Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/Today

Purge
Shortcut WP:AFD/T

31 March 2025

Read how to nominate an article for deletion.

Recent AfDs: Today Yesterday

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

< March 30	April 01 >

Guide to deletion

Purge server cache

Kakan Rajputs

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

this is an orphan article, plus there are WP:MOS and grammar errors galore here too Gommeh (talk/contribs) 15:44, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I am the creator of this Wikipedia page(Kakan rajputs) and have been actively contributing my time and knowledge to it since its inception. I have made frequent additions and have been consistently involved in its editing. The grammar errors present are not from our side but from other contributors/editors, and my team is actively working to correct them. I assure you that these issues will be addressed, and we will closely monitor the page moving forward. Therefore, I sincerely request you to withdraw this deletion request, as we are committed to maintaining and improving the page. ZypheriZ (talk) 15:57, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Light train

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

Appears to be an original WP:NEOlogism. None of the cited sources use the term "light train" as defined in the article, and there do not appear to be other sources that describe the term as such. It appears to combine two separate concepts: lightweight trains from the mid-20th century, and a unrelated variety of trains in operation in Europe which are not permitted for regular operation in the United States. Sub31k (talk) 15:20, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 15:34, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

WeProtect

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

Fails WP:NORG. Absolutiva (talk) 15:20, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and United Kingdom. Absolutiva (talk) 15:20, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Martin Petr

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

He played 86 minutes in the highest tier of Slovakia before disappearing in 2023. My secondary searches are limited to passing mentions and an image caption. ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 14:54, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Czech Republic. ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 14:54, 31 March 2025 (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. (non-admin closure) Absolutiva (talk) 14:51, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Justin Berry

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

Fails WP:GNG, did not find any WP:SIGCOV. Absolutiva (talk) 14:46, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Absolutiva (talk) 14:46, 31 March 2025 (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.

Fail-safes in nanotechnology

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

Page that fails WP:SYNTH, WP:OR, WP:CRYSTALBALL and WP:Notability. It combines a number of different topics, with original research suggestions for ways to prevent malfunctions. The page contains 8 sources, but only [6] is claimed to be related to failsafe and reading of the source only has “In the future, if our molecular automaton is sent on a medical mission, it can be programmed to exercise similar judgment”, i.e. crystal ball. When this page was created in 2008, perhaps there was discussion of building failsafe into future nanotech, although I am dubious; for certain this neologism has not been adopted by the community. Topics such as self-healing materials, self-healing hydrogels, self-healing concrete (and a few more) as well as fault tolerance are well established, and should not be confused with this neologism.

Curtesy ping of User:Bearian. Ldm1954 (talk) 14:18, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Science and Engineering. Ldm1954 (talk) 14:18, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nomination. Some folks want to eliminate all of these poorly sourced articles on nanotechnology, some want to leave them all here. I'm taking them on a case-by-case basis. Everyone knows that we have never published original content. There's lots of places to publish this. We're a charity under attack and we can't stray from our missions. Bearian (talk) 14:41, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with your opinion about the nano articles. If repairable and notable they are fine, and should have sources added and be updated although that is non-trivial work. Ldm1954 (talk) 14:49, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Per nom. Subject is clearly entirely speculative and not suitable for inclusion. silviaASH (inquire within) 15:23, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Scrapyard (mixtape)

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

Does not pass WP:NALBUMS. Half of the sources are from Twitter while the rest are seemingly from student newspapers, which do not contribute to notability. The only reliable source from WP:A/S used here is HotNewHipHop, but an album needs at least 3-4 reliable sources from A/S to pass for notability. Locust member (talk) 13:54, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 13:57, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2025 March 31. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 14:04, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Foundation of the International Bureau of Weights and Measures

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

The International Bureau of Weights and Measures (commonly BIPM, per its name in French) is undoubtedly notable but this article does not show that the foundation of the Bureau was a separately notable event, and notability is not inherited. Merging into International Bureau of Weights and Measures would not be appropriate; much of this content has previouly been removed from that article, and/or Metre and History of the metre, as excessively detailed, failing WP:DUE, off-topic, digressive and florid. NebY (talk) 13:26, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Organizations, and Science. NebY (talk) 13:26, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of France-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 14:04, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Mosaics in Asia

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

I don't see how this is one topic, and not just a grouping of topics across two characteristics (mosaics from certain regions / influences, and certain regions in Asia) which have no real common ground. I could find no good sources for this topic as a whole (looking for this gave results about mosaics in Asia Minor, which is not the same of course). Fram (talk) 13:25, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Visual arts and Asia. Fram (talk) 13:25, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
While I agree that the article lacks a common bond of mosaics in the different regions, I think some of the content is good. Mosaic is overwhelmingly about Europe (and it should make better use of summary style with its subpages), but the Middle Eastern and Western Asian section is relatively short and there is nothing at all about East or Southeast Asian mosaic art. This is a new article from a new user, so I would recommend they consider merging some information or working on it as a draft. Reywas92^Talk 15:24, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Draftification and splitting into separate articles may be best. Fram (talk) 15:32, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Joshua Chibueze

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

Fails WP:GNG and WP:ANYBIO. No independent reliable coverage; most of the coverage consists of "Chibueze said," "Chibueze told," "Chibueze commented," etc. Cinder painter (talk) 11:34, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and Nigeria. Shellwood (talk) 11:39, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
redirect: to PiggyVest, there seems to be more coverage about the compnay than about his person. He's also the founder... Wired seems to be the best source, but it hardly talks about this person. Oaktree b (talk) 12:07, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Oaktree b Does PiggyVest exists? Vanderwaalforces (talk) 13:05, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
No, it would likely have to be created. It seems notable, most of the coverage here used for this person is about the company. Oaktree b (talk) 14:17, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Redirecting to a non-existent article is not a viable option.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 13:12, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Marat Ressin

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

Fails WP:BLP, no media sources relevant to the article. Article moved from draft to main space without being checked. Bexaendos (talk) 12:25, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Bexaendos (talk) 12:25, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators and Canada. Shellwood (talk) 12:54, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep – the article is supported by multiple reliable sources including mainstream media (e.g. Canadian Jewish News, Forbes Kazakhstan, CMDA, Schulich/York University). Subject is notable as the founder of YEDI, a globally ranked accelerator by UBI Global. Sources confirm awards, academic work, and public recognition.

Oleksandr Makarov (talk) 13:06, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: No clear indication of notability. Does not meet WP:GNG criteria.Rimesodom (talk) 13:29, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Russia-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 15:11, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:40, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 13:11, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

March for Our Lives Seattle

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

This article fails WP:NOTNEWS and WP:NEVENT. The coverage of this protest are just local routine news. After the protest ended, all coverage stopped completely. WhoIsCentreLeft (talk) 12:59, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. WhoIsCentreLeft (talk) 12:59, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Differentiable vector–valued functions from Euclidean space

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

Differentiable vector–valued functions from Euclidean space has interrelated issues. I'm not able to find other sources than the sole one that the article cites (F. Trèves' book on topological vector spaces). I think inasmuch as it is different from just, multivariable differential calculus, it is not a notable topic—in that sense, it may be seen a content fork, where the page is about an obscure TVS approach to a well-known topic that probably doesn't merit coverage on the article about the latter. It is also written in WP:NOTTEXTBOOK-like style, quite closesly paraphrasing Trèves. For example, the portion starting at Differentiable vector–valued functions from Euclidean space#Space of Ck functions corresponds tightly to the portion of Trèves starting at Notation 40.1; see an example of this below:

Article:

Suppose $\Omega _{1}\subseteq \Omega _{2}\subseteq \cdots$ is a sequence of relatively compact open subsets of $\Omega$ whose union is $\Omega$ and that satisfy ${\overline {\Omega _{i}}}\subseteq \Omega _{i+1}$ for all $i.$ Suppose that $\left(V_{\alpha }\right)_{\alpha \in A}$ is a basis of neighborhoods of the origin in $Y.$ Then for any integer $\ell <k+1,$ the sets: ${\mathcal {U}}_{i,\ell ,\alpha }:=\left\{f\in C^{k}(\Omega ;Y):\left(\partial /\partial p\right)^{q}f(p)\in U_{\alpha }{\text{ for all }}p\in \Omega _{i}{\text{ and all }}q\in \mathbb {N} ^{n},|q|\leq \ell \right\}$ form a basis of neighborhoods of the origin for $C^{k}(\Omega ;Y)$ as $i,$ $\ell ,$ and $\alpha \in A$ vary in all possible ways.

Trèves:

Consider a sequence $\Omega _{1}\subset \Omega _{2}\subset \dots \subset \Omega _{j}\subset \dots$ of relatively compact open subsets of $Y$ whose union is equal to $Y$ , an arbitrary integer $l<k+1$ , a basis of neighborhoods of zero in $E$ , [namely] $\{U_{\alpha }\}$ . As $j,l$ and $\alpha$ vary in all possible ways, the subsets of $C^{k}(Y;E)$ , ${\mathcal {U}}_{j,l,\alpha }=\left\{{\underline {f}}:\left(\partial /\partial y\right)^{q}{\underline {f}}(y)\in U_{\alpha }{\text{ for all }}y\in \Omega _{j}{\text{ and all }}q\in \mathbb {N} ^{n},|q|\leq l\right\},$ form a basis of neighborhoods of zero for the $C^{k}$ topology.

ByVarying | talk 02:49, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Mathematics-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 03:16, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: I do not agree with your assertion about a lack of noteworthiness. Also, the topic is substantially different from multivariate calculus. Topological vector spaces are certainly noteworthy, and since differentiability is a corner stone in analysis, it is clear, that differentiable functions with values in such spaces are also noteworthy. The classical definition of differentiability is based on norms (see, for instance, Jean Dieudonné's textbook "Foundations of Modern Analysis"). This classical approach does not work for functions with values in topological vector spaces. So this article has very little to do with multivariate differential calculus. It is a keep. 51.154.152.231 (talk) 16:23, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
When I say notable, I'm talking about WP:N. Being tangentially related to notable topics doesn't make something notable; substantial coverage in RS does. ByVarying | talk 00:58, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 11:30, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Al Dhafra Private School

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

not notable and doesn't pass WP:GNG 𐩣𐩫𐩧𐩨 Abo Yemen (𓃵) 11:11, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. 𐩣𐩫𐩧𐩨 Abo Yemen (𓃵) 11:11, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education and United Arab Emirates. Shellwood (talk) 12:08, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Charles Wilson (missionary)

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

This article looks at first glance very well referenced, but looking more closely, I fear there are some major problems.

Hargrove 1809" doesn't seem to mention Charles Wilson?[1]
Sibree 1923 is a publication by the "London Missionary Society", so not an independent source
Davies 1808 and Davies 1810 are "'publications" from the "Records of the London Missionary Society" and not even really published, it is a microfilmed manuscript
Wharton & Im Thurn 1925 is this source which has one primary mention of Charles Wilson as a co-signatory of a letter
"London Missionary Society 1818a" is obviously a publication from the LMS again

So nothing in the article is actually based on reliable, independent sources about Charles Wilson, which indicates the lack of notability for this missionary (and the text gives no indication why he would be considered notable either). Fram (talk) 10:47, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Religion, England, and Oceania. Fram (talk) 10:47, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Lovett's 1899 History of the London Missionary Society 1795–1895 has (on p.176) Charles Wilson captured on the "Duff" before going out again on the "Royal Admiral" in 1801. So that's how the Hargrove source, an account of the "Duff" voyage, gets joined in. For a fact-poor obituary of Wilson (which outright tells us that it isn't going to tell us anything about the period between 1801 and this person retiring in 1842 and dying in 1857) that however also joins the dots for the "Duff", see the July 1858 Missionary Chronicle, p. 453. There's another obituary in the 1858-09-24 The Friend (v.8 no.9 p.65) which tells is that this person's work "extended over a period of near sixty years", and says not one thing about those 56 years, also stopping the facts at 1801.
That said, perhaps we could have left the article for more than 30 minutes of writing to see how the other 26 sources were going to pan out. Uncle G (talk) 11:36, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Judging from other articles like this one, there was little inclination to keep on working on the article. Many of these other sources were from the LMS as well anyway, and other ones don't really have much on Charles Wilson either (e.g. [chrome-extension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https://scholarspace.manoa.hawaii.edu/server/api/core/bitstreams/a6a00647-248f-40a2-beed-87e632163f33/content this one]). The two sources you mention aren't independent either, of course. Fram (talk) 11:47, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Vasu Raja

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

Lacks notable, verifiable sources proving his subject meets Wikipedia's notability guidelines for a person. Hka-34 Jyli (talk) 09:06, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Hka-34 Jyli (talk) 09:06, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 10:26, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Aviation, Maryland, and Texas. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:38, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Vasu Raja was the high-profile architect of the world's largest airline's commercial strategy including a unique take on distribution for two years before being forced out and continues to be a notable industry expert. He has sufficient coverage to meet the general notability guideline and curious whether a search was done before nomination. Avgeekamfot (talk) 16:58, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Benison (Beni · talk) 10:35, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

weak keep: Seems to be written by a Senior Contributor (which I think is a staff position), Forbes [2]. Not an extensive amount of sourcing, but there is some. Oaktree b (talk) 13:48, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Jasmeen Manzoor

AfDs for this article:

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

Ref 1 is a mention, Ref 2 is tagged as PR, Ref3 is not independent coverage as the coverage given to her was by her own TV station. Ref 4 is a database entry, Ref 5 is a video of her own TV show, Ref 6, 7, 8 merely mention her. Ref 9 is an example of routine coverage (PR again?). Fails WP:GNG and WP:NBIO. Gheus (talk) 08:54, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Journalism, and Pakistan. Shellwood (talk) 10:23, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:40, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: AfDed before. Not eligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Benison (Beni · talk) 10:34, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Limited amount of coverage [3] and [4]. First is about her parent passing away, second one is by her employer. We don't have enough for notability. Oaktree b (talk) 13:51, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Radhikaraje Gaekwad

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

Fails WP:GNG and WP:NOTINHERITED.

None of the reliable sources provide significant coverage to the subject separate from their family. Koshuri ^(グ) 09:41, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and India. Koshuri ^(グ) 09:41, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Royalty and nobility, and Gujarat. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:40, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Muhammad Rizvi

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

Draft on this subject was declined multiple times due to lack of notability. Since it was still under process of improvisation, editor has blanked the draft and moved the article into main space. Article doesn't meet BLP criteria. Rahmatula786 (talk) 10:37, 16 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Spirituality. Rahmatula786 (talk) 10:37, 16 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Islam, Bihar, and Canada. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 10:42, 16 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I tried to find some sources, but failed to do so. The subject does not meet WP:GNG and WP:NBIO as of now. Taabii (talk) 13:35, 16 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I implore all of you to look at the sources provided already. Multiple established Canadian news articles (National Post, Toronto Sun, Toronto Star), JSTOR, and published books. BurimKazimi (talk) 14:34, 16 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
An editor on a similar forum says about a separate article, "My search through Google resources (e.g. Google Books, Google Scholar) and provincial archives (accessed through Vancouver City archives and UBC archives) yielded no in-depth coverage by reliable sources." This editor, regarding that article, is correct. See for yourself. Please note that this subject, however, must be far from such criteria, as subject is established clearly in Google Books, provincial news (National Post, Toronto Sun, Toronto Star,) Toronto city archives (multiple examples, some front-page,) JSTOR, and MEMRI. BurimKazimi (talk) 22:28, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:18, 16 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Please identify this sourcing not just vague waves
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 14:57, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

They're all in the article. BurimKazimi (talk) 15:39, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Any further thoughts?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 08:55, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Gonna do a source assessment: Refs 1, 2, 12, 13, 15, 17 have short quotes from Rizvi on other topics and do not count towards the GNG. Ref 3 quotes Rizvi extensively – not sigcov about him, but this indicates to me that he is a subject-matter expert. Ref 4 mentions that Muhammad Rizvi's father was a "well-known Shia imam and writer" but doesn't have sigcov of the son. Ref 5 is an obituary for the father which briefly mention's the son's job, not sigcov. Ref 6 has long quotes from him and mentions that a school he was affiliated with was suspended, not quite sigcov but closer. Ref 7 is a short biography, definitely sigcov, but it is not really independent, given it seems to be hosted by an online school he works for. I don't have access to the book cited in ref 8, so I cannot judge it. Ref 9 doesn't have the title of the article, so I can't find it on ProQuest. Ref 10 quotes Rizvi extensively but from the part I can see doesn't give much information about him beyond his job. Ref 11 is a passing mention. Ref 14 has longer quotes from Rizvi. Ref 16 is just a photo. Refs 18, 19, and 20 are about a document he signed along with a large number of other people; they do not contain sigcov, simply listing his name once or not mentioning him at all. Ref 21 is a long quote from him, from a source of dubious reliability (WP:MEMRI). Ref 22 is a scholarly source that extensively references Rizvi's writing and at one point criticizes it – if we had more sources like this, we might meet WP:NAUTHOR, but one alone is not enough, and this is not sigcov about him. Ref 23 is a biography (sigcov), but it is not clear to me if it is independent. Ref 24 is the only source that definitely counts toward the GNG.
Based on the sourcing in the article alone I lean towards !voting weak delete, but he does seem to be an influential and oft-cited expert on religious matters. Toadspike [Talk] 09:44, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- I did a few spot checks, starting with the JSTOR source, and came to much the same conclusions. The sourcing to a photograph of 3 blokes standing around is one of the particularly poor pieces of sourcing. Surely there was a piece that had words in it, to accompany the photograph! Uncle G (talk) 09:58, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Lonestar Shootout 2022

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

No notable pro wrestling event. Most sources are just WP:ROUTINE coverage, no coverage after the show to prove notability. Searching for sources, it doesn't look like the event had coverage after [5] HHH Pedrigree (talk) 12:07, 16 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep This recurrent event is the first of a continuous series of pay-per-views. Coverage from recently implemented reliable sources such as Pro Wrestling Dot Net, POSTWrestling, Fightful and Wrestling Observer Newsletter are enough to support WP:NOTABILITY. JeyReydar97 (talk) 10:12, 17 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Even if the article has coverage, there is no in-deep coverage of the event AFTER it happened. Wikipedia:Notability (events) talks about it. While the event was covered at the time, there is no much sources years after. --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 17:47, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

As demonstrated above, NJPW pay-per-views (as topics) are always subjects of WP:SIGCOV. However, they don't always need to have ongoing coverage since generally demonstrating WP:SUSTAINED and WP:NTEMP (no need for extra future articles to provide more coverage as established by NTEMP). The Duration of coverage subsection of the inclusion criteria also talks about it. Narrowing down to the hereby case, the article meets at least two main criterias of WP:DEPTH through it's references. Sources such as [6] which are not featured in the article but can be googled check the WP:FUTUREEVENT criteria. All of the reliable sources already featured in the article check the criteria of WP:DIVERSE. JeyReydar97 (talk) 15:05, 19 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2025 March 16. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 12:25, 16 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Wrestling, and Texas. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 12:45, 16 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 15:00, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 08:54, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Patrick Durusau

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

While certainly accomplished, I cannot find enough in-depth references to show that he meets WP:GNG, and does not meet WP:NSCHOLAR. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 16:11, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Law. Shellwood (talk) 17:02, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Authors, United States of America, and Louisiana. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:24, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Fails WP:GNG. Gheus (talk) 07:45, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep or redirect to High places in cyberspace. I have found three reviews of his book High places in cyberspace: in the Journal of Near Eastern Studies [7], in Semeia : an Experimental Journal for Biblical Studies [8] (p 166), and in the Journal of Feminist Studies in Religion [9]. So it looks as though the book is notable, per WP:NBOOK. We could either write an article about the book, or keep the article about him, adding references including the book reviews. There are certainly newspaper articles which verify that he worked as a defence lawyer, which don't contribute to notability but would probably be better sources than a law report. I haven't yet found secondary sources about his work with OASIS or ISO standards. RebeccaGreen (talk) 12:42, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
We could move the current article to the book title, to maintain history, and make the article about the book, which per your sourcing looks notable. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 20:51, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 08:52, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Aranmula Palace

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

The article has been subject to several AfDs under multiple titles (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aranmula Kottaram and the much older Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aranmula palace). The article has weak sourcing and search results turn almost none that can demonstrate wp:notability. Recommend redirection to Aranmula as with the most recent AfD (that was closed three months ago!). Please note that the author's edits mostly revolve around promoting the palace as a standalone article. ToadetteEdit (talk) 17:33, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Architecture, Royalty and nobility, and Kerala. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:02, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
What with Aranmula palace (AfD discussion), Aranmula Kottaram (AfD discussion), Aranmula Mangattu Palace, Aranmula Vadake Kottaram (Northern Palace), Aranmula Palace (Aranmula Palace), Aranmula Palace (Aranmula Kottaram), Aranmula Pala (Aranmula Kotta), Draft:Aranmula Kottaram, Draft:Aranmula Mangattu Kottaram, and Aranmula Mangattu Kottaram it is becoming hard to keep track. It doesn't help that the articles don't clarify which of these is the real Kottaram. Uncle G (talk) 18:43, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Dear all, The malayalam word 'kottaram' means Palace in english language. vadake kottaram is the name of palace. There was another big palace in aranmula known as 'Valiya kottaram'(Meaning-big palace). when valiya kottaram demolished on 1985, last king moved to Vadakke kottaram and continued to live there until 2008.then he left aranmula and died last year. The malayalam word 'vadakke' means northen in english language. After 5 yeas research,in the book 'Aranmula Ithihyavum Charithra Sathyangalum' Written By K P Sreeranganadhan, he mentioned in page 418 that he have proofs that showing vadakke kottaram renovated in 1910 and got approval from kerala ruled king. Since aranmula dynasty don't had any ruling privilege's, and it is a small village, it is not mentioned much in history. However, in the book Kerala A Journey in Time Part II: Kingdom Of Cochin & Thekamkoor Rajyam; People Places and Potpourr, written by George Abraham, also describes Aranmula palace belongs to Thekumkoor dynasy. Article's about aranmula kottaram is there in news channel is also added in references. I don't know how to vote for 'keep' this article. i couldn't find any 'keep' button. yes to protect this page, I have done some small mistakes. I have created a page on 2009 in wikipedia and from 2018-2021 onwards, this page is targeted and attacked. it is mentioned that the article has been subject to several AfDs. it was for the first page and it is deleted by some one without even informing me. Sorry to say You people didnot take any action against user who do vandalism. I have recreated this page and Now again.. Please keep in mind that there are lot of treasures in world like this which are not recorded properly in history. I have spend a lot of time and effort. I had enough mental stress due to this page and not anymore. If you think this is fake, you may delete this. You can delete only Wikipedia page but not the real palace which will remain in Aranmula for ever.
Thanks Ajithchandra (talk) 12:05, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect per nom. If this is a duplicate of another article, then it could be redirected there, but in the absence of a better redirect target, the town article is the most appropriate. Celia Homeford (talk) 13:37, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- This is not duplicate. This is recreated page when someone targeted and deleted first page after continuous vandalism. You may ask why i didnt reported. First of all, i am not a wikpedia expert. I have reported it in edit history and to some people who tagged for deletion. After reading my reply, they all just left instead of providing support. I tried to go through the help but to be honest, it was very confusing and there is no simple steps to follow. So i did what i can do. What else i am suppose to do when there is no support from wiki experts? Ajithchandra (talk) 12:33, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect both this article and the equally poorly sourced page Aranmula Mangattu Palace to Aranmula. I agree with the user above that it's becoming hard to keep track of the drafts and all the similar pages. Keivan.f^Talk 19:27, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep This is genuine article and the authenticity is proved in the books mentioned in reference. This article is also useful for people who are searching about Aranmula. The malayalam word 'kottaram' means Palace in English language. vadake kottaram is the name of palace.. After 5 yeas research, in the book 'Aranmula Ithihyavum Charithra Sathyangalum' Written By K P Sreeranganadhan, he mentioned in page 418 that he have proofs that showing vadakke kottaram renovated in 1910 and got approval from Kerala ruled king. Since Aranmula dynasty don't had any ruling privilege's, and it is a small village, it is not mentioned much in history. However, in the book Kerala A Journey in Time Part II: Kingdom Of Cochin & Thekamkoor Rajyam; People Places and Potpourr, written by George Abraham, also describes Aranmula palace belongs to Thekumkoor dynasty. Article's about aranmula kottaram is there in the news is also added in references.Ajithchandra (talk) 13:21, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- I was not aware of what was happening, but now I have a clear picture. The original page was created in 2009. The issues with this page began when a user, Arjunvishnu2000, along with another user, repeatedly attempted to change its content to "Mangattu Palace" (a different building near this palace) from 2018 to 2024. Every time I reverted their edits, they change it again after 2–3 months. I was so frustrated that I even tried creating a separate page for Mangattu Palace, hoping they would stop the vandalism and work on that page instead. However, when their repeated edit attempts failed, they then tried multiple times to have this page deleted. I did not receive any notifications about these actions until December 2024. I was also unaware that the original page had been redirected. One day, when I searched for it, I couldn't find it. As a result, I recreated the page, thinking the original content was lost.
  If you check the edit histories, you can clearly understand this. Unfortunately, it now seems that admins are protecting the page of user responsible for the vandalism while attempting to remove the real page. Ajithchandra (talk) 14:53, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep This palace still exists in Aranmula and serves as a valuable reference for those interested in building a Nalukettu-style house. I believe this page should remain to inform those who are not familiar with Aranmula. vasu44 (talk) 17:58, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Which Kottaram is the real Kottaram? Uncle G (talk) 10:13, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 08:52, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The book mentioned says, in toto, 10 words on this subject: "The Thkkumku royal family had several palaces, including Aranmula Palace". Clearly, even the article creator cannot give a simple verifiable statement of which Kottaram is the real Kottaram, given that there are 2 different buildings across a host of articles, and no decent sourcing. One has to appreciate, also, the new anonymous web-log purported source dated the very day that Ajithchandra weighed into this discussion, tagged with "wikipedia" at the bottom. Uncle G (talk) 10:13, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Aranmula. This article fails WP:GNG. A standalone article about the palace cannot be justified with the sources presented.--DesiMoore (talk) 15:31, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Lawrence C. Marsh

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

Fails WP:GNG & Wp:nprof Sabirkir (talk) 11:18, 16 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators and Economics. Sabirkir (talk) 11:18, 16 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Two items with pretty good citation levels is below what I'm generally looking for in WP:NPROF. University-wide teaching awards do not contribute here. On the other hand, one book tends to fall under WP:BLP1E so far as WP:NAUTHOR goes; I did not anyway find reviews on a cursory search. Russ Woodroofe (talk) 14:13, 16 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Indiana, and Michigan. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:18, 16 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete. For someone at this level of seniority, two well-cited publications (one a textbook) with the rest falling off steeply is below the bar for WP:PROF#C1, and nothing else in the article looks to contribute to notability. I did find one published review of the book, and hints that there might have been another by Garman in [10] (from which any book reviews are now missing), but even if I could find the second review it wouldn't be enough for WP:AUTHOR. —David Eppstein (talk) 19:46, 16 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. To my mind a notable econometrician. His founding of/chairing of the Midwest Econometrics Group (MEG) is I think very notable within the US academic econometrics community and his role as the guest editor for a special edition of a highly prestigious econometrics journal - the Journal of Econometrics is important, as his work on Splines in ecmetrics via his book and papers ... and these seem to me together sufficient for notability. His published academic work in econometrics is very wide ranging....and I have used some if it in different contexts.... His later post-retirement books and media / opinion piece work seem to me less notable (but my bias is towards the academic side) and I don't know how notable his work as an independent Midwest Voices columnist on the Kansas City Star online edition might be from a journalistic point of view. (Msrasnw (talk) 07:56, 19 March 2025 (UTC))[reply]
Keep The article has been expanded since its creation. The contributions made by Msrasnw, consisting of valuable content including his publications, serve to further establish the notability of the subject. Gedaali (talk) 08:22, 20 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. While he has (as mentioned above) a couple of well cited papers, the dropoff is fast and the total number of citations at 1359 is weak. His own page does not indicate anything notable except some prior students; notability is not inheritable from his prior students. I don't see indications that his book(s) have had an impact. Ldm1954 (talk) 16:29, 22 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:56, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 08:50, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Royce Cronin

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

Completely unreferenced article about an actor. As always, actors are not automatically entitled to Wikipedia articles just because they exist, and have to be shown to pass WP:GNG on third-party media coverage about them and their performances -- but this cites no references at all, and is written in a semi-advertorialized tone that's not complying with WP:NPOV.
As he's a British actor whose strongest claims to potentially passing NACTOR are television roles from 20 years ago, I'm willing to withdraw this if a British editor with better access to archived UK media coverage from the noughts can find enough GNG-worthy sourcing to salvage it, but nothing here is "inherently" notable enough to exempt him from having to have any referencing. Bearcat (talk) 18:03, 16 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers and United Kingdom. Bearcat (talk) 18:03, 16 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, Theatre, England, and New Zealand. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:11, 16 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Fails GNG, NACTOR and SIGCOV. Also contains WP:SELFPROMO, as at least one, probably both, of the IP edits is/are by the subject himself. DerbyCountyinNZ ^{(Talk Contribs)} 19:28, 16 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete no SIGCOV. Alexeyevitch^(talk) 07:24, 17 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete found nothing in my search that'd contribute towards GNG. Traumnovelle (talk) 02:31, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete have yet to find independent RS referencing the subject in detail asides from brief mentions of his roles from what I have found so far.Villkomoses (talk) 17:15, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep He meets WP:NACTOR with significant roles in 24Seven, Family Affairs and more recently on stage in The Band Back Together, a stage play by Barney Norris which does not yet have a WP article, but has reviews from The Guardian, The Times and The Spectator, which I have added to this article, and is thus clearly notable. He has also had other stage roles, including in a well-reviewed production of Bouncers by John Godber (which also should have a WP article). RebeccaGreen (talk) 17:55, 22 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - per WP:NACTOR - Had two regular roles on main channels in the UK. I have expanded the article slightly. Thank you for explaining RebeccaGreen - I was able to find sources for the works you talked about using the newspaper archive. Perhaps this just needs extra research, a lot of his career was in the 1990s and early 2000s and the link rot obviously means we lost sources for his early roles. I have sourced some early role info using archives.Rain the 1 21:20, 22 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - I would request that this stays open longer since the original rationale and subsequent support for deletion is based on an unsourced version of this article [11] - I have sourced more of the actor's early life and career beginnings since my previous comment. Also pinging @Alexeyevitch:@DerbyCountyinNZ:@Villkomoses:@Traumnovelle:@Bearcat: - should I continue trying to expand it?Rain the 1 22:00, 22 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per sources provided by RebeccaGreen and the improvement (WP:HEY) done by RainTheOne. The subject is clearly notable and meets NACTOR. There are also multiple newspaper sources discussing the actor that I can email. DaniloDaysOfOurLives (talk) 18:22, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:50, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 08:49, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Grand National Unity Party

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

Delete – The article does not meet Wikipedia’s notability guidelines for organizations.

- **No direct sources**: There are no independent, verifiable sources directly covering the subject. - **Lack of references**: No reliable references exist to establish the significance of this political party. - **Fails WP:GNG**: The article does not meet Wikipedia’s general notability guidelines. - **Violates Wikipedia’s sourcing policies**: This article fails to provide reliable sources and lacks independent sources, violating Wikipedia’s verifiability policy.

For these reasons, I support the deletion of this article. --Kim jong min (hanyang) (talk) 06:52, 31 March 2025 (UTC) Kim jong min (hanyang) (talk) 06:52, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2025 March 31. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 07:08, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Politics, and South Korea. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:42, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Chengdu Golden Apple Child Education

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

I can't find any information about this company. The only company with a similar name I found was not founded in 1985. I'm not sure if it exists, and there are no references to this entry. Babaibiaobin (talk) 07:14, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - The company exists (website, Baidu Baike), but doesn't seem notable enough to have any in-depth news coverage – I only found a brief mention in this Fortune article. --Iiii I I I (talk) 09:09, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Education, and China. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:43, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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

Delete – The article does not meet Wikipedia’s notability guidelines for organizations.

- **No direct sources**: There are no independent, verifiable sources directly covering the subject. - **Lack of references**: No reliable references exist to establish the significance of this political party. - **Fails WP:GNG**: The article does not meet Wikipedia’s general notability guidelines. - **Does not meet all three criteria for Wikipedia notability**: The subject is not listed in a biographical dictionary, has not received a significant award, and has not demonstrated consistent contributions that establish enduring notability.

For these reasons, I support the deletion of this article.--Jo HyeonSeong (talk) 07:00, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2025 March 31. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 07:07, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

WAMPOC/WAMPEX

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

Insufficient notability, as it relies on self-referential sources and lacks significant independent coverage from credible publications that establish the conference as a prominent part within the energy industry Mapsama (talk) 07:05, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. Mapsama (talk) 07:05, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Business, Africa, and Ghana. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:44, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Lhoist group

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

due to a lack of notability, as significant coverage from independent reliable sources is missing, and the content is too short to provide notability Mapsama (talk) 07:03, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Mapsama (talk) 07:03, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Belgium-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:45, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I'm surprised a company this large and old (established 1889) has so little coverage other than routine listings. I would change my opinion if more coverage could be found. Maybe someone with better access to offline print media archives could find something? WeirdNAnnoyed (talk) 10:55, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Andres David Drobny

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

questionable notability, as it relies predominantly on sources too closely associated with the subject and lacks significant independent coverage in reputable publications. Additionally, the article presents a promotional tone Mapsama (talk) 07:02, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Mapsama (talk) 07:02, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - just about meets WP:NAUTHOR, with two reviews of the subject's book in academic journals, which I have added to the article. I agree the tone is rather promotional. Cheers, SunloungerFrog (talk) 09:58, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If it’s two reviews about the author’s book without any awards, I believe the entry should be about the book and not the author. Best, Reading Beans, Duke of Rivia 14:22, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Authors, Businesspeople, England, and Massachusetts. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:47, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Midas Pharma

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

I recommend the deletion of the MIdas Pharma page due to a lack of notability, as it does not have sufficient independent coverage in reputable sources to demonstrate its significance in the pharmacy industry Mapsama (talk) 07:00, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Mapsama (talk) 07:00, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Medicine and Germany. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:48, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

CTGP-R

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

Non-notable stub about an unofficial game mod that lacks sufficient coverage or depth. Contested WP:PROD. Current secondary sourcing is one reasonably in-depth TheGamer article about the subject, and a trivial mention in a WaPo article. A quick search yields little other than a brief mention in a Cracked article here: [12] All in all, this isn't exactly the pedigree or depth of coverage for a video game article. (Note: I'm not sure who decided to NPP tag what feels like every single possible tag on the page, but that wasn't me. The 'sources exist' tag is not accompanied by any suggested sources in-article or on the talk page.) ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 06:52, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 06:52, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Whether it's unofficial has no bearing in notability since we are not Nintendo, but it doesn't seem to have reached a decent threshold of significant coverage. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 10:23, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for pointing that out - I agree I should probably go for concision and avoid coloring the rationale with a description of the title as it emphasises things that aren't relevant to notability, like that it's an unofficial game mod. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 10:39, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I can only find the Washington Post and Cracked articles used for sourcing, WP isn't entirely about this mod, Cracked doesn't seem to be a RS/unclear reliability. I don't find anything else for sourcing, so it's a delete. Oaktree b (talk) 13:55, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Instead of straight up deleting it, we should just Draftify it instead. TzarN64 (talk) 15:42, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Operation Dost

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

This article documents a routine humanitarian mission that received only brief, routine news coverage and does not meet Wikipedia’s notability criteria for events (WP:EVENT). It clearly falls under WP:NOTNEWS, lacking the enduring coverage or in-depth secondary sources required by WP:GNG. There is no indication of lasting encyclopedic significance.

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2025 March 31. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 06:43, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Syria, India, and Turkey. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:52, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Operation Brahma

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

The article fails Wikipedia’s notability guidelines for events (WP:EVENT) and falls under WP:NOTNEWS. It documents a routine news event without lasting encyclopedic significance. There is little to no in-depth coverage in multiple, reliable secondary sources that demonstrate enduring notability. As such, it does not meet WP:GNG and should be deleted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chegouahora (talk • contribs) 06:15, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2025 March 31. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 06:27, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to the page on the quake. Hyperbolick (talk) 06:32, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The details that exist in this article are too long and would be WP:UNDUE coverage if fully merged into the main article. EmeraldRange (talk/contribs) 12:33, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - theres literally a lot of pages like this Category:Humanitarian military operations involving India. India everytime launches a significant humanitarian aid with special names as an operation which is notable. I'm not only referring to india, there are loads of rescue operation like this by the US too Category:Non-combat military operations involving the United States. Imwin567 (talk) 06:47, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I get that there are similar articles about other operations, but just because those exist doesn’t automatically mean this one should stay too. Every article still has to meet Wikipedia’s notability standards on its own.

Imo though, the coverage for Operation Brahma seems pretty limited, it's mostly short-term news without any real in-depth analysis or long-term significance. That’s why I think it falls under WP:NOTNEWS and probably doesn’t meet WP:GNG either. It's best that this article be merged to the page on the quake and this deleted. Chegouahora (talk) 07:15, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The article is yet to be updated. The operation is not even finished yet, you are rushing. Theres a lot more. Check the timeline section of the article. Later there will be numbers of how many being rescued and the role of operation brahma of the earthquake. Imwin567 (talk) 07:23, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

What exactly makes this in particular so special from other rescue missions other countries are doing to where it warrants its own wikipedia page? The material, resources, manpower in this rescue mission done by India are all at similar levels to other countries. It does not warrant its own wikipedia article. Chegouahora (talk) 12:23, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Myanmar, and India. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:53, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Negative checking

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

After a cursory search through the sources listed in part D of WP:BEFORE, I failed to find any other notable sources (much less three) that specifically speaks of negative checking as opposed to someone's checking account having a negative balance. A search for neg check is admittedly a bit more promising, but it mainly turns out online services as opposed to notable sources.

Given that we can't really merge this article into our article on the fictitious persons disclaimer (which itself doesn't really discuss negative checking), I propose deleting this article. Silcox (talk) 05:18, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

no opinion on how notable, but I looked for the Lunney and Oliphant book mentioned on the page, and it indeed has a para on negative checking just as described, on page 728. Hyperbolick (talk) 06:31, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- I'll admit that I'm unable to read the book due to technical reasons, although I was already aware that the book was mentioned in the article even while writing this AfD. I cannot find any other sources on negative checking, so I think we're stuck in 1R territory even if the book proved to be a non-passing reference for the subject. Silcox (talk) 06:58, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  - That's a shame, because if you had, you would have seen that the source cites a second source itself: Barendt et al. 1997a, pp. 114–115 harvnb error: no target: CITEREFBarendtLustgartenNorrieStephenson1997a (help) and Barendt et al. 1997b, pp. 195 harvnb error: no target: CITEREFBarendtLustgartenNorrieStephenson1997b (help). That said, I think that this is the BBC's idiosyncratic name for this. I found exactly one other mention, and it was in a directory of BBC departments in a 1993 handbook on television production (ISBN 9780240513447). (Yes, BBC. The original source talks about the BBC. See page 132.) Uncle G (talk) 08:36, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    - Barendt, Eric; Lustgarten, Laurence; Norrie, Kenneth; Stephenson, Hugh (1997a). "Broadcasting". Libel and the Media: The Chilling Effect. Clarendon Press. pp. 100–125. doi:10.1093/oso/9780198262275.003.0005. ISBN 9780198262275.
    - Barendt, Eric; Lustgarten, Laurence; Norrie, Kenneth; Stephenson, Hugh (1997b). "Conclusions". Libel and the Media: The Chilling Effect. Clarendon Press. pp. 182–198. doi:10.1093/oso/9780198262275.003.0009. ISBN 9780198262275.

The section heading used on Barendt et al. 1997a, p. 114 is "The Problem of Unintentional Defamation", by the way. You will get a lot further with unintentional defamation as the subject name. Of course we've had a missing subject titled by one particular nonce noun phrase instead of the actual name since 2008. This is Wikipedia. ☺ Uncle G (talk) 09:24, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements, Radio, Television, and Law. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:54, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. It's a UK term, not specifically a BBC one - and indeed the example given in the article is an ITV programme, although it is used at the BBC. Smethurst's How to Write for Television (both 2000 and 2016 editions) has half a page of discussion of neg checking under Libel. Gallagher's Breaking into UK Film and TV Drama (2016) mentions it under Clearances. Orlebar's The Practical Media Dictionary (2003) has an entry for Negative Checks. Note that all of these have a slightly different definition from the current article - it's not just about individuals' names, but also about products and companies. I didn't find any examples of it being used outside the UK; from the US, Patz's Production Management 101 (2002) uses it to mean checking film negatives. Adam Sampson (talk) 13:32, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- With 3 slangy sources where "neg check" is string matched to something partway down and buried in the middle of what is actually a discussion of defamation (the "libel" sources saying "defamatory matter" outright), specifically unintentional defamation, how one risks it and how one can attempt to avoid it, you make my case for me.
  If you go instead to the higher quality law sources like Douglas Maule's Media Law Essentials (EUP, 2017) or Robertson and Lane's Media Law: The Rights of Journalists and Broadcasters (Longman, 1984) you'll find this and more under unintentional defamation. There's tonnes of this if one actually gets the subject name right and stops following the Wikipedia practice of using slang titles and string matching.
  I'll mention at this point that the Lunney and Oliphant book is on the law of tort and page 728 is part of chapter 12, on defamation, pages 727 to 729 dealing with intent and with E. Hulton & Co. v Jones, 20 (AC 1910). as the aforementioned do as well (and which has had impact in Indian and Australian jurispridence). Even the 1 original source cited is telling us all what the subject is. Uncle G (talk) 14:43, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Move to unintentional defamation and refactor this content into a section on means of preventing this, basically per Uncle G. BD2412 T 14:53, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Vivienne Pinay

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

Does not pass GNG. Only piece of independent, in-depth coverage is an interview in "Hotspots Magazine" from 2013. The other source with subject's name in headline is just a recap of a reality TV episode on which the subject was eliminated; it is not in-depth coverage of Vivienne Pinay. ꧁Zanahary꧂ 04:57, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, Sexuality and gender, Philippines, and Georgia (U.S. state). ꧁Zanahary꧂ 04:57, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 12:09, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Lineysha Sparx

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

Does not pass GNG. The only piece of in-depth, independent coverage of this person is an interview from 2013 in Hotspots Magazine. ꧁Zanahary꧂ 04:54, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, Entertainment, Sexuality and gender, Puerto Rico, and New York. ꧁Zanahary꧂ 04:54, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 12:09, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Vuk Topličević

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

I could find nothing meaningful on this young player. Possibly WP:TOOSOON, but as it stands right now, there doesn't appear to be any WP:SIGCOV here. Anwegmann (talk) 04:45, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. Anwegmann (talk) 04:45, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Contested draftification. The creator did not respect or understand draftification, and has messed up the edit history somewhat. Only 1 senior football game means a huge failure of WP:SPORTCRIT. I did find this. Geschichte (talk) 05:02, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and Serbia. Shellwood (talk) 12:07, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment – For countries that do not use Latin Alphabet, searching in their original script is where the coverage would be; a plain English search is generally not sufficient. In this case, has anyone tried searching under "Вук Топличевић" on Google? ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 14:54, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Diamonds Are Forever, So Are Morals

AfDs for this article:

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

While reviewing my past AfD nominations, I came across this page and noticed that it has been further improved. Upon closer examination, I discovered that the book in question was published under the Penguin Enterprise imprint, which is essentially a vanity publishing division of Penguin Random House India. As per WP:NBOOKS, "Self-publication and/or publication by a vanity press do not establish notability." So, I am nominating the page again. This book is simply a strategic attempt to improve someone's public image. Charlie (talk) 17:18, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Literature and India. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:21, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That it was self-published doesn't make it not notable if there are reviews. It just tends to correlate with a lack of reviews. Reviews were brought up in the last AfD. Do you have new reason to believe those are unreliable (not out of the question since NEWSORGINDIA) PARAKANYAA (talk) 19:06, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

In my personal opinion, I feel that a book published through a vanity press and written by a rocket scientist rather than a business expert may not have the same credibility as works from any other established author. Also, a glance at the author's Wikipedia page shows that they have written on almost every topic imaginable, which is quite something. Interestingly, the book is mostly reviewed in Indian news portals (which, as everyone knows, lacks integrity WP:NEWSORGINDIA) instead of respected academic journals, which makes one wonder about the recognition it’s getting. Overall, things don’t quite seem to add up. Now, if I let my imagination run a little further, it wouldn’t be too far-fetched to think that Govind Dholakia, the subject of this autobiography, might have funded this autobiography to bolster his bid for a Rajya Sabha seat. While it is being claimed that he has been 'elected,' a closer look at the process tells a different story. In India, Rajya Sabha members from each state are chosen by the state's MLAs through an indirect election using proportional representation with a single transferable vote (STV). Given that Gujarat's legislature is dominated by BJP MLAs and that Dholakia was fielded as a BJP candidate, it’s hardly surprising that he secured the seat. It does raise the question, though was this a genuine election or just a well-orchestrated move to further his legacy? Charlie (talk) 05:05, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I see your points, however the issue is that an author or publisher's credibility isn't necessarily the deciding factor in whether or not a book passes notability guidelines or is independently notable of its author or subject. What is the deciding factor would be coverage in independent and reliable sources.

Now as far as sourcing goes, you're correct in that there is an issue with churnalism in Indian news sources. However that doesn't mean that all Indian news sources are unusable. Some are, but others can still be usable - and with others it might be a case of where in the paper the article was published rather than the outlet as a whole. WP:ICTFSOURCES has a pretty good list of what's usable and what isn't. The list is geared towards film, however it should suffice in this situation as well. Offhand with the article, most of the sources are from usable outlets like Deccan Chronicle, The Asian Age, and Outlook India. The Indian Express is usable as long as it's not from their Brand section. DeshGujarat and The Hindu Businessline are kind of questionable. Both would need to go through WP:RS/N to determine its usability even for minor details. What doesn't help with THB is that the film sourcing list mentions them as an example of incorrect reporting. All of that means that even if we remove the questionable sources, that still leaves us with three definitely usable sources, all of which are reviews - so notability is established.

Now instead of arguing notability or bringing up the article's creation history, a better argument to make would be whether or not there's enough information about the book to make an individual article worthwhile or if it's largely redundant to the main article on Dholakia. One common issue with biographies is that sometimes the book fails to get any coverage other than reviews of the work. This means that there's no coverage on the writing process or any other information that would be unique to the book - note that this coverage would include primary sources like the author's website or interviews about the book's development. In cases like this the book may pass notability guidelines, but still not have enough overall information to really be all that useful - so in some cases it ends up that the book can be more or less summarized in a paragraph on the subject's Wikipedia page. Now, I haven't looked at any of the sources so it's entirely possible that this coverage does exist and can be used to flesh out the book article and make it worthwhile. I think that should absolutely be explored. Otherwise it's a case of merge and redirect rather than delete because the book is notable - it's just a question of where it should be covered. ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (｡◕‿◕｡) 16:37, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@ReaderofthePack your words leave no room for debate. If this AfD discussion requires a proper and conclusive closure, it must be grounded in the reasoning put forth by you. Thank you for not only guiding this discussion but also helping me understand better. Charlie (talk) 18:05, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No problem! Biographies are kind of a weird area, honestly. Whenever they come up part of me wants to keep them for completionism, but in many cases there's just not a lot of non-review information. If the parent page is particularly large I'll often argue for inclusion because it would be difficult to really include content about the book adequately, but in this case the subject's article is kind of lean and a small section about that would help flesh it out more. ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (｡◕‿◕｡) 20:55, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, SK2242 (talk) 03:37, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: I found three book reviews last time, that's more than we have for most book articles that come to AfD. This isn't War and Peace, but a biography about a businessman. I'm satisfied with the sourcing given. Oaktree b (talk) 13:58, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Date My Family Nigeria

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

This article's subject does not meet notability requirements. I could not find many reliable sources mentioning it. Most of the references in the article do not seem to be reliable and independent of the subject. Cyrobyte (talk) 02:41, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete The article is poorly written, has many errors, and does not meet notability requirements. All news I could find are promotional content for the subject. ^Wiinter_U 02:49, 31 March 2025 (UTC

Delete: Also did not find any meaningful sources on the topic. silviaASH (inquire within) 07:12, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Nigeria. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:55, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Gay Valimont

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

Random congressional candidate. WP:NPOL says you don't get a Wikipedia page just for running for office, and I don't see how she meets WP:GNG either. BottleOfChocolateMilk (talk) 02:23, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Florida-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 03:17, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 03:17, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 03:18, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. It is one week until a notable special election that a large part of the nation is watching, especially this Democrat candidate in what was traditionally "Trump country". I want to add that waiting may provide the article for a congressional representative. The article just needs work. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Starlighsky (talk • contribs) 04:10, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"Just being an elected local official, or an unelected candidate for political office, does not guarantee notability" -- WP:NPOL. There are U.S. House special elections every year. I don't see the argument for why this one is uniquely notable. BottleOfChocolateMilk (talk) 14:55, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: I don't see coverage outside of the news he's running for office. I'm not even sure what this person did for a living, or any other personal information, as there is no coverage... Long way from notability. Oaktree b (talk) 12:13, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge with Draft:Gay Valimont, which existed prior to the creation of this article, pending the outcome of the special election. Per the nominator and Oaktree b, the notability bar is not currently met. I suggest deleting this article and merging its edit history with that of the draft page. A. Randomdude0000 (talk) 14:54, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep orMerge with Draft:Gay Valimont as per above. Flat Out (talk) 05:24, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: The special election is soon and deleting it would be stupid, also according to the florida department of state, she is leading in escambia county by party registration and prevented republicans from getting majorities of the vote in the other 3 counties, which hasn't been done by a democrat in the district since 1994. There are also several secondary sources on her. 2600:1006:B33F:26F8:1999:16DC:ED14:F0D2 (talk) 15:37, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to 2025 Florida's 1st congressional district special election If she wins, we can always restore the article history, and if she doesn't, this will likely head to RfD and we can also deal with the draft at that time. Nathannah • 📮 19:22, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment We are within a week until the election. While I believe that most candidates for congress should be redirected to the page about their election, when we are this close to the election, we should refrain from closing the discussion until after the election has concluded to see if the candidate would then pass WP:NPOL. If not, we can then access whether there is a) sufficient coverage to pass WP:GNG or there remains a reason to keep a stand-alone page, when most of the candidate's biography could be placed on the page about the special election. --Enos733 (talk) 20:26, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: There are several secondary sources and to find them all you have to do is look for them. This special election is notable because she raised millions in trump country. W1luck (talk) 23:35, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect the page to 2025 Florida's 1st congressional district special election for the time being. This is probably just too soon. wizzito | say hello! 23:55, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to 2025 Florida's 1st congressional district special election, with a selective merge to Draft:Gay Valimont if needed. There is just not enough non-special election coverage to warrant an article. Esolo5002 (talk) 05:57, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
However, the Florida special elections in less than a week are being covered by NBC News and so on, in part, because so much funding is flowing in for these congressional elections. Starlighsky (talk) 14:01, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to 2025 Florida's 1st congressional district special election, there is just not enough notability beyond Valimont being a congressional candidate to warrant a stand-alone article.

Stanloona2020 (talk) 18:25, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, or in the alternate, merge. She has raised an extraordinary amount of money, which sadly is what counts today. Bearian (talk) 02:12, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Bearian, to clarify, are you voting keep or merge? Because those are two different things. And raising a lot of money doesn't automatically entitle someone to a Wikipedia page. Marcus Flowers raised $17 million in his campaign against Marjorie Taylor Greene and has no page. BottleOfChocolateMilk (talk) 02:20, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I voted keep, but don't oppose a merger. Bearian (talk) 02:23, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, but with some overhauls. I think it could be notable considering it's a mainly republican area that she's running in. Especially notable if she wins. However, I do think the page needs to be edited quite a bit. Camillz (talk) 15:24, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Camillz, could you clarify what you mean here? The fact that she's running in "a mainly republican area" doesn't qualify her for a Wikipedia page. There are dozens of Democrats who run in heavily GOP areas (and vice versa) every election cycle. Remember that WP:NPOL says "Just being an elected local official, or an unelected candidate for political office, does not guarantee notability" BottleOfChocolateMilk (talk) 17:32, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Florida's 1st congressional district is incredibly Republican. Witch Donald Trump winning 68% of the vote last American election. Source. And Matt Gaetz winning 66.0% of the vote during the last election I that particular district. Source. I think it's noteworthy that she's going up in this district, and seeking election. She's also raised 6.5 million dollars, more than her opponent.Source. this to me anyways, shows that her campaign has good momentum, and I think that's noteworthy for such a reason. Again I do think the page should be edited a bit more, but honestly, I don't think it should be deleted. Especially if she wins. Camillz (talk) 17:47, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There are over 100 safe House districts in America and most are contested every election cycle. Running in a red district doesn't make her especially noteworthy. And raising a lot of money doesn't automatically entitle someone to a Wikipedia page. Marcus Flowers raised $17 million in his campaign against Marjorie Taylor Greene and has no page. BottleOfChocolateMilk (talk) 20:53, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - This fails WP:NPOL badly and is otherwise non-notable. Rochambeau1783 (talk) 01:57, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per WP:GNG. There's an abundance of national reliable sources (with more to come in the next few days for sure). Nemo 19:00, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete -Plenty of far more prominent congressional candidates don't have pages. I don't see any reason why this individual should be considered notable enough. brg37133 19:47, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: This candidate is very notable, the April 1st elections are being covered a lot right now by news. I don't see how she is not notable enough. The fact she is even making this race close says enough about her. She deserves it, and she also deserves a photo for her page aswell! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.44.68.231 (talk) 23:33, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
No one deserves an article, we need to show notability with coverage in reliable sources. Oaktree b (talk) 14:04, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to election page. Does not meet WP:GNG or WP:NPOL. ser! ^{(chat to me - see my edits)} 01:06, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep for now If she loses next week we can always delete at that time, if she wins the effort put into the current page needs to be repeated to some extent. Therefore I do see no reason to delete right now. Arnoutf (talk) 14:15, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to 2025 Florida's 1st congressional district special election; the usual outcome for these type of political candidates. If she were to win, can be restored from history and if not doesn't sit around becoming out of date. Eluchil404 (talk) 23:56, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I don't see a consensus and I'm also reluctant to close a discussion on a political candidate two days before an election when, depending on the results, sentiment could change. I'd also like to discourage editors from bringing strong candidates to AFD on the cusp of an election which could change their eligibility for NPOL. Either nominate them weeks before the election or after the election but not the week before the election is scheduled to happen. Of course, now that this discussion has been relisted, it can be closed at any time a closer can discern a consensus among participants. And if the election results change your opinion, please strike out your earlier "vote".
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:29, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. The election is literally tomorrow. If she wins, the article is ready for a new congressional representative. There is a lot of notability across the country because the 2025 Florida Special Elections are presenting surprising polling data for congressional districts that traditionally voted Republican. To delete now is bordering to taking a political position in tomorrow's election.

Starlighsky (talk) 11:53, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment, I say that we wait. If she wins, keep the article. If she loses, redirect to 2025 Florida's 1st congressional district special election.

RedactedHumanoid (talk) 05:32, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

RFA Mollusc

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

Non notable salvage vessel. I am unable to find significant coverage in reliable secondary sources (basically all I get is historicalrfa.uk which even if it met all the criteria for SIGCOV, which I am uncertain on, is only one source). I tagged this for notability a week ago, but the author simply reverted the tag without comment and declined to improve the article any further, leaving me with no choice but AfD. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 02:19, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Transportation and United Kingdom. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 02:19, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Also noting that an attempt to draftify on March 1 was promptly reverted without comment by the article's author. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 02:22, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment – I am unable to find any sources myself, but I'm hesitant to support deletion just yet because so many navy vessels do turn out to be notable. If anyone can access The Times archives, which I do not have access to, that might be a good place to check. I thought RFA Belgol wasn't notable, but it turned out to have sufficient coverage in The Times and at the Historical RFA website. PrinceTortoise (he/him • poke) 03:23, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 03:33, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 03:34, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - article creator is a new editor. As well as the Historical RFA website used as a reference (from which the article can be expanded greatly), there is also Clydesite. The Times draws a blank this time. Mjroots (talk) 12:14, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Does Historical RFA meet our requirements for a reliable source? I've looked it over and can't find any sort of "about us" beyond two people listed as consultants. A trip to rfaa.uk is more promising, but I'm still not getting a clear sense of who their authors are and if the website counts as a reliable source. Forgive me, I am not shipsandotherthings so I'm not as familiar with sourcing in this area.

If this were a warship, I'd probably have left it in the NPP queue, but a salvage vessel doesn't seem to have automatic notability. Perhaps there's a list article it could be merged to somewhere? Trainsandotherthings (talk) 20:29, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Trainsandotherthings: - Given the detail of entries consistently across the site, I'd say yes. However, I'm not a MILHIST expert, it just happens that some ships have MILHIST connections. I'll ask over there, see what the experts say. Mjroots (talk) 06:39, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment – Having had a look around the usual sources I agree that it is going to be difficult to prove notability for Mollusc. The Historical RFA page is more a list of seaman deaths plus two lines on the salvaging of some items from Falmouth than in depth coverage. Clydeships prove the ship existed but is not much more than a database entry. I think any evidence of notability will come from her later service as Yantlet, especially with mention of this 1667 Dutch warship and the possibility of work during the Second World War. I'm no expert on civil ship service so with have to leave it to others to prove or disprove. Looking at some definitely not reliable sources, it appears Mollusc may have originally been the name ship of the Trinculo-class mooring vessels. Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 13:37, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting as no one but the nominator has actually cast a "vote" here yet. I'd also like to get this discussion a bit more time in case an editor knowledgeable about ships and shipping can propose an ATD. Too bad there isn't a deletion sort for "ships".
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:09, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Walter Steinhart

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

Stub article on early 20th century motorcyclist who has no WP:SIGCOV beyond brief mentions in a handful of newspaper articles from the 1910s. Fails WP:GNG. MidnightMayhem 01:43, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Cycling, and Washington. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:03, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Doesn't seem to have been well-covered in the press, I've tried Gnewspapers above and the LOC newspapers, and there isn't much/anything about this person. Oaktree b (talk) 23:11, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Indian Powerplus#Promotion and development. I can't find much more about Walter Steinhart - digitised newspapers provide information that he was the manager of the Cycle Supply company in Spokane, and rode from Spokane to Seattle on an Indian motorbike in just over 10 hours in 1921. Neither adds to notability, and there's not really SIGCOV, either. I think the info that, in 1917, Steinhart, on an Indian motorcycle, was the first motorcyclist to reach the summit of Snoqualmie Pass and won a race twice around Lake Washington, could be added to the Indian Powerplus article, with sources - the brand he rode is named in contemporary reports of the events. RebeccaGreen (talk) 21:24, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Is there more support for a Merge?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:55, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Indian Powerplus#Promotion and development. There is still some salvageable content from the article. If not, Redirect to said article. ^Wiinter_U 02:46, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Jericho, Tipton County, Indiana

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

There is no significant coverage of this because it never existed. The single source I could find that mentions it with more than a phrase says its location is conjecture because no one ever bought land in the village and the plat was abandoned. Oona Wikiwalker (talk) 01:53, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge into Jefferson Township, Tipton County, Indiana. I think there could be some useful information that could be salvaged in a merge. If not, Redirect to Jefferson Township. ^Wiinter_U 02:20, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The Goodspeed, Cline, and Pershing county histories all have this; they all say the same thing; and it isn't any more than this article already says except that they give an approximate location of (per Cline) south-west of the intersection of SR28 and SR31. And they all have it as a sub-head under Jefferson Township. Uncle G (talk) 07:44, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Indiana. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:56, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Rick Sopher

AfDs for this article:

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

I responded to a speedy tag this morning as G4, recreation of an article previously deleted at XfD. In the moment, I believed the sourcing similar to that when it was first deleted. After another admin disagreed I was happy to undo the G4. Now I'm asking for re-assessment of this version, since I wasn't given the opportunity to question the SIGCOV in my purely administrative tasks. I assert these sources are marginal at best, and the page creator was blocked for promotional ediitng several years ago. I have no presented reason to believe this wealthy businessman is any more notable than any other wealthy businessman. BusterD (talk) 01:30, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Finance, and United Kingdom. BusterD (talk) 01:30, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Articles are either about being one of the to hedge fund managers, where he's mentioned in a list with about 19 others, or this [13] about planting a tree in Saudi Arabia as a sign of interfaith "togetherness" for lack of a better word. I don't see sources 1 and 4 in the article as being only about this person. Rest aren't RS per Cite HIghlighter. Being one in a list of 20 and planting trees aren't quite enough for notability here. Oaktree b (talk) 04:14, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

He has been covered by Maneet Ahuja in her books and numerous reliable sources, including Reuters, the New York Post, and the Wall Street Journal. As the Chairman of LCH Investments, the world’s oldest fund of hedge funds, he is also responsible for compiling the annual list of top hedge funds. in addition, he holds distinguished positions at notable organizations like the Woolf Institute, Alliance Israélite Universelle, and the Center for Jewish History. If these credentials are not sufficient to establish notability for a hedge fund manager, then what would be? In fact, many existing Wikipedia pages on cite fewer sources than his.Jiuantaui (talk) 11:32, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
We need sourcing about the person. You can be whatever and get an article here if you have enough sourcing. Being notable but having poor sourcing is the issue. Oaktree b (talk) 14:01, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yeh Chanda Kanoon Hai

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

This Indian comedy series fails WP:GNG. GTrang (talk) 01:20, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and India. GTrang (talk) 01:20, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Legs (character)

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

A minor character in the DC Comics continuity. A search was difficult given the generic name of the character, but no matter what key words I used, the only coverage of Legs I found was in conjunction with Anarky, and only as TRIVIALMENTIONs at that. There is no coverage on this character beyond that, making him a WP:GNG failure. A possible AtD redirect could be to Anarky, who is the character Legs is most strongly associated with. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 00:37, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements and Comics and animation. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 00:37, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I suppose it could also be merged to list of Batman supporting characters but this character is so minor I don't think it is worth it. Rhino131 (talk) 17:24, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to List of DC Comics characters: L in the spirit of WP:PRESERVE. --Rtkat3 (talk) 19:31, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, we have two separate Merge target articles proposed so we have to settle on one for the purposed of our closing technology, XFDcloser.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:17, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge with List of DC Comics characters: L: Not independently notable. silviaASH (inquire within) 07:14, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Phosphorus Rex

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

An incredibly minor character with basically zero reliable, significant coverage I can find. Complete failure of WP:GNG. I do not mind a redirect, but he seems like such a minor character that I'm not sure if he needs to stick around or not. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 00:20, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements and Comics and animation. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 00:20, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep or merge with List of DC Comics characters: R in the spirit of WP:PRESERVE. --Rtkat3 (talk) 01:21, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge selectively and redirect to Circus of Strange, with which the character is affiliated according to Comics through Time, p. 1361. Daranios (talk) 16:17, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: We have two different suggested Merge/Redirect target articles.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:11, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Punjab Legal Services Authority

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

Non-notable GraziePrego (talk) 00:09, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Law, Organizations, and Punjab. Shellwood (talk) 00:20, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - this nomination does not show signs of WP:BEFORE. PULSA as a government body, working across the state. " In Punjab such kinds of lok adalats are conducted under the Punjab Legal Services Authority. It takes up the various kinds of cases and is settled under this lok adalat." ([14]) See for example [15], [16], [17]. --Soman (talk) 11:09, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:10, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: They exist, but coverage I find is only where they've provided legal services and are only mentioned. The one source now in the article isn't helpful. Oaktree b (talk) 04:16, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]