Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/Today

Purge
Shortcut WP:AFD/T

5 October 2024

Read how to nominate an article for deletion.

Recent AfDs: Today Yesterday

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

< October 04	October 06 >

Guide to deletion

Purge server cache

Franja de Gaza

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

No sources other than self-sources since 2009. Based on the lack of sources, it looks not notable. Brunnaiz (talk) 22:17, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Argentina-related deletion discussions. --Brunnaiz (talk) 22:18, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Laxmichya Paulanni

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

Attempted redirect as there is no significant coverage that shows notability outside of unreliable sources, mentions, and general announcements. Created by blocked user and IPs (likely LOUTSOCKs) have objected to the redirect so here we are. CNMall41 (talk) 21:55, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and India. CNMall41 (talk) 21:55, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge with Gaatchora: not sure why there's no Adaptations/Remakes section there. Not opposed to deletion given the existing coverage, which allows verification: notable music director and notable cast. So very opposed to deletion. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 22:00, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The edit summary notes why it was removed. --CNMall41 (talk) 22:47, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Maharashtra-related deletion discussions. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 22:02, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Alimetry Limited

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

I don't see Alimetry Limited passing WP:NCORP. Unfortunately, I think I have declined this twice at AFC, yet the page creator would do a little improvement and resubmit. Following this way, I think it's wayward and not good to keep declining (even from another reviewer), when the article doesn't meet the minimum consideration, hence more participation would be good at AFD.

Quite a long article, source one is purely unreliable and it references the company's non notable product. The second one thebit.nz is also unreliable, and even though NZRS was edited years ago, I don't see the source's editorial integrity of this likely WP:BLOG. Source 7 didn't tell us about the "Gastric Alimetry", instead, about the effects of gastric disorders, which didn't even mention the product.

New Zealand International Business Awards (sources to a blog from a reliable source), the Arobia Trailblazer Innovation Grant, and Medtronic APAC innovation Challenge aren't notable awards per WP:NAWARDS, and same is applicable to the NZ Hi-Tech Awards. There also appear to be an over-detailed contents in the sections, "Technology" and "Clinical Research". Regulatory approvals doesn't justify notability. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 18:16, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Health and fitness, Organizations, and New Zealand. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 18:18, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:18, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Fails WP:ORGCRIT. I was a bit shocked to see SS accept this, only to become satisfied with seeing the AfD as their intention was right. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 19:44, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - References fail WP:ORGCRIT. For example, the most significant sourcing comes from this publication which seems to be a blog that sells advertisements and has no editorial oversight.--CNMall41 (talk) 20:37, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Safari Scribe, I fully appreciate that organisations on Wikipedia should be treated with appropriate scrutiny when publishing articles. However, I feel that the appropriate due diligence on the references provided for this article has not been done.

To the points about the reliability of the first two sources, the first source comes from the website for New Zealand’s annual Tech Week, an industry initiative to foster engagement with technology around New Zealand. The article however, was first featured on ‘see tomorrow first’ a government-funded initiative (https://www.seetomorrowfirst.nz/domestic) (https://nztech.org.nz/2022/02/22/launch-of-nzs-tech-story-and-brand-platform-we-see-tomorrow-first/). I have updated this reference to include the see tomorrow first feature also. Thebit is a technology-focussed online newspaper that partners with Stuff.co.nz (featured on the NZRS). I have added a reference where this same article was published there as well.

Source 7 is only about the product. The Wikipedia article outlines ‘The Gastric Alimetry device employs patented body surface gastric mapping technology, utilizing a sensor array and connector to detect electrophysiological data from the stomach.’, and source 7 is a peer-reviewed paper that outlines the different components of Alimetry’s Gastric Alimetry product and its validation. Alimetry is stated several times in the article, and the visual abstract mentions both ‘Alimetry’ and ‘Gastric Alimetry.’

I believe WP:NAWARDS is not the appropriate article for establishing the notability and reliability of these awards, as this article outlines the requirements for a stand-alone article for an award. In this article, I am only citing these awards as evidence. While the Ārohia grant does not have its own Wikipedia page, Callaghan Innovation who awarded it does, and there is plenty of evidence online to showcase that it is a New Zealand government entity (https://www.callaghaninnovation.govt.nz/about-us/). The NZ Hi-tech awards have been a showcase of the best tech companies in NZ since 1994 and have received independent new coverage each year around the awards (https://www.hitech.org.nz/more/about/). Although Wikipedia:Awards and accolades is in draft form, Alimetry Limited’s award references do meet this criteria.

Detailed feedback like this is appreciated to create a better article. I have also completed a notability assessment of all the sources and I hope this has addressed some of your concerns which will allow this article to stay published.

Source	Independent?	Reliable?	Significant coverage?	Count source toward GNG?
Source assessment table:
https://techweek.co.nz/news/alimetry-decoding-the-gut/	This was published independently of Alimetry	TechWeek is supported by several industry and government bodies in New Zealand and is an annual national event	It is a profile on Alimetry the company and it's product Gastric Alimetry	✔ Yes
https://www.seetomorrowfirst.nz/international/news/alimetry-decoding-the-gut	This was published independently of Alimetry	See Tomorrow First is a New Zealand Government funded organisation	It is a profile on Alimetry and its product Gastric Alimetry	✔ Yes
https://thebit.nz/deep-dive/alimetry-the-auckland-startup-that-wants-to-digitise-your-gut/	There are no associations with Alimetry	~ The author is not stated	It is an in-depth profile on Alimetry	~ Partial
https://www.stuff.co.nz/technology/thebit-nz/300361341/alimetry-the-auckland-startup-that-wants-to-digitise-your-gut	Stuff is an independent newspaper	Stuff in a national online news hub	It is an in-depth profile on Alimetry	✔ Yes
https://www.nzte.govt.nz/blog/meet-the-winners-of-the-new-zealand-international-business-awards-2023	NZTE is independent of Alimetry	NZTE is a government organisation	A profile on the company	✔ Yes
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/2022-hi-tech-awards-three-gongs-for-alimetry-mccrae-honoured/7YDWLXAQWTRAB6MI2RE5FBCA7M/	NZ Herald is an independent newspaper	NZ Herald is a national newspaper	A profile on Alimetry	✔ Yes
https://thebit.nz/deep-dive/alimetry-the-auckland-startup-that-wants-to-digitise-your-gut/	TheBit is an independent news source	~ Specific author unknown	A lengthy profile on Alimetry	~ Partial
https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/cdrh_docs/pdf21/K213924.pdf	the FDA is an independent source	The FDA is a government organisation	Alimetry's 510(k) approval letter	✔ Yes
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/the-listener/health/nz-researchers-make-major-tech-breakthrough-for-diagnosing-gut-problems/AII2GPGTPNG7BBAUNSEJIJOVQM/	NZ Herald is an independent newspaper	NZ Herald is a national newspaper	A profile on Alimetry	✔ Yes
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10078595/	A peer-reviewed independent journal	A peer-reviewed journal article	the paper outlines the Gastric Alimetry product in detail	✔ Yes
https://journals.physiology.org/doi/full/10.1152/ajpgi.00049.2022	A peer-reviewed independent journal	A peer-reviewed journal article	the paper discusses the Gastric Alimetry technology in detail	✔ Yes
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10042458/	A peer-reviewed independent journal	A peer-reviewed journal article	the paper discusses the Gastric Alimetry technology in detail	✔ Yes
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36534985/	A peer-reviewed independent journal	A peer-reviewed journal article	the paper discusses the Gastric Alimetry technology in detail	✔ Yes
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10495352/	A peer-reviewed independent journal	A peer-reviewed journal article	the paper discusses the Gastric Alimetry technology in detail	✔ Yes
https://www.callaghaninnovation.govt.nz/stories/first-arohia-innovation-trailblazer-grant-recipients/	Callaghan Innovation is a government organisation and is independent of Alimetry	Callaghan Innovation is a NZ government organisation	A profile on Alimetry winning the grant	✔ Yes
https://www.healthcareitnews.com/news/anz/roundup-clinician-alimetry-win-medtronic-apac-innovation-challenge-nzhit-rebrands-digital	Healthcare IT news is independent of Alimetry	It is a global healthcare news source	Description of the award Alimetry won	✔ Yes
https://bestawards.co.nz/value-of-design-award/alimetry/gastric-alimetry-1/	The Best Awards are independent of Alimetry	The Best Awards are a national design awards event that began in the mid-70s in NZ	A profile on the award Alimetry won	✔ Yes
https://bestawards.co.nz/studios/alimetry/	The Best Awards are independent of Alimetry	The Best Awards are a national design awards event that began in the mid-70s in NZ	A profile on the award Alimetry won	✔ Yes
https://good-design.org/projects/gastric-alimetry/	The Good design awards are an independent award	The Good Design awards are an Australian award that began in 1958.	A profile on Alimetry	✔ Yes
https://www.movac.co.nz/fund-5/investment-notes-alimetry/	Movac is an investor in Alimetry but Alimetry had no input into the content of this article	Movac is NZ's oldest venture capital firm	A profile on their decision to invest in Alimetry	✔ Yes
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/the-next-fp-healthcare-alimetry-raises-16m-for-breakthrough-product/YN3MQPXHRNS2FGZJU2SABF2LSQ/	NZ Herald is an independent newspaper	NZ Herald is a national newspaper	A profile on Alimetry	✔ Yes
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}}.

Odal46 (talk) 20:19, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep this passes WP:GNG and WP:ORGCRIT in my opinion: we have an entire NZ Herald article; an entire article in The Listener; a Stuff article (see below); plus the industry body awards mentioned above. Not that the criticism of "TheBit.NZ" website made above might be valid, but the article was republished by Stuff, which does maintain editorial oversight on that they publish. Therefore I think it inherits the credibility of that outlet (which is high). David Palmer//cloventt ^(talk) 20:55, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment/request: @Odal46: Would you mind declaring any conflict of interest you have with either the company or any of its associated personnel? DerbyCountyinNZ ^{(Talk Contribs)} 07:02, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, should have checked. The user has in fact declared a COI [1]. DerbyCountyinNZ ^{(Talk Contribs)} 07:31, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: A critical source assessment from a non-COI editor would be helpful.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 21:13, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

John Frankel (financier)

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

Fails WP:GNG as there is no significant coverage. There are mentions and plenty of interviews and him giving advice, but nothing in-depth about him that is reliable. There are references such as this in Inc.com, but when you look closer you can see this is a contributor submitted piece with no editorial oversight, similar to others out there. I would recommend a redirect to ff Venture Capital but that was recently tagged for notability by another editor. CNMall41 (talk) 20:54, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Finance. CNMall41 (talk) 20:55, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, United Kingdom, and New York. Shellwood (talk) 21:15, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 22:15, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

1970 Bhojpur uprising

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

Much of the content has nothing to do with the actual incident which is itself non-notable. The subject as a whole fails WP:GNG. Ratnahastin (talk) 16:09, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, History, and Bihar. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 16:18, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Strong keep the nominator should have researched about the subject before nominating this. There are several high quality journals that are strictly written on this topic. Atleast they should have gone through reference section where they could've found following:

Sinha, Arun (1978). "Class War in Bhojpur: I". Economic and Political Weekly. 13 (1): 10–11. JSTOR 4366262.
Mukherjee, Kalyan (1979). "Peasant Revolt in Bhojpur". Economic and Political Weekly. 14 (36): 1536–38. JSTOR 4367921.
Rajendra Singh Yadav, Kalyan Mukherjee (1982). "For reasons of state: Oppression and resistance a study of Bhojpur peasantry, The Journal of Peasant Studies, 9:3". : Agrarian Movements in India: Studies on 20th Century Bihar: 119–147. doi:10.1080/03066158208438175. S2CID 154841960.
Sinha, Arun (1978). "Class War in Bhojpur: II". Economic and Political Weekly. 13 (3): 90–92. JSTOR 4366310..Admantine123 (talk) 17:01, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Explain how any of these sources establish WP:GNG. Ratnahastin (talk) 17:06, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is a significant event of the History of Bihar like Bihar movement. The Naxalism in Bihar has been a highly notable subject to write as in the history of Bihar, we have read caste wars happening over the decades between various faction of society for land and political power. This significant subject throws light on the early events sparking the naxalite movement in plains of central Bihar after it first emerged in the neighbouring state of West Bengal. You talk about "passing mention", let me tell there are seperate books written on the movement like some of the journals I have mentioned there. Anyone with fair judgement would have gauged the notability of the article. Admantine123 (talk) 00:52, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You were asked to describe how does those cited sources establish WP:GNG. I am not asking why do you believe this subject is important. Ratnahastin (talk) 01:31, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What is the definition of Notability according to you? Admantine123 (talk) 03:55, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Articles generally require significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the topic. Ratnahastin (talk) 04:03, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

So you got in these sources published by scholarly journals. Admantine123 (talk) 05:43, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No because you are yet to explain how any of these sources establish WP:GNG. Ratnahastin (talk) 07:11, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Passing mentions don't count when it comes to establish notability. Dympies (talk) 03:39, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Clearly passes WP:GNG, many reputed media articles, journals available on internet! Youknow? (talk) 10:55, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Seems insignificant to begin with. Captain AmericanBurger1775 (talk) 16:31, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: As per the sources/journals, the article obviously passes GNG; there's no reason for deletion of the same! Ekdalian (talk) 08:55, 1 October 2024 (UTC) — Note: An editor has expressed a concern that Ekdalian (talk • contribs) has been canvassed to this discussion. (diff)[reply]
Keep – For those who still don't know, the article is about the Naxalite movement in Bhojpur, which started in the early 1970s. The topic is widely covered in scholarship and is clearly notable. I just needed to do a cursory search to find the following in-depth scholarly sources that are not even cited in the article, although most of the details covered in them are already summarised in it:

Kala, Manju; Maharaj, R. N.; Mukherjee, Kalyan (1986). "Peasant Unrest in Bhojpur: A Survey". In Desai, A. R. (ed.). Agrarian Struggles in India After Independence. Oxford University Press. pp. 263–274. ISBN 978-0-19-561681-1. Archived from the original on 12 May 2021.

[Check from The Movement section onwards of p. 263, although previous pages are also relevant, as they give the movement's background]

Sinha, Arun (1978). "The Awakening in Bhojpur". In Sen, Samar; Panda, Debabrata; Lahiri, Ashish (eds.). Naxalbari and After: A Frontier Anthology, Vol. 1. Kathashilpa. pp. 264–290. OCLC 1150867358. Archived from the original on 19 August 2019.

[this book's review: https://www.jstor.org/stable/4367846]

Das, Arvind N. (1983). "Agrarian Change from Above and Below; Bihar 1947–78". In Guha, Ranajit (ed.). Subaltern Studies II: Writings on South Asian History and Society. Oxford University Press. pp. 221–226. ISBN 978-0-19-561502-9. Archived from the original on 25 September 2018.
Banerjee, Sumanta (1984). India’s Simmering Revolution: The Naxalite Uprising. Zed Books. pp. 301–305. ISBN 978-0-86232-037-9. Archived from the original on 22 December 2023.

All of these sources give in-depth coverage of the Bhojpur movement. In fact, the article is already well-sourced and detailed. Having said that, the title of the article isn't good. It should be Naxalite movement in Bhojpur because that's how sources describe this movement, e.g. see here. Note that sources also describe it as Bhojpur movement (see here), although that title seems a bit ambiguous to me. - NitinMlk (talk) 19:16, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Then you should create a Naxalite movement in Bhojpur or Bhojpur movement because that is a broader topic while this AfD concerns a non-notable event. Ratnahastin (talk) 04:52, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ratnahastin, I don't think you read the article, let alone the sources. The whole article from the first till the last sentence is about the Naxalite movement in Bhojpur. It already covers all relevant details of the 1970s as well as its background. So I don't need to create an article that already exists. The article requires page move, not deletion. Note that all these details were already there in the article before you nominated it. - NitinMlk (talk) 06:25, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think we should consider supporting the move to "Naxalite movement in Bhojpur" Ratnahastin (talk) 06:43, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The two votes of delete are frivolous. These editors are somehow related to Rajput article. This nomination happened after I checked the recent disruptive activity on Rajput article which was not liked by some. Bishonen is aware of the problem associated with this caste article. In past, you (Ratnahastin) were also in edit dispute with me over Rajput caste related articles. Admantine123 (talk) 05:19, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Plus, the content is not limited to 1970 event only. It captures spread to other areas as well and I agree with NitinMlk that choice of title was bad. Admantine123 (talk) 05:22, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Two editors having edited a similar page does not mean WP:CANVASSING. Stop disrupting this AfD with your nonsensical accusations. Dympies (talk) 06:06, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment After checking the sources provided above, I have no problem with moving the page to Naxalite movement in Bhojpur per WP:ATD. Ratnahastin (talk) 06:43, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: The title of article is irrelevant in determining the notability of its subject. The question before us here is whether the topic, be it the Bhojpur uprising or the Naxalite movement, meets our notability guidelines. Once we've answered that question, a page move--if needed--is trivial.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 20:54, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rina Lipa

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

The subject fails to meet WP:GNG on their own merit and is only notable due to being the sister of a notable person, as evidenced by all available references primarily focusing on her relationship to her sister. And WP:INVALIDBIO explicitly state That person A has a relationship with well-known person B, such as being a spouse or child, is not a reason for a standalone article on A. Ckfasdf (talk) 15:06, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Women, Dance, and England. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 15:42, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: looks like a failure to perform a BEFORE. I'm finding substantial references that are about Rina, not her older sister (Vogue, Deadline). Also, the sources present are not primarily focusing on Rina's relationship with her sister, but instead mention it as a considerable detail. ~ Pbritti (talk) 15:46, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It's true that Vogue and Deadline have articles about Rina, but even the headlines in both pieces emphasize her relationship to Dua Lipa, which suggests that her notability is primarily tied to her sister. Ckfasdf (talk) 15:56, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Read past the headline, per WP:HEADLINES. There is SIGCOV of her as a fashion model and actor. ~ Pbritti (talk) 01:00, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The primary reason she received coverage is due to her relationship with Dua Lipa, as even Vogue pointed out by stating, She’s self-aware about the nepo-sibling thing. Also, the lead describes her as a model, actress, and dancer, this means the article should also meet WP:ARTIST and WP:NMODEL requirements, both of which she falls short of meeting. Ckfasdf (talk) 01:25, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No, it’s enough if she meets GNG, which she does. A subject meeting GNG does NOT have to meet particular requirements of SNGs. That would be absurd. The articles (some on the page and plenty more available online) mention her sister but focus on her and constitute significant coverage addressing Rina directly and in depth, in reliable media outlets, which is precisely what is required. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 16:10, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or redirect to Dua Lipa. There isn't much coverage of her as someone other than Dua's sister. Frost 15:47, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: given the existing coverage; a redirect to Dua Lipa#Early life is totally warranted anyway. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 22:48, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fashion and Albania. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 10:54, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Kosovo-related deletion discussions. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 11:08, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: per arguments presented above. -AlexBachmann (talk) 23:10, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I stumbled upon this article as I was deleting articles created by a sockpuppet of Asphonixm but I see the article is being improved and is the subject of this discussion. But if it wasn't being worked on, it would likely be eligible for a CSD G5. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:18, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Liz: If we compare the state of the article since it was last edited by the sock and after the involvement of multiple editors, I do not see any substantial edits made on the article. The changes made so far seem to include removal of maintenance tags, fixing minor errors like references, paraphrasing sentences, switching "British" to "English", and adding categories—none of which amount to substantial content contributions. Therefore, Asphonixm's sock remains the major contributor. Ckfasdf (talk) 05:50, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I am the one who added sources to the page (yesterday, I think) and I am sorry but it was a significant change. I did it to prove she meets GNG. Who is the "major contributor" is not what matters, what matters is whether there is/are (a) "significantly edit"(s) by other user(s). -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 09:31, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm surprised to see Liz suggest CSD 5 eligibility extended until recently in the face of demonstrative notability and involvement of other editors (myself included) well before the sock was caught. Mushy Yank has made such substantial edits in the last 48 hours that I wonder if Ckfasdf believes that a sock only needs to be a majority contributor for CSD 5, rather than the only major contributor. ~ Pbritti (talk) 11:04, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, but I don’t think Liz suggested eligibility extended; quite the opposite, I would say (Liz clearly indicates the page is being improved), and her note is just for information, to prevent any CSD nomination, or at least to make things clear. Best, -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 12:21, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
My mistake, I didn’t notice Mushi Yank’s edits in the last 48 hours. However, on 28th September, I did suggest CSD G5 because that sock puppet was the main contributor, and it's worth noting that this sock puppet is notorious for creating biography articles. Pbritti disagreed, which is why we now have this AfD. My stance remains unchanged: she is only known because of her sister, as evidenced by all the sources that prominently mention her sister in both the headlines and the content. Ckfasdf (talk) 03:16, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sorry if my comments were unclear. I had deleted some other articles created by this sock but decided this one was not eligible due to the contributions of other editors to the content creation which wasn't the case with their other articles. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:18, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 20:42, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Leslie Controls

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

Fails WP:NCORP. None of the references here or in a WP:BEFORE hold up to WP:ORGCRIT. CNMall41 (talk) 20:41, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and Florida. Shellwood (talk) 20:48, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and Florida. CNMall41 (talk) 20:54, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Satoru Kashiwase

AfDs for this article:

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

Deleted before. The claim to notability, playing 215 minutes in the USA and in the German fifth tier, is very weak. The sources are not significant or independent and don't rectify the notability problems, failing WP:GNG and WP:SPORTCRIT. Geschichte (talk) 19:46, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Japan. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 20:40, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kiyoshi Nakatani

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

The claim to notability, playing in the third tier of Poland, Latvia's semi-pro league and 11 games in Japan's third league, is weak. The sources are not enough to rectify that and as such he fails WP:GNG and WP:SPORTCRIT. Geschichte (talk) 19:48, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Japan. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 20:40, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bologna Violenta

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

Sources on page consist of databases and a self-authored piece, so no notability there. The artist's Italian-language article doesn't seem to offer anything better. I was able to find this article which appears to be primarily about the artist, and these two which I think are only passing mentions (hard to tell because I can't read Italian). If those are indeed just passing mentions, then it appears we've only got one valuable source, and notability isn't met. I wouldn't be surprised if there's more to be found, especially in Italy-specific archives that I don't have access to, but as is this does not meet our standards. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 19:23, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Italy. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 19:23, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Qurtuluş 93

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

nn residential complex, no independent refs --Altenmann >talk 19:22, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Azerbaijan-related deletion discussions. jlwoodwa (talk) 19:38, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 20:41, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Shahzaib Rind

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

I draftified this BLP on a non-notable athlete because I believe it doesn't meet the WP:N. Then the creator of the BLP submitted the draft for review, which I declined, but it was still moved to the main NS. I don’t think it meets GNG or even WP:ATHLETE, thus AFD'd it. — Saqib (talk I contribs) 17:54, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. — Saqib (talk I contribs) 17:54, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and Martial arts. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:13, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jorge Ornelas

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

Ornelas played a handful of matches in the second tier of Mexico but otherwise has no other claim to notability. The only decent source that I can find is Pasion Rojiblanca, which is a blog on a fan site and clearly not WP:RS. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:09, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Mexico. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:10, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:52, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 19:01, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Martin Kabrhel

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

I have been unable to find significant coverage of this poker player outside of the stories about his alleged cheating and the alleged investigation into it. The stories from PokerNews are all routine coverage of his winnings/participation in tournaments. Being a high-roller is insufficient to establish notability. voorts (talk/contributions) 17:06, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Games, Europe, Austria, and Czech Republic. voorts (talk/contributions) 17:06, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. The most successful and best known Czech poker player with appearance in mainstream TV shows (more here). I quickly found sources like 1, 2 and 3, and I'm sure there will be more (and not only on the Internet). FromCzech (talk) 18:17, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Juan Flores (footballer, born 1993)

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

Flores played 7 minutes of professional league football before disappearing. The best coverage that I can find is Imago7, which is just an image caption. No evidence of WP:SPORTBASIC. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:01, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Mexico. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:01, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I will say, looking at the domestic cups tab of the page you linked, he appeared in closer to 400 total minutes. I’d still favor deletion but wanted to point that out. Michaelwallace22 (talk) 18:48, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:53, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 19:01, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete, the article doesn't make any credible claim of significance or importance. Geschichte (talk) 19:53, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Istanbul Europa Race

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

Tagged uncited for many years and I cannot find any recent sources. Perhaps it has been renamed or cancelled? Chidgk1 (talk) 16:19, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sports and Turkey. Chidgk1 (talk) 16:19, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:14, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
delete. No refs and not much useful info in the article to "resurrect" it. --Altenmann >talk 19:25, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Karin Van Der Laag

AfDs for this article:

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

Previously deleted (WP:Articles for deletion/Karin Van Der Laag) and I don't think the new article addresses the notability concerns. I also don't see articles about the subject since the previous AfD that would add to coverage such to satisfy N. Bobby Cohn (talk) 16:02, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers and South Africa. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 16:10, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 16:55, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
keep "Best Actress" award makes her notable. --Altenmann >talk 19:33, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
From South African Film and Television Awards. Per WP:ANYBIO is that a well-known and significant award or honor? Bobby Cohn (talk) 21:35, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I would say Yes. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 21:51, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: I think she meets both WP:NACTOR (at least 2 significant roles in notable productions) and WP:ANYBIO with her award. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 21:56, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wanda Toscanini Horowitz

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

She is not notable in her own right, the article only mentions her as daughter and wife of famous persons. Marbe166 (talk) 16:00, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women and Italy. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 16:56, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Music, Massachusetts, and New York. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:15, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
keep, yes, notability not inherited, but IMO the bio satisfies WP:GNG. --Altenmann >talk 19:39, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
How? Marbe166 (talk) 21:46, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Labour Party of Turkey

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

Yet another completely unsourced article about a defunct Turkish political party. Although as @Soman: said when deprodding there are sources about the banning such as https://www.anayasa.gov.tr/media/4937/kd_18.pdf, and half a page in a book at https://books.google.at/books?id=-Fp2DwAAQBAJ&pg=PA197#v=onepage&q&f=false is that enough to make this party notable? After all I understand that lots of parties were banned during the 70s and 80s. And as many native Turkish speakers live outside Turkey presumably it would be safe for them to write a Turkish article nowadays if the party was notable. Chidgk1 (talk) 15:28, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - At no point did I state that the two links above would be the sole potential sources for expansion. And lack of sources in an article is not a rationale in itself for deletion (apart from BLP). TEP was a notable party in its own right 1975-1980, and target for violence and repression. It was one of the first legal parties in Turkey to formally support Kurdish language rights, and was banned for it. --Soman (talk) 16:18, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Politics, and Turkey. Shellwood (talk) 16:25, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, rather obviously after the article has been improved. BTW, I wasn't able to see anything in the nomination giving a rationale for deletion and it would preferably be withdrawn. Thincat (talk) 17:01, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2015 Pac-12 Football Championship Game

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

It happened, but I couldn't find enough reliable sources to show it meets WP:N, or which page it could be merged/redirected best to as an WP:ATD. Boleyn (talk) 15:24, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dog this is directly shown on film Aswffv (talk) 15:47, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, American football, and California. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 16:55, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep
1. Sporting events such as these are generally kept
2. There are clearly enough reliable sources out there for it to pass GNG _pbp 18:13, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment, you are really setting foot in a mind field with this nomination. There are lots of these pages for many conferences. What does sustained coverage look like for a College Football championship game and would deleting this page effect about 200 others? Esolo5002 (talk) 21:05, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

BBCC-Hang Tuah station

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

I couldn't find sources to add which show it meets WP:N. Boleyn (talk) 15:04, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Stations, Transportation, and Malaysia. Shellwood (talk) 16:26, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep at worst this would be merged but I think it's better kept as it's an intersection point between three lines and thus where would you merge it to? Garuda3 (talk) 17:17, 5 October 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 speedy delete‎. There is a strong consensus here that this is a hoax. Just Step Sideways ^{from this world ..... today} 20:07, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Arvin's Cockroach

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

Probable hoax, unreferenced and not a single mention of it online. Moved back to main space from draft same day by article creator, still unreferenced. Wikishovel (talk) 14:53, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Biology-related deletion discussions. Wikishovel (talk) 14:53, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: It doesn't exist, no mentons in Gscholar or Jstor. HOAX article. Oaktree b (talk) 15:28, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry that my edit countered yours at the same time, where you inserted a {{Db-a7}} template, which is bizzare considering your input (this ain't any comment for me) here. Let this AFD run to this conclusion before adding such templates as this. Again, sorry about that! Intrisit (talk) 15:41, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Completely unreferenced, and while there may be an unpublished designation for this species, no designation information can currently be found on ZooBank, GBIF, or any other species database. Ecoevergreen (talk) 15:30, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Would've loved to see this soft delete and later get undeleted on the sole count of refs and sourcing, but per Oaktree b's assertions.... Intrisit (talk) 15:44, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Another attempt at a hoax article. While Toby Kovacs did study the evolutionary history of Australian cockroaches for his honours project, his current PhD work at the University of Sydney is on marsupials. As such, I believe the original author's name quoted is just a coincidence. And as a hoax, there is no reason to let this live untouched in mainspace for a week. Loopy30 (talk) 15:59, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Animal-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:16, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
SNOWBALL DELETE a hoax created by an editor who created numerous fake article sin wp. --Altenmann >talk 19:45, 5 October 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.

Western Armenia Government in Exile

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

This is a non-notable entity. The article contains not a single third party source establishing its notability. It a small group of individuals who set up a website. Wikipedia should not be promoting non-notable groups with little to none relevance. --Երևանցի ^talk 09:51, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Armenia-related deletion discussions. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 10:24, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 12:35, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm.. looks like I found 60 seemingly ok sources that seem to be OK. 59 if you strike out Artsakh Public TV (which is clearly talking about football), and 58 if you remove Newinfo. [possibly 57 or 56, i forgot if I had crossed out Facebook and ARMINFOCENTER already or not...]

Google Search Query: "արևմտյան հայաստանի հանրապետության" -site:"www.parliament-wa.info/" -site:"parliament-wa.info/" -site:"https://citizenship-western-armenia.info/" -site:"western-armenia.eu" -"Western Armenia TV"

The source providers for the Armenian search: Israelahayer, Nt.am, mamul.am, Lousavor Avedis Hraparak, hhtert.am, asekose.am, Keghart, iravunk.com, A1Plus, Factor.am, Anews.am, Aravot, Radio YAN, iravunk on YouTube and Noyan Tapan on YouTube.

Now then, none of these sources are used in the article.

Also, I even question whether or not these are actual reliable sources, or if this even says a word about notability.

Still gonna bring that one up though.

Pressenza also allowed the Consul(ate) of Western Armenia in Argentina covers the Origin of the Republic of Western Armenia, an article on how Artsakh is legally part of the Republic of Western Armenia (actually, this source can fit into the article. didnt even know about it until now. gonna add it rq.), "The Hour of Dignity", and a Commemoration of the Armenian Genocide. Other than that that seems to be it.

I wonder if that makes Western Armenia available for notability? Kxeon (talk) 15:57, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Keep per rationale listed above by Kxeon. There is a plethora of sources online about this topic. It surpasses WP:N guidelines. It is a prominent political entity within the Armenian Diaspora, specifically representing Armenians in Turkey. Archives908 (talk) 16:36, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No reliable source listed. ----Երևանցի ^talk 18:18, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Have you even read the article? Please review the sources section. In addition, a simple google search yielded 117,000,000 results. Archives908 (talk) 18:41, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

My goodness! 117 MILLION?!? Keep, but because I'm not sure how many of these are actually about Western Armenia and how many are just about Armenia, it's not Strong. Kxeon (talk) 22:11, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep but rename Republic of Western Armenia still substantial enough within scholarly sourcing. Ecpiandy (talk) 18:08, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What scholarly sourcing? ----Երևանցի ^talk 18:18, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, this article has one relevant source ([2]), and it's not even about the subject here, but the tv channel. At any rate, this article is a WP:TNT job, see also Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)/Archive 191#RfC: micronation infoboxes. CMD (talk) 07:19, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Personal attack removed)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 14:30, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete and possibly merge with Western Armenia or Wilsonian Armenia articles This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 22:23, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Curtis Bashaw (politician)

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

Article about an as yet unelected political candidate, not properly referenced as having any serious claim to notability. As always, people do not get Wikipedia articles just for standing as candidates in elections they haven't won -- the notability test at WP:NPOL is holding a notable office, not just running for one, while unelected candidates must either (a) have preexisting notability for other reasons that would already have gotten them an article anyway, or (b) show credible evidence that their candidacy should be seen as a special case of significantly greater and more enduring notability than most other people's candidacies. But this is basically "he is a candidate, the end", and isn't even trying to show that he would meet either of those conditions for the notability of an unelected candidate at all. And the sole footnote here, added after I pointed out in this nomination statement that the article was completely unreferenced, is a primary source table of primary results from the state government elections office, which isn't support for notability.
Obviously no prejudice against recreation in November if he wins the election, but simply being a candidate for a seat he hasn't already won is not grounds for an article now. Bearcat (talk) 14:23, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians and New Jersey. Bearcat (talk) 14:23, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
He is the first openly LGBT person to run for candidacy in New Jersey, so I thought that would be significant enough to warrant this article. CavDan24 (talk) 14:45, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

So you're claiming that Reed Gusciora and Tim Eustace didn't exist, or did you just forget to add some more qualifiers? Regardless, simply claiming that somebody is the first openly LGBT person to do a thing that wouldn't otherwise be notable on its own is not an exemption from Wikipedia's notability criteria — if he'd been the first LGBT candidate for anything in the entire United States, that might be something if he was getting nationalized coverage on that basis, but simply being the first LGBT candidate for one specific office that's already had other LGBT candidates and incumbents before him, in one specific state that's already had other LGBT candidates and officeholders in other offices before him, is not an instant notability clinch all by itself. Bearcat (talk) 14:56, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: TOOSOON Wining the primary is fine, but that's all the coverage there is [3]. Doesn't appear anywhere online before the nomination, I'm not seeing notability. Can perhaps get an article if he wins the election. Oaktree b (talk) 15:32, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:16, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Absolute (Aion album)

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

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

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

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

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

Five articles about albums not shown to pass WP:NALBUM. Back in the day, Wikipedia's approach to album notability was to extend an automatic inclusion freebie to any album recorded by a notable artist, regardless of its sourcing or lack thereof, in the service of completionist directoryism -- but that's long since been kiboshed, and albums are now independently notable only if they can be shown to pass WP:GNG on reliable source coverage about the album. But four of these five articles are completely unreferenced, and one is referenced solely to a single unreliable source directory listing that isn't support for notability.
It also warrants note that these were all briefly redirected to the band a year and a half ago for lack of independent sourcing, but that was reverted within 24 hours with no actual explanation provided of what the problem with redirecting them was, and they've continued to stand as unreferenced articles ever since, without ever having a whit of GNG-worthy sourcing added to any of them. Bearcat (talk) 13:04, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Music and Japan. Bearcat (talk) 13:04, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. I was the one who reverted some redirections, and I don't really recall why, but when I look into it now, I see that the editor who made the redirects was a problem editor who became indefinitely blocked. Geschichte (talk) 14:19, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 14:32, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 14:17, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Triangle and Robert

AfDs for this article:

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

I'm not sure if this webcomic is notable. The single reference that's in the article brings up Triangle and Robert a few times ([4]), though Google Books only lets me see snippets, so I can't tell if it's significant coverage or not. It has also been mentioned ([5]) in The Comics Journal, where it even says "This [...] strip is virtually never talked about when Web comics are discussed". The article was previously kept at an AfD, but that was back in 2005 when standards were very different. toweli (talk) 12:17, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Webcomics, Internet, and Websites. toweli (talk) 12:17, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Nothing in my literature either, and a google is giving me nothing reliable. There's not much for us to work with here. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 15:41, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Not eligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, RL0919 (talk) 13:16, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:11, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete No evidence of notyability. --Altenmann >talk 19:49, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Cradlepoint

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

Scope creep previously PRODded this article, but it was procedurally dePRODded. The rationale was "Company article that fails WP:NCORP. References are routine business news. Fails WP:SIRS." Indeed, the coverage is routine and WP:ORGTRIV, and most of the sources are WP:TRADES. Janhrach (talk) 14:08, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Business, Companies, Computing, and Idaho. Janhrach (talk) 14:08, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I never saw it was deproded or I would have sent it to Afd. It fails WP:NCORP. scope_creep^Talk 14:55, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete nn business. Refs are regular PR stuff --Altenmann >talk 19:51, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Freestyle fixed gear

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

I don't think this article in its current state meets WP:NSPORT. Yes we have fixed-gear bicycle, as well as fixed gear racing, but it doesn't seem clear what this one is all about. As they say, two heads are better than one, and here I am to find the community's assessment. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 05:35, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sports and Cycling. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 05:39, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I believe the sport of freestyle fixed gear meets notability. Aside from being featured in Hollywood motion pictures (cited), the very first cycling trick done on film was done on a fixed gear bicycle (this is cited in the article). A fixed gear bike was used in the X Games (in 2001 Trevor Meyer) the premier showcase of Extreme sport. Fixed-gear bicycle article doesn't contain the details or background on the community of people doing tricks on fixed gear bikes. Racing on a fixed gear isn't really related to freestyle (tricks) on a fixed gear; similar to how speed skating isn't related to figure skating. FixedGearFreeStyle (talk) 23:59, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 13:57, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of Indian podcasts

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

Promotional article fails WP:NLIST. Almost all items are non-notable. Ratnahastin (talk) 08:41, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Lists and India. Shellwood (talk) 11:53, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Leaning towards Weak Keep. I don't see how the article is promotional and its a well sourced list. It serve as a informational list per WP:LISTPURP. The problem is it needed more expansion. Warm Regards, Miminity (talk) (contribs) 15:18, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Radio-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:24, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per WP:NLIST because Indian podcasts have been discussed as a group or set by independent reliable sources, which is demonstrated by the cited sources. TipsyElephant (talk) 18:34, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete At best only 3 items can be preserved. Don't need a standalone article for that. REDISCOVERBHARAT (talk) 08:59, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 12:39, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Simon Crosby

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

Fails WP:SIGCOV, WP:BIO. scope_creep^Talk 08:35, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators and Businesspeople. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 12:37, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Significant coverage for this person exists. Wired [6], The Register [7], eWeek [8], Computerwoche [9], InfoWorld [10], CRN [11], TechTarget [12], Csoonline.com [13] Frost 16:33, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Computing, South Africa, and England. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:24, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Almost everyone of these references are interviews of one sort or another and can't be used to prove notability. Gbooks is probably the best bet for establishing it. There is a couple of profiles there that are no good either. scope_creep^Talk 07:33, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I agree, these sources don't establish GNG notability, and subject is nowhere near WP:NPROF. Qflib (talk) 13:56, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 12:39, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2000 Tehran airport collision

(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, only primary sources exist on the event with no secondary sources existing on the event. The event does not have in-depth nor sustained continued coverage with coverage only briefly occurring in the aftermath of the crash. No lasting effects or long-term impacts on a significant region have been demonstrated. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 10:14, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Aviation, Transportation, and Iran. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 10:14, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Maybe you are in a region where access to the BBC is blocked: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/628749.stm Thincat (talk) 13:06, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I do have access to the BBC but as noted above, these sources aren't secondary due to there being no analysis, evaluation, interpretation, or synthesis. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 13:43, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
We don't know the source of some of the BBC's information: I doubt whether they had a reporter on the spot. Where they tell us what Mazaheri said they are giving us his secondary account surely? But, apart from the secondary aspect, the event may well not be too notable. I found the other claims in your nomination more persuasive. Thincat (talk) 14:44, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

•Merge into Runway Incursion and Tehran Airport Accidents and incidents sufficently covered there. Notable but doesnt warrant its own article as shown by nom @Aviationwikiflight Lolzer3k 18:18, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Correction, * ground collision there is no accident description there, needs to be created. Lolzer3k 18:20, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 12:37, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

National liberation struggle of the Ingush people

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

This article is a POVFORK and we already have a decent article at Ingush people. There may be some elements of this article that can be merged there, but I don’t think this article as a whole should be retained. Mccapra (talk) 06:10, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Military and Russia. Mccapra (talk) 06:10, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events and History. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 12:42, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Any content worth merging?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 12:34, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge Yes it is even a larger fork (actually, not POVFORK, but WP:CFORK.). What to be done: (1) Make History of Ingushetia page (now it is a redirect) (2) merge the relevant contents from three pages: Ingushetia § History, Ingush people § History and National liberation struggle of the Ingush people and (3) rework Ingushetia and Ingush_people per WP:Summary style. --Altenmann >talk 20:10, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Spring Financial

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

Run-of-the-mill predatory/payday lender. "Reviews" are indiscriminate WP:SPIP with no meaningful content. Wikipedia is not the place to host brochures. No indication of any independent coverage, in-depth in reliable sources, in fact there's barely anything beyond the SPIP and the routine "I got predatory loaned to" that all of these have, which, while sad, are not great sources for encyclopedic content. Alpha3031 (t • c) 11:58, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Finance, Companies, and Canada. Alpha3031 (t • c) 11:58, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Not really meeting CORP. There's the Global News article about someone that wasn't happy with their loan, and this [14] where someone with the company talks about their work model... Not really sigcov in either case. Rest are all PR links. Oaktree b (talk) 15:36, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2028 New South Wales local elections

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

This feels like it's WP:TOOSOON for this election to have an article. The election is four years from now. Warm Regards, Miminity (Talk? | contribs) 10:35, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politics and Australia. Warm Regards, Miminity (Talk? | contribs) 10:35, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I understand why you say that but I'm going off the sorta-precedent of the 2026 Victorian state election, 2027 New South Wales state election, etc pages being created right after the previous one ended

There's already coverage in multiple reliable sources about the 2028 elections and the changes that'll occur then, I think that meets enough coverage to keep the page

Otherwise if it was to be deleted, I would argue it should instead redirect to Local government in New South Wales Totallynotarandomalt69 (talk) 10:39, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:17, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Night Begins to Shine (Teen Titans Go!)

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

No evidence of notability for these episodes together, better covered at main articles Indagate (talk) 09:29, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Comics and animation and Entertainment. Indagate (talk) 09:29, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 12:34, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Sources seem to show this is notable enough. https://www.cbr.com/teen-titans-go-ber-night-begins-shine/ ; https://www.wbur.org/npr/545906301/an-accidental-hit-begins-to-shine-and-only-because-of-teen-titans-go ; https://www.dcplanet.fr/220502-decouvrez-funko-pop-teen-titans-go-version-the-night-begins-to-shine ; https://tvsourcemagazine.com/2020/07/review-teen-titans-go-the-night-begins-to-shine-2/ ; https://meiobit.com/371129/jovens-titas-the-night-begins-to-shine-cancao-incluida-em-biblioteca-virou-um-sucesso-entre-os-fas-warner-capitalizando-em-cima/ ;https://www.kotaku.com.au/2017/08/the-fall-out-boy-music-video-for-teen-titans-go-redeems-that-horrible-ghostbusters-song/ etc -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 16:29, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Presumed security

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

A term seemingly coined by a single blog post. The post does not appear to have received secondary coverage and Wikipedia now seems to be primary source of the term. Brandon (talk) 08:23, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. Brandon (talk) 08:23, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
delete nonreliable source; the concept fails WP:GNG in the industry. --Altenmann >talk 20:18, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Embassy of Turkey, Rome

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

Fails WP:ORG. Article based on primary sources and a directory listing. LibStar (talk) 08:15, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: There are no reliable and independent sources to establish WP:CORP
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bilateral relations, Italy, and Turkey. LibStar (talk) 08:15, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Baldwin Class 12-32 ¼ E

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

The only source I could find which discusses the subject in depth is https://locomotive.fandom.com/wiki/Baldwin_Class_12-32_%C2%BC_E which is not a reliable source. References in the article do not discuss the subject in depth. TarnishedPath^talk 08:12, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. TarnishedPath^talk 08:12, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. TarnishedPath^talk 08:57, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: It's probably covered in a specialist book about the company, but this is likely too niche to get an article here. I don't find any coverage in Gbooks. I've got some locomotive encyclopedias I use, but this isn't in them either. Oaktree b (talk) 15:39, 5 October 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 of the discussion was: Withdrawn‎ per the recent findings of multiple sources by @Cunard. (non-admin closure) Aviationwikiflight (talk) 10:25, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

TransAsia Airways Flight 510A

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

Per 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 in nature since none of them contained analysis, evaluation, interpretation, or synthesis. The event does not have in-depth nor sustained continued coverage with coverage only briefly occurring in the aftermath of the accident. No lasting effects or long-term impacts on a significant region have been demonstrated. Additionally, none of the sources found provided significant coverage of the event. 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) 07:48, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Aviation, Transportation, and Taiwan. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 07:48, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. The event meets Wikipedia:Notability (events)#Duration of coverage in that it has received significant coverage in a 2016 book published 21 years after it took place on 30 January 1995.
The event is notable since the Routledge book The Dragon in the Cockpit: How Western Aviation Concepts Conflict with Chinese Value Systems noted, "From the CAA report, we can infer some cultural factors in the accident. Although these inferences are not part of the original report, they are consistent with the events of that night and with what we know about Chinese culture. In the accident report from the CAA, the conversation between crewmembers, the radio communication between crewmembers and traffic controllers, together with all kinds of sounds, were disclosed." If the event were non-notable, it would not continue to receive significant coverage in a book published 21 years later.
Sources
1. Jing, Hung-Sying; Batteau, Allen (2016). The Dragon in the Cockpit: How Western Aviation Concepts Conflict with Chinese Value Systems. Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge. pp. 25–31. ISBN 978-1-4724-1030-6. Retrieved 2024-10-05 – via Google Books.
  The book notes on page 25: "At 7:16pm, Flight 510A departed from Magong Airport without any passengers on board, scheduled to land in Taipei at 8:20pm. Sixteen minutes later the crew called Taipei approach, said the plane was 16 n.m. from Miaoli Houlong, and would descend and maintain an altitude of 9,000 feet. The approach tower directed the crew to pass Houlong and descend to 4,000 feet, and prepare to land on runway 10 of Taipei Songshan Airport. When the plane passed through Houlong, the crew asked to fly directly to Linkou, and proceed with visual approach. The approach tower agreed and directed the plane to lower the altitude to 4,000 feet."
  The book notes on page 26: "Two years later, the CAA published the accident report (Civil Aeronautics Administration 1997). In the report, there were no primary causes revealed. Only the conclusions of the investigation were listed. Among them, several main points were given as below."
  The book notes on page 27:
  Why and how did this happen? From the report of the CAA, it can be found that the CAA again attributed the cause to lack of training. Therefore, reinforcing crew training can prevent such tragedies from happening again. However, after every single plane crash, accident reports always suggest to reinforce training. "Reinforcing training" is almost a cliché in flight safety of Taiwan. Yet, plane crashes continue to happen. Why is that? Is it because the training is still not enough? Or, is it because that reinforcing training is very hard? Is it possible that training is not the real cause? Or were there some more profound explanations other than training? What is the truth?
  From the CAA report, we can infer some cultural factors in the accident. Although these inferences are not part of the original report, they are consistent with the events of that night and with what we know about Chinese culture. In the accident report from the CAA, the conversation between crewmembers, the radio communication between crewmembers and traffic controllers, together with all kinds of sounds, were disclosed. From 13:23 after 7:00pm when the flight was approved by Magong for take-off, until 43:57, the total length is 30 minutes and 34 seconds. From the moment when the plane was still on the ground, there was the voice of a flight attendant (F/A) in the cockpit.
  The book notes on page 30: "Why didn't the crewmembers stop the flight attendant when she interfered with their communication to the controller? In Chinese culture, who would treat a good friend like this given such a relaxed atmosphere? Again, relationship favor played a very important role in the behavior of the crew. As for the reason why the crewmember replied to the flight attendant first, in Chinese culture, the relationship favor is hierarchical. If there are two people, one is a good friend, the other is a stranger, the two stand at quite different psychological distances in our mind. Every Chinese person would be inclined by instinct to attend to a friend first, not the stranger."
2. 1995 sources:
  1. "Taiwan plane flew too low when it crashed". Honolulu Star-Bulletin. 1995-02-01. Archived from the original on 2024-10-05. Retrieved 2024-10-05 – via Newspapers.com.
    The article notes: "A Taiwanese airliner was flying too low when it hit a mountain on a wet night this week, killing all four people aboard, aviation officials said on today. They said the Foshing Airlines twin turboprop ATR-72 was flying at about 1,000 feet through a rainy night when it crashed less than 15 minutes before it was due to land in Taipei on Monday. ... Foshing is also called TransAsia Airways."
  2. Cai, Zhenyuan 蔡振源 (1995-02-08). "復興空難黑盒子解讀發現'有不正常訊號'" [TransAsia Crash: Black Box Analysis Reveals 'Abnormal Signals']. United Evening News [zh] (in Chinese). p. 3.
    The article notes: "民航局副局長張國政上午表示，從座艙通話紀錄器的解讀資料中發現，除夕夜失事的復興航空510A班機，在失事前「飛行可能有偏，而且有不正常訊號出現」，但細節張國政不願多說，只表示還要再對座艙通話紀錄資料詳加研讀後，在下午4時公布。"
    From Google Translate: "Zhang Guozheng, deputy director of the Civil Aviation Administration, said in the morning that from the interpretation of the cockpit call recorder, it was found that TransAsia Flight 510A, which crashed on New Year's Eve, "may have been deviated in flight and had abnormal signals" before the crash, but Zhang Guozheng had no details. He did not want to say more, but said that he would make a detailed study of the cockpit call record data before announcing it at 4 p.m."
    The article notes: "今天上午，失事調查小組人員，包括民航局、復興航空、法國民航局及ATR公司代表已就黑盒子資料作過初步意見交換，但張國政說「大家都沒辦法解釋清楚」。在開完記者會後，調查小組人員繼續開會判讀。"
    From Google Translate: "This morning, members of the crash investigation team, including representatives from the Civil Aviation Administration of China, TransAsia Airways, the French Civil Aviation Authority and ATR, had a preliminary exchange of opinions on the black box information, but Zhang Guozheng said that "no one could explain it clearly." After the press conference, the investigation team members continued their meeting for interpretation."
  3. "復興失事客機黑盒子通話內容公布最後廿秒出現異常隨後撞山" [TransAsia Crash: Black Box Communication Contents Released; Abnormalities Detected in the Last 20 Seconds Before the Crash]. Min Sheng Bao (in Chinese). 1995-02-09. p. 18.
    The article notes: "民航局昨天公布除夕夜復興航空失事客機上座艙通話器(俗稱黑盒子)錄音帶內容判讀結果，顯示失事飛機在飛行途中一切正常，只有最後廿秒出現異常，即失事撞山。"
    From Google Translate: "The Civil Aviation Administration of China yesterday announced the results of the interpretation of the audio tape of the cockpit intercom (commonly known as the black box) on the TransAsia Airways plane that crashed on New Year's Eve. It showed that everything was normal during the flight. Only the last 20 seconds caused an abnormality, when the plane crashed and hit a mountain."
  4. "復興班機墜毀龜山四組員罹難機上無乘客兔坑村山區火光可見松山機場還關閉跑道等候降落另兩班機因此改降中正機場" [TransAsia Flight Crashes in Guishan; Four Crew Members Killed, No Passengers on Board. Flames Visible in the Mountain Area of Tuku Village. Songshan Airport Closed Runway Awaiting Landings; Two Other Flights Diverted to Taoyuan Airport]. United Daily News (in Chinese). 1995-01-31. p. 1.
    The article notes: "大年夜發生大不幸，復興航空公司昨由馬公空機飛回台北，編號B二二七一七的五一○A春節加班機在桃園縣龜山鄉兔坑村附近山區失事墜毀，機上四名組員罹難。罹難者屍體及飛機殘骸均已找到。罹難者是：機長王洪佳，副駕駛李光志，空服員劉慧卿、林子雅。 "
    From Google Translate: "A big tragedy occurred on New Year's Eve. Yesterday, TransAsia Airways flew a Malaysia Airlines flight back to Taipei. The 510A Spring Festival overtime flight numbered B22717 crashed in the mountains near Tukeng Village, Guishan Township, Taoyuan County. Four people on board were on board. A team member died. The bodies of the victims and the wreckage of the plane have been found. The victims were: Captain Wang Hongjia, co-pilot Li Guangzhi, and flight attendants Liu Emily and Lin Ziya."
  5. "上月購進飛行時數僅兩百餘小時失事客機昨天飛行11趟" [Purchased Last Month, the Crashed Aircraft Had Only Flown Just Over 200 Hours and Made 11 Flights Yesterday]. United Daily News (in Chinese). 1995-01-31. p. 4.
    The article notes: "昨天失事墜毀的復興航空公司客機，上個月才購進，飛行時數僅兩百六十五小時，落地三百九十四次，但昨天一天已飛行十一趟，單日飛行密度很高。復興航空目前有十三架ATR七十二型飛機，昨天失事的這架是最新購進。機長王洪佳已有一萬七千一百三十小時的飛行時數，其中飛行ATR為一九八七小時；副駕駛李光志的飛行時數為六千九百廿六小時。 "
    From Google Translate: "The TransAsia Airlines passenger plane that crashed yesterday was purchased only last month. It had only flown for 265 hours and landed 394 times. However, it had flown 11 times yesterday, and the flight density in a single day was very high. . TransAsia Airways currently has 13 ATR 72 aircraft, and the one that crashed yesterday was its latest purchase. Captain Wang Hongjia has 17,130 flying hours, including 1,987 ATR flying hours; co-pilot Li Guangzhi has 6,926 flying hours."
There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow TransAsia Airways Flight 510A to pass Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline, which requires "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject".
Cunard (talk) 10:03, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I had just found the mentioned book above, The Dragon in the Cockpit, and was planning on withdrawing the nomination. Also, good job on finding the multiple sources above. I agree that these do indeed establish the event's notability. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 10:11, 5 October 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.

Ferdinand Oliver Porsche

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

Lacking in sources and no indication of claimed entrepreneurship. Sits on Porsche and Volkswagen boards, most likely due to his family connections as the great-grandson of Ferdinand Porsche. Clarityfiend (talk) 07:32, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Austria, and Germany. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 08:34, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Clarityfiend is not wrong in their assessment, but then again: Lukas Walton, Ben duPont, Victoria B. Mars, Susan Alice Buffett, ... --bender235 (talk) 21:41, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

AppShield

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

AppShield the product does not appear to independently establish notability beyond Sanctum, the company that created it. As a testament to that the version of the article prior to my edits describes three different products or research projects entitled AppShield, all erroneously presented as a single topic. Brandon (talk) 07:30, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Technology and Israel. Brandon (talk) 07:30, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 08:37, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
keep - Although it seems very likely that WP:COI editors are meddling with this and related articles, I think this passes notability. Doing a little more digging I found a couple more decent-quality sources, including a ZDNet article attesting to adoption in 2002. IMO this is a good example of how COI editors can actually make it less likely that their subjects get articles, when left alone they don't raise as many eyebrows. StereoFolic (talk) 13:42, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Thank you for improving the article! At this point I agree the content belongs somewhere, However it does still feel like AppShield and AppScan could be presented as sections within the Sanctum (company) article. Especially considering the company and the products were acquired together by Watchfire a combined article would be able to present a intertwined narrative without having three stubs that are unlikely to ever be fleshed out on their own. Brandon (talk) 18:10, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Aeroflot Flight A-53

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

Per WP:GNG and WP:EVENTCRIT: There exists no reliable independent (significant) news coverage of the event, no secondary sources, no in-depth coverage, no (sustained) continued coverage, no demonstrated lasting effects nor long-term impacts on a significant region of the world that would make this event notable enough for a stand-alone article. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 07:27, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Aviation, Transportation, and Turkmenistan. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 07:27, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
keep Invalid nomination. 23 people killed is a notable event in my books. There are at least 3 sources cited which have no dependence on Aeroflot whatsoever. Of course a catastrophe in a Somewherestan aint no global reverberation, but it did make impact and consequences. Keeping in mind it was in 1975 in the Soviet Union, where such kind of information was thoroughly suppressed, it is importnt to keep it in Wikipedia. --Altenmann >talk 20:30, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Darius Yuen

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

BLP of a successful businessman and philanthropist lacking in depth independent coverage. Non-notable awards, Forbes and routine coverage of career moves. Does not seem notable. Mccapra (talk) 07:24, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and Hong Kong. Mccapra (talk) 07:24, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete a reasonable search for sources turns up nothing substantial. Yes, he got a 1-paragraph mention in a Forbes Asia list, but I can't see how WP:BLP is met, and no other applicable category Oblivy (talk) 09:37, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Startup Britain

AfDs for this article:

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

Fails WP:ORGCRIT. Created as promo. AfD a decade ago closed as no consensus and there's been no improvement since. A campaign which appears to have had little lasting impact after initial routine news coverage. Website is now dead. Huge sections of unverifiable text. AusLondonder (talk) 07:14, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Business, Companies, and United Kingdom. AusLondonder (talk) 07:14, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:18, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Aliheydar İbragimov

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

I’m not sure this military commander is notable, though much decorated. The Azerbaijani site has no sources at all, and the sources in the Russian article are very scanty. If nobody can find anything else more solid I think deleting would be appropriate. Mccapra (talk) 07:11, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Military, Azerbaijan, and Russia. Mccapra (talk) 07:11, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tony Schaller

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

I can't find any trace of meeting WP:GNG. The lyrical competition of the Olympics is probably not the venue that would make a writer notable. It can be confirmed that Antoine Schaller wrote lyrics based on Hippolyte Ackermans [fr], being one of 30 names - with surnames starting with S, that is - mentioned in a large list. I can find nothing but WP:PASSING mentions elsewhere; both Google and Google Books throw around a lot of namesakes from our time. Geschichte (talk) 06:58, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Olympics, and Belgium. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 08:35, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Morrison Hashii

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

Having played 2 minutes in Singapore, for a community college and in the English non-league, this player has not picked up significant, independent coverage to meet WP:GNG and WP:SPORTCRIT. Geschichte (talk) 07:01, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Japan. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 08:36, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 16:58, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 19:00, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yogananth Andiappan

AfDs for this article:

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

There's no more indication of notability this time than there was last time, as far as I can tell. The SCMP article doesn't even seem to mention the article subject. I can't see any indication of how it might meet BASIC. Alpha3031 (t • c) 04:24, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Health and fitness, Hong Kong, and India. Alpha3031 (t • c) 04:24, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors and Tamil Nadu. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:35, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lecture room (disambiguation)

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

Unnecessary per WP:DIFFCAPS and WP:SMALLDETAILS, none of the disambiguated titles overlap or conflict with each other. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 04:15, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Disambiguations-related deletion discussions. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 04:15, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. WP:DIFFCAPS and WP:SMALLDETAILS are guidelines of Wikipedia:Article titles, not of Wikipedia:Disambiguation. Even WP:DIFFCAPS and WP:SMALLDETAILS clearly state that readers are guided as swiftly as possible to the topic they might reasonably be expected to be looking for, by such disambiguation techniques as hatnotes or disambiguation pages (italic added). Lecture room (disambiguation) has three disambiguation entries, lecture room, Lecture Room, and The Lecture Room, which only differ in capitalization and the definite article (the) and should be included on the disambiguation page. --Neo-Jay (talk) 06:57, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per Neo-Jay's argument and the "See also" to near-synonym lecture hall. The reader will be helped by this dab page. PamD 07:35, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. This will avoid a clumsy hatnote. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 08:19, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Neo-Jay's argument and on how it is clear on how they differ 79lives (talk) 09:32, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Maybe my reasoning was not obvious to people, but a hatnote would not be "clumsy" and would fall under WP:ONEOTHER for Lecture Room. The other link is so minor it does not even have a page of its own. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 11:11, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"The other link" that you mentioned above refers to The Lecture Room, which is a redirect page to AKB48 Show!#The Lecture Room. It is acceptable because, according to Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Disambiguation pages#Where redirecting may be appropriate, [a] redirect should be used to link to a specific section of an article if only that section discusses the disambiguated topic. --Neo-Jay (talk) 11:45, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Embassy of South Korea, Ankara

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

Fails WP:ORG. Only 2 primary sources provided. A search for sources found incidents like this which don't really add to notability. https://www.turkiyetoday.com/turkiye/south-korean-ambassador-jeong-yeondoo-prefers-yht-for-ankara-trip-539/ LibStar (talk) 03:50, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bilateral relations, South Korea, and Turkey. LibStar (talk) 03:50, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Embassy of Algeria, London

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

Fails WP:ORG. 2 directory listings provided as sources. A search for sources only came up with this incident which doesn't really add to notability. https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c977qndxndxo LibStar (talk) 03:46, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bilateral relations, Algeria, and United Kingdom. LibStar (talk) 03:46, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
merge or redirect. If there is a suitable target to merge the list of ambassadors to that should be done (unfortunately Algeria–United Kingdom relations is red), but in either case the title should be a redirect to List of diplomatic missions in London#Embassies and High Commissions in London (improving that list to at least have anchors for every country is on my to do list) to match every other Embassy of xxx, London that has been redirected (either following AfD or uncontroversially after a prod). There is no justification for deletion. Thryduulf (talk) 17:30, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Magnet Man

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

promotional..notability in doubt SINGS09 (talk) 03:11, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Barbados. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:36, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Disagree with this nomination, particularly no evidence of a WP:BEFORE. The article does need some cleanup but that's no reason for deletion. There is enough coverage, including of awards and platinum sales, from independent sources to meet WP:MUSICBIO. ResonantDis_tortion 09:43, 5 October 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 Withdrawn by nominator‎. Additional entries were added following the nomination to the point where the DAB page does seem needed. (non-admin closure) ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 13:05, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Letter of the law (disambiguation)

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

Unnecessary DAB page - see WP:PTM for why. None of the disambiguated pages are solely called "Letter of the law" or even "Letter of the Law". ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 02:28, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Law and Disambiguations. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 02:28, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. WP:PTM does not indicate that this disambiguation page should be deleted. Letter of the law (disambiguation) has three disambiguation entries, each of them is legitimate. 1. Letter of the law redirects letter and spirit of the law, which should be a disambiguation entry at Letter of the law (disambiguation). 2. The Letter of the Law has article "The", and "The plus disambiguation term" should usually be included on the disambiguation page for the disambiguation term (see Wikipedia:Disambiguation#Partial title matches ( WP:PTM): For instance, the Mississippi River article [...] is included at Mississippi (disambiguation) because its subject is often called "the Mississippi"). 3. Takeru: Letter of the Law's subtitle is Letter of the Law, and a work may often be referred to by its subtitle. Furthermore, I have added a link to Wiktionary:en:letter of the law into this disambiguation page. --Neo-Jay (talk) 06:40, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"May be"? Is there evidence that Takeru: Letter of the Law is referred to by only its subtitle without its actual title? It appears to only be referred to as "Takeru" or "Takeru: Letter of the Law" in reliable sources. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 11:15, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. This page is helpful, and avoids a clumsy hatnote. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 08:23, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The hatnote would not be clumsy as it would likely only contain one entry. Takeru is dubious to include here at all. I'm not convinced people would search for it by "letter of the law" rather than "Takeru". ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 11:23, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have added four more disambiguation entries to the disambiguation page. --Neo-Jay (talk) 12:31, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I think there's enough DABMENTIONs here to merit withdrawing the AfD. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 13:04, 5 October 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.

Wright Investors' Service Holdings, Inc.

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

Fails GNG. There’s a news article about them donating some dam properties but that’s it. Northern Moonlight 03:20, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Finance, Companies, and New York. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:51, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete : The nominator is right.--Gabriel (……?) 11:58, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 03:35, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: There is a very detailed article about this company's history at Cengage / encyclopedia.com under its previous National Patent Development Corporation name. The end of that article also includes a list of sources (on paper). AllyD (talk) 08:55, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 02:25, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep as National Patent Development Corporation meets WP:GNG and WP:NCORP. The NPDC's role in the history of the development of soft contact lens, as well as its IP, is very well documented (though it is tricky to untangle the "real" story with all its legal twist and turns and international intrigue). A few examples include this 2022 article in Hindsight: Journal of Optometry History; the 1989 book Communist Entrepreneurs: Unknown Innovators in the Global Economy; and this 1997 Business Week article, "Ready to Rise from the Dead?" which explains the company's poor financial performance in the late 1980s and 1990s. It's to the point that I did wonder if this article should be renamed to its historical name, but given that there is more recent coverage about the company as Wright Investors Service Holdings, particularly with regard to the dams in Connecticut as the nominator pointed out, it's fine as is for now. Sources have been added, but the article still needs more citations and clean up, which can take place over the normal course of editing. Cielquiparle (talk) 09:06, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]