect or Merge.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 04:52, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WEEE-LP[edit]

WEEE-LP (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 meet the GNG. Mvcg66b3r (talk) 04:49, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Tennessee. Mvcg66b3r (talk) 04:49, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak keep The station was Knoxville's UPN affiliate in the early 2000s and got some significant coverage in that era. Sammi Brie (she/her • tc) 06:36, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WFEM-LP[edit]

WFEM-LP (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 meet the GNG. Mvcg66b3r (talk) 04:48, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bass 305[edit]

Bass 305 (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 band. Fails WP:BAND. SL93 (talk) 04:30, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • I did do WP:BEFORE. I already explained the nomination. Just read WP:BAND. I refuse to regurgitate the guideline. SL93 (talk) 03:57, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 04:48, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Peterson Electro-Musical Products[edit]

Peterson Electro-Musical Products (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:NORG Once you take out the primary sources (source 1 and 2), you are left with 3 sources used for brief statements. source 3 is a product review thus not SIGCOV, 4 is a product listing thus not RS, source 5 is an ad in a magazine, thus fails RS. A search for sources turned up a mix of product sites, database entries, Social Media and other Primary sources. Prod objected to on the basis that: " longstanding, well-developed article deserves additional review" Lavalizard101 (talk) 22:03, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I quickly ran another search on a few product names to see if I was right, and I appear to be.
https://charlestonclassicalguitar.org/blog/2023/09/24/peterson-stroboclip-hd-review-precision-tuning-at-your-fingertips/
https://guitarinteractivemagazine.com/review/peterson-stroboplus-hd/
https://www.guitarworld.com/news/peterson-stroboplus-hdc
https://www.musicradar.com/news/peterson-stroboplus-hdc-guitar-tuner
https://www.premierguitar.com/gear/quick-hit-peterson-strobostomp-hd-review
https://www.soundonsound.com/reviews/peterson-stroboplus-hd
https://www.soundonsound.com/reviews/peterson-vs1
https://mixdownmag.com.au/reviews/hardware-and-accesories/reviewed-peterson-stroboplus-hd/ (no byline)
Warren L.T. Peace (talk) 22:24, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Source review of your source list:
  • source 1: a brief routine press release about the company reaching 75 years, does not contribute to notability
  • source 2 and 3: the same press release published by two different publisher, about the passing of the founder does not contribute to notability
  • If I remember correctly product reviews that focus on one product are not WP:SIGCOV of the company, thus do not contribute to notability of the company.
SO in essence no SIGCOV that is required to pass GNG. Lavalizard101 (talk) 12:33, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Reviews that narrowly focus on a particular product or function without broader context (e.g. review of a particular meal without description of the restaurant as a whole) do not count as significant sources from WP:PRODUCTREV. Lavalizard101 (talk) 12:34, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oh it does seem that those first three are press releases. Sorry. However, if if product reviews are not permitted, you should start nominating most articles about records for deletion as reviews are all that sustain them. The same goes for record labels. I suggest that you go back and try to do searches, as I suggested. There is a lot written about their products and the company. Their products are used widely in the music industry and the (and the company) have been written about. Warren L.T. Peace (talk) 21:31, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
As for WP:PRODUCTREV there are three caveats: the reviews must be 1) significant, 2) independent and 3) reliable, which the sources I provided are (except the one without a byline). And for what it is worth, I did not try hard to find sources. Warren L.T. Peace (talk) 21:37, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Again Reviews that narrowly focus on a particular product ... do not count as significant sources So no the product reviews are not significant. What PRODUCTREV means by the caveats is that if the product review gives a broader review e.g. such as reviewing the product as part of a company review and that this company review section must be significant. Lavalizard101 (talk) 09:39, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
if product reviews are not permitted, you should start nominating most articles about records for deletion as reviews are all that sustain them err no need. WP:PRODUCTREV is a subset of WP:NORG, records have a different guideline WP:NSONG which allows critical reviews. Different topics have different notability guidelines. Lavalizard101 (talk) 09:44, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Then a move may be in order. Either way, we'll see what other have to write about the subject. Warren L.T. Peace (talk) 00:47, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Not one of the facts attributed to non-independent sources 1 and 2 in the article are found in those sources. It is quite possible that the web site has changed considerably since 2011, but this means that very little of the article can be verified and that the content attributed to those sources must be removed. The resulting article will be very thin indeed. Yes, there are product "descriptions" as noted above, and a few that are more than just recitations of product details, but I don't think that product listings or reviews alone rise to NCORP. We would need some substantial sources about the company itself. I did find some mentions in books: mention1, mention2, but just mentions. The most ample source of information is the obit in Premier Guitar, but that isn't enough to achieve NCORP. Lamona (talk) 01:14, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 03:59, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per above. This subject fails both WP:GNG (especially as to substantial/in-depth and enduring qualities) and WP:NCORP. Cheers. JFHJr () 04:43, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WVTN-LD[edit]

WVTN-LD (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 meet the GNG. Mvcg66b3r (talk) 03:58, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of A.D. Isidro Metapan players[edit]

List of A.D. Isidro Metapan players (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)

WP:LISTN is not met here due to a lack of coverage of the subjects as a group. As it stands, this is an indiscriminate list of mostly non-notable people. Let'srun (talk) 03:28, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of companies based in Kent, Washington[edit]

List of companies based in Kent, Washington (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)

WP:LISTN is not met; I could not find any coverage relevant to the topic. Let'srun (talk) 03:21, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sascha Grabow[edit]

Sascha Grabow (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 individual has not received significant coverage in reliable sources to warrant a stand-alone article. He is among many people to have to visited most of the world's countries, but this is not particularly exceptional and does not confer notability per WP:BLP1E. gobonobo + c 02:26, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. Liz Read! Talk! 07:33, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Legitimacy of Volodymyr Zelenskyy[edit]

Legitimacy of Volodymyr Zelenskyy (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 absolutely not for challenging the "legitimacy" of politicians and their rule. See WP:SOAP.Ratnahastin (talk) 02:52, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! WP:SOAP has five different subcategories. Could you be more specific, please? The article is not about challenging anything, it covers the debate, cites legislative acts. I'd be glad to hear your concerns to make the article better. Steffuld (talk) 08:33, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Right from the start, the article relies on a bunch of op-eds, which are insufficient establish notability. The legal section is just inserted without context. The "private observers" bit is one article weasel-worded into a larger issue. At most, this could be merged into the Zelenskyy article. Cortador (talk) 16:09, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Hello! Thank you for pointing out questionable sources. I've added the Background section to provide the context and rewrote the Other concerns section to cover more sources. Steffuld (talk) 19:44, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Inserting a legal section without context is a WP:SYNTH feature. JFHJr () 02:54, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I could close this as a Soft Deletion but I think this discussion warrants more time and participation for other editors.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 02:16, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge/Delete, fail to see why this merits it's own article instead of being brought up in relevant articles. Traumnovelle (talk) 02:28, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, the reliable sources cited in the article describe this subject as "a Russian propaganda claim".[14] Much of the body text cites primary source documents. Rjjiii (talk) 05:02, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom and per Rjjiii. JFHJr () 05:23, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. Liz Read! Talk! 07:34, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wichita Falls Diablos[edit]

Wichita Falls Diablos (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)

Semi-pro indoor football team which played a handful of games in its only year of existence in 2008. The most coverage I found was this and this. JTtheOG (talk) 02:27, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 02:13, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete Traumnovelle (talk) 02:31, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. No coverage indicating enduring significance is likely to crop up. JFHJr () 02:55, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

Alphonse Crespo[edit]

Alphonse Crespo (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 subject fails WP:GNG and all other notability metrics. Clear promotion and cruft (primary sources, Amazon...) JFHJr () 01:54, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Creative Vault Studios[edit]

Creative Vault Studios (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 notability IgelRM (talk) 01:55, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Peter Riva[edit]

Peter Riva (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 subject fails WP:GNG and WP:NARTIST. Marked for COI and primary sourcing issues over 10 years ago, this article's sourcing still consists of 1) coverage about other topics that merely mention the subject, and 2) primary sources. JFHJr () 01:51, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Astra Superstars[edit]

Astra Superstars (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 could not find any coverage in reliable sources, hence fails both WP:GNG and WP:NVG. Cocobb8 (💬 talk • ✏️ contribs) 01:47, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kave Terminal[edit]

Kave Terminal (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 can't find any GNG or RS Claggy (talk) 01:29, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. Liz Read! Talk! 07:35, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of CFL on TSN commentators[edit]

List of CFL on TSN commentators (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 meet the WP:LISTN as this is not a grouping discussed in non-primary sources. PROD was declined without a clear rationale, so bringing this to AfD. Let'srun (talk) 02:12, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Already PROD'd so Soft Deletion is not an option.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 01:10, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per above. Traumnovelle (talk) 02:47, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

WUJX-LD[edit]

WUJX-LD (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 meet the GNG. Mvcg66b3r (talk) 01:50, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 01:07, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WMUB-LD[edit]

WMUB-LD (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; questionable sourcing. Merge with Mercer University#Student life. Mvcg66b3r (talk) 01:45, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 01:07, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The San Francisco Improv Alliance[edit]

The San Francisco Improv Alliance (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 no sources, I cannot find any sources, and the group is possibly defunct given that their website is a dead link. The group's founder may have created this page, given the username. The creator's other article also has cites no sources, though I will attempt to find some before recommending deletion for that as well. Wikipedaen (talk) 00:42, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Val Ramos[edit]

Val Ramos (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 carried out WP:BEFORE on this unreferenced biography of a musician, and cannot find coverage to add. I do not think the subject meets WP:GNG, WP:ANYBIO or WP:NMUSIC. Tacyarg (talk) 00:38, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files[edit]

File:Page from Watson.png[edit]

File:Page from Watson.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Serial Number 54129 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

This is a copyrighted page (link). Magog the Ogre (tc) 02:57, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Batangas city center - Plaza Mabini (statue) (Batangas City)(2018-07-30).jpg[edit]

File:Batangas city center - Plaza Mabini (statue) (Batangas City)(2018-07-30).jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Patrickroque01 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Sculpture might not be free in the United States. Assuming the sculptor is anonymous, it is already in public domain in the Philippines by 2002 (1951+50+1 years), since it was made in 1951. But due to the WP:URAA and as a pre-1978 work of art, the sculpture won't be in public domain in the United States until January 1, 2047 (95+1 years after public display of the monument). If the applicable exception for commercial uses of public art becomes existing in the Philippines, this image can be undeleted and transferred to Commons. But until then, this image is not free in the U.S. and should be removed. Enwiki is bound to follow the laws of the United States as per WP:Freedom of panorama; the U.S. law does not provide FoP for copyrighted public sculptures and artworks. No use of turning this into "fair use" file because there is no article on the monument itself. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 03:25, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Cherbiy.jpg[edit]

File:Cherbiy.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Rsf7589 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Cover art of less successful cover recording. Omitting the image may not impact understanding of the song originally done by earlier artist. May fail "contextual significance" criterion. George Ho (talk) 05:41, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Categories[edit]

NEW NOMINATIONS[edit]

Category:People educated at Skerry's College[edit]

Nominator's rationale: Non-defining. Skerry's College wasn't an individual college, it was a series of courses that preped you for the civil servants examine. Mason (talk) 04:10, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:British LGBT civil servants[edit]

Nominator's rationale: Non-defining intersection between being LGBT and being a civil servant. Per EGRS, the intersection must be relevant. Notably, there isn't a LGBT civil servant category. Mason (talk) 04:06, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Rhythm games[edit]

Nominator's rationale: Some may not agree with me but there are several reasons I have for this merge. First of all, many video games labeled as a rhythm game in their articles are instead located in Category:Music video games, and now especially since I recently removed all subcategories in this category except for Rhythmic action games. Secondly, the five languages that this category is also in (please ignore the French version since it has over a hundred articles but was created over a decade ago unlike the English version) have only a few articles in each one. Finally, rhythm game and music game may be different things, but the category for music video games as whole contains subcategories for various types of music game, often distinct from rhythm games, such as Karaoke or Dance games. QuantumFoam66 (talk) 04:06, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose, I can't really see a problem here, neither of the three arguments is convincing. If many articles about rhythm games are not in this category yet, they should be added. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:21, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Video games about undead and monsters[edit]

Nominator's rationale: I honestly want the category Video games about legendary creatures to be reverted, neither category alone is very populated in either way. QuantumFoam66 (talk) 03:25, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Federation of Asian Muaythai Associations member associations[edit]

Nominator's rationale: Upmerge. Multiple redundant category layers Mason (talk) 02:45, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Music series[edit]

Nominator's rationale: So it is a video game series titled "Music". "Music series" is a bit to board i think. QuantumFoam66 (talk) 01:54, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Rota (island)[edit]

Nominator's rationale: To match article name - moved due to recent consensus that WP:USPLACE covers U.S. territories. -- Beland (talk) 06:17, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 00:27, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Tinian[edit]

Nominator's rationale: To match article name, which was changed per recent consensus that WP:USPLACE applies to U.S. territories. -- Beland (talk) 06:26, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 00:27, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Saipan[edit]

Nominator's rationale: To match the article name, which was just changed because of recent consensus that WP:USPLACE applies to U.S. territories. -- Beland (talk) 06:47, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • WP:USPLACE does not apply to islands, does it? Besides articles about towns on Saipan are formatted as "town, Saipan", not as "town, Northern Mariana Islands". Marcocapelle (talk) 06:48, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 00:27, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Sexuality-related controversies in film[edit]

Nominator's rationale: After purging, there is a single member of the category (Roman Polanski sexual abuse case). Upmerge to parents for now without prejudice against recreation if it can be appropriately populated. HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 00:14, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirects[edit]

HD resolution[edit]

The aspect ratio is not itself "HD", this is misleading and confusing. I'm not sure where this redirect should lead, maybe High-definition television? Leaving that up to people with a better understanding of the area than me. Rusalkii (talk) 21:21, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Weak retarget to 720p, as I'd say that would be the most precise target for "HD resolution", and HD resolution by itself most commonly refers to 720p / 1280x720, the first resolution considered "HD". I would probably also add a hatnote at the top of the article saying something like "HD resolution redirects here. For the broader topic, see High-definition video." for if readers want to know more about other resolutions that are considered 'HD' / have 'HD' in the name. Otherwise, other ideas I have are High-definition video (a broader topic than High-definition television), or convert to a disambiguation page that includes all three aforementioned topics. Note: I've also added the alternative capitalisation redirect Hd resolution to the nomination. — AP 499D25 (talk) 13:29, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment though HD commonly refers to 1080i/1080p, and not 720, which is EDTV, enhanced definition, or 540p, standard definition -- 65.92.244.237 (talk) 21:49, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      1080p is officially referred to as 'Full HD' though. — AP 499D25 (talk) 03:50, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • DAB, nowadays this is used for 1080p resolution, but historically anything from 720p, 1080i, 1080p were all considered 'HD' resolution. Maybe other formats too, but those are very minor. Alternatively, a redirect to High-definition television would also be fine. Maybe even High-definition television#Display resolutions. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 23:15, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to High-definition television#Display resolutions as per Headbomb. It's the closest we have to an existing list of "HD resolutions", and if the reader wanted instead a discussion of "HD resolution" in general... they need merely to scroll up. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 23:57, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 08:52, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If you wanna make the world a better place, take a look at yourself and make a change[edit]

Lyric from the song not mentioned in target. Rusalkii (talk) 20:34, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Delete or keep?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 08:51, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Moon of the Spider(novel)[edit]

Can't be speedily deleted due to significant edit history, though I doubt the consensus would be any different here. 104.7.152.180 (talk) 03:49, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per WP:RDAB: this is still an implausible search term even if it doesn’t qualify for WP:X3. InterstellarGamer12321 (talk | contribs) 13:02, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete it was an article for several months in 2009/2010 but doesn't appear to contain any content not in Moon of the Spider. Crouch, Swale (talk) 17:17, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep to preserve edit history and attribution, due to its content being merged into the target. This is exactly why it is not eligible for speedy deletion. Fieari (talk) 23:53, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Are there any diffs that attest to this merge? I don't see it in the target's history. All I see is a merge from Moon of the Spider. And that one has no merges at all in its edit history, so how did content from the nominated page end up in the target? Nickps (talk) 02:17, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Delete or keep?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 08:49, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

User:67.100.217.179[edit]

I see no good reason to have an IP redirect to a registered User's page. If the IP starts editing again, this will make it difficult to contact them. Nickps (talk) 00:55, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Like the RFD below this one, this 2008-era redirect was created by user:Linas themselves; although the redirect's edit history is more vague as to why, it's easy to assume that it's because this IP was what Linas posted as before they made their account, similarly to Moritheil below. However, again just like the RFD below this one, there's no guarantee that the IP address still leads to Linas themselves-- they could have easily moved to a new location, swapped ISP, or done any of the numerous other methods of getting a new IP in the intervening 15 years since this redirect was created. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 01:21, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It's actually even more clear than that. Linas now edits under a different IP address. This can be seen on their talk page. Nickps (talk) 01:31, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

User:199.74.100.109[edit]

I see no good reason to have an IP redirect to a registered User's page. If the IP starts editing again, this will make it difficult to contact them. Nickps (talk) 00:55, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: The edit history indicates this 2009-era redirect was created by user:Moritheil themselves, due to being what they posted as before they made an account. However, there's no guarantee that the IP address still leads to Moritheil themselves-- they could have easily moved to a new location, swapped ISP, or done any of the numerous other methods of getting a new IP in the intervening 15 years since this redirect was created. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 01:17, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Glory Hallelujah[edit]

Fairly common phrase (I thought of Battle Hymn of the Republic); redirect to this relatively obscure song would likely be surprising. May merit a disambig page instead. Rusalkii (talk) 00:27, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Templates and Modules[edit]

Template:José Clímaco[edit]

No linked article. All red links. Content at José_Clímaco#Filmography --Min☠︎rax«¦talk¦» 05:36, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Miscellany[edit]

Alternate history userpages by Heatyeet[edit]

User:Heatyeet/Micronesian Civil War (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User:Heatyeet/First Krakoan Federation (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User:Heatyeet/Hopara Valley Massacre (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User:Heatyeet/Krakoa (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User:Heatyeet/Onkardo (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User:Heatyeet/Krakoan Revolution (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) – (View MfD)​

Per WP:FAKEARTICLE, appears to be historical fiction or alternate history. It's probably not intended to be a hoax, but it might as well be one. This is for websites like Fandom. Air on White (talk) 05:06, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion review[edit]