User:Ijey6458/2 days ago

use Template:NOINDEX

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2024 June 22

Recent AfDs: Today Yesterday

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

< June 21	June 23 >

Guide to deletion

Purge server cache

WWAT-CD

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

Subject does not meet the WP:GNG due to a lack of WP:SIGCOV. Mvcg66b3r (talk) 22:55, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Pennsylvania. Mvcg66b3r (talk) 22:55, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
Delete as per nomination. Non-notable defucnt local TV network.TH1980 (talk) 01:30, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
Delete, but..Well, I did find one source, and apparently it’s technically still not dead yet due to its license to broadcast still being valid. But still, one source for a Wikipedia article is not exactly going to cut it. --Danubeball (talk) 16:01, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

Stroke orders of CJK Unified Ideographs in YES order, part 1 of 4

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

I believe this and the other lists below do not meet WP:NOTEVERYTHING and WP:INDISCRIMINATE. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 17:23, 15 June 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Language, Computing, and China. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 17:23, 15 June 2024 (UTC)

The reasons why the article is put on the wiki main space include:

1. Lists are a kind of wiki articles in Wikipedia;

2. Similar articles such as List of CJK Unified Ideographs, part 1, part 2, part 3, part 4 have been on the main space for ages.

3. Stroke orders of CJK Unified Ideographs in YES order, part 1 of 4 etc. are sorted in YES order for easy lookup and include stroke orders information.

By the way, the article has been reviewed twice since its publication last month and has been rated List-class by the first reviewer. Ctxz2323 (talk) 01:44, 16 June 2024 (UTC)

Ther are 4 relevant sources in the brief introduction in front of the list. And more are available in the parent article, as mentioned there. Thanks for your attention.

Welcome to add more sources to make the article more notable. Ctxz2323 (talk) 02:20, 16 June 2024 (UTC)

Oops

Comment you seem to have bundled different-style articles that go with List of CJK Unified Ideographs, part 1 of 4. The stroke-order one is the only one I would consider deleting. Walsh90210 (talk) 17:25, 15 June 2024 (UTC)

Walsh90210, Stroke orders of CJK Unified Ideographs (YES order) indicates that they are all related—perhaps they are not, I don't know. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 17:28, 15 June 2024 (UTC)

~~Oh no wait, you're right. This is rather embarassing.~~ EDIT: or maybe not, I'm deeply confused. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 17:30, 15 June 2024 (UTC)

The article links were wrong. Stroke_orders_of_CJK_Unified_Ideographs_in_YES_order,_part_3_of_4 is part of the set recently created by a single author. You tagged List of CJK Unified Ideographs, part 3 of 4. Walsh90210 (talk) 17:32, 15 June 2024 (UTC)

Ahhhh. I see. What's best to do now—transfer the AfD tags to the stroke order lists Walsh90210? ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 17:33, 15 June 2024 (UTC)

Hopefully, everything is fixed now Walsh90210? ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 17:43, 15 June 2024 (UTC)

Looks correct; you might want to bundle Stroke orders of CJK Unified Ideographs (YES order) as well. Walsh90210 (talk) 17:45, 15 June 2024 (UTC)

Delete per nom. I have no strong opinion on whether this stroke-order information should be on Wiktionary articles like wikt:锗; but it should not be an encyclopedia article. Per nom, WP:NOTEVERYTHING, and WP:INDISCRIMINATE. Walsh90210 (talk) 00:12, 16 June 2024 (UTC)
More information for reference: All the 4 articles have just been reviewed on June 15, 2024, by Vanderwaalforces (talk · contribs). (Thanks, Vanderwaalforces) Ctxz2323 (talk) 02:00, 16 June 2024 (UTC)
The review was to take the article off the NPP queue and not to give it an outright approval. This discussion will determine if they’ll stay or be deleted. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 04:21, 16 June 2024 (UTC)
This looks like a great and useful work but in violation of WP:NOTDICT. The Appendix of Wiktionary looks like a potential place for this; I would suggest to transwiki there. (Any Wiktionarians around?) —Kusma (talk) 07:56, 17 June 2024 (UTC)
It sounds like a good suggestion. Thanks!

I will try it. New to Appendix of Wiktionary, it may take time. Ctxz2323 (talk) 13:27, 17 June 2024 (UTC)

I have re-created the lists on Wiktionary, at wikt:Appendix:Stroke orders of CJK Unified Ideographs (YES order). Please help check if it is OK. Ctxz2323 (talk) 01:07, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
Comment: These have been transferred as cut-and-paste moves. Is a historymerge needed from WP to Wikt, or alternatively deletion and formal transwiki-ing, or given that all significant edits were made by Ctxz2323, no action needed? ^~Hydronium^~Hydroxide^~(Talk)~ 04:57, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
Better to move with history. But there is no such an option on the Move menu of Wikipedia. Ctxz2323 (talk) 05:18, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

Is there a handy way to copy the history to Wiktionary? Ctxz2323 (talk) 06:14, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

Sub-list 1 used to be the largest in Wikipedia. Ctxz2323 (talk) 06:47, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:54, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

Delete: I just don't see what purpose these four lists of brush strokes serve. There is no context given to differentiate one from another and no other information than a unicode number... This seems too specialized for Wikipedia, this would only be useful to a very small subset of linguists or anthropologists and to be honest, I've read the article and still have no ideal what this is. Oaktree b (talk) 23:43, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
They are four sub-lists of Stroke orders for the 20,992 Unicode CJK character set sorted in YES Order.

It is useful to all Chinese character users.

Please read the parent and grandparent articles for more information. Ctxz2323 (talk) 04:57, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
20,000 Unicode characters don't need a Wikipedia article or series of articles; this seems to be an overly long list, that really doesn't serve the community here. Move to Wiktionary I suppose, not sure how interested they would be there (but they can decide for themselves). Oaktree b (talk) 19:12, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
Yes, moving is in progress.

Can anyone help to move the History and other relevant data?

More information is available in the previous discussion. Ctxz2323 (talk) 23:51, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

Shifting nth root algorithm

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

Has never been sourced since its creation over 20 years ago. Appears to be original research. Better (but still not great) coverage of computation of roots is at our main article nth root. My prod saying all this was removed as the only edit by a new editor without improvement, and with the only rationale being WP:ITSUSEFUL. —David Eppstein (talk) 19:09, 15 June 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Mathematics-related deletion discussions. —David Eppstein (talk) 19:11, 15 June 2024 (UTC)
Delete Yep, looks like OR. And explained rather opaquely, at that. (Opaqueness isn't itself a reason for deletion, of course, but in this case, I think it does point to a lack of interest in improving the page.) Wikipedia is not a repository of stuff somebody noticed about basic arithmetic one day. XOR'easter (talk) 21:33, 15 June 2024 (UTC)
Comment It's a bit unclear, but it looks like it may be a different derivation of the algorithm described in Methods_of_computing_square_roots#Digit-by-digit_calculation. That's a well-known algorithm - e.g. it's described in Hacker's Delight and First Draft of a Report on the EDVAC, and I've seen it suggested that it originated as an abacus technique. Adam Sampson (talk) 23:46, 15 June 2024 (UTC)
Comment. Nth root computation algorithms are certainly an area of study (1, 2, 3, 4, 5). My question is more or less whether this shifting algorithm is part of that area of study that's been covered, and frankly my insufficient mathematical competence is hampering me in completing a source search. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 18:12, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:53, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

Delete: Listings in a Stack Exchange post and Wikiversity are what I'm able to pull up for sourcing... I'm not sure this is properly sourced, but it's too long to be made up. I don't see how we can keep this without some specialist mathematical sourcing, which I can't find. Oaktree b (talk) 23:46, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
Delete. Yes, original research and not well explained. Athel cb (talk) 10:46, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

Alexandr Levintsov

AfDs for this article:

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

Fails WP:NSKATE; medal placement at the junior level or bronze/silver medals at the national championships do not meet the requirements of WP:NSKATE. Google search turns up nothing outside of wikis and scoring databases. Previous AFD received zero arguments in favor of keeping this article that cited any evidence of notability. Bgsu98 (Talk) 15:28, 8 June 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Skating, Poland, and Ukraine. Bgsu98 (Talk) 15:28, 8 June 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, RL0919 (talk) 21:14, 15 June 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:53, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

Aleksandr Anichenko

AfDs for this article:

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

Fails WP:NSKATE; medal placement at the junior level or bronze/silver medals at the national championships do not meet the requirements of WP:NSKATE. Google search turns up nothing outside of wikis and scoring databases. Previous AFD received zero arguments in favor of keeping this article that cited any evidence of notability. Bgsu98 (Talk) 15:26, 8 June 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Skating, and Azerbaijan. Bgsu98 (Talk) 15:26, 8 June 2024 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Olympics-related deletion discussions. Let'srun (talk) 14:32, 9 June 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, RL0919 (talk) 21:15, 15 June 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:52, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

Delete: With zero citations, article violates WP:OR. Also seems to be a WP:STUB, despite being 16 years old. —Mjks28 (talk) 08:14, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

Being a stub is not a deletion reason regardless of age, and some of the statements in the article have a reference (bulleted). Please improve your argumentation. (Being a stub may sometimes be an argument for a merger.) Geschichte (talk) 14:41, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
My argument is based on the fact that the article has zero citations. The stub factor was just an additional comment. My apologies if that was unclear. Mjks28 (talk) 21:59, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

WIIC-LD

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

Subject does not meet the WP:GNG due to a lack of WP:SIGCOV. Mvcg66b3r (talk) 22:51, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Pennsylvania. Mvcg66b3r (talk) 22:51, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
Delete Fails to meet WP:GNG. This station is only notable at a local level (if even that, due to its checkered history). TH1980 (talk) 01:33, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
Delete. Couldn’t find any sources even mentioning this station. --Danubeball (talk) 13:46, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

Pdftotext

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

Non-notable software per WP:N. SL93 (talk) 22:46, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. SL93 (talk) 22:46, 1 June 2024 (UTC)
I am wondering if this could usefully be merged somewhere. BD2412 T 01:21, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
List of PDF software? Rjjⁱⁱⁱ (talk) 05:41, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
That is probably the best bet. A section could be added on conversion software specifically, or on miscellaneous PDF software. It is mentioned in passing in a row in the "Linux and Unix" section of that list. BD2412 T 20:14, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:49, 8 June 2024 (UTC)

Add to List It seems to be one of those handy utilities. I see lots of references and I would not be surprised if there isn't more than one bit of software with this obvious name. Lamona (talk) 16:18, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
Redirect to Poppler (software). The Poppler fork of pdftotext is version used in most linux distros, like Ubuntu. This particular tool is far from notable, but would serve as a useful redirect. — BillHPike (talk, contribs) 00:44, 14 June 2024 (UTC)
Yes, I think this is another good option. Lamona (talk) 18:46, 14 June 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: We have 2 different Merge/Redirect target articles now suggested
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:15, 15 June 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:51, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

Marcin Trębacki

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

Fails WP:NSKATE; medal placement at the junior level or bronze/silver medals at the national championships do not meet the requirements of WP:NSKATE. Google search turns up nothing outside of wikis and scoring databases. PROD removed without explanation. Bgsu98 (Talk) 15:34, 8 June 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Skating, and Poland. Bgsu98 (Talk) 15:34, 8 June 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Already PROD'd so not eligible for Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:21, 15 June 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:48, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

Alexandra Maksimova

AfDs for this article:

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

Fails WP:NSKATE; medal placement at the junior level or bronze/silver medals at the national championships do not meet the requirements of WP:NSKATE. Google search turns up nothing outside of wikis and scoring databases. Previous AFD received zero arguments in favor of keeping this article that cited any evidence of notability. Bgsu98 (Talk) 15:29, 8 June 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Women, Skating, and Belarus. Bgsu98 (Talk) 15:29, 8 June 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Not eligible for Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:23, 15 June 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:47, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

Aneta Kowalska

AfDs for this article:

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

Fails WP:NSKATE; medal placement at the junior level or bronze/silver medals at the national championships do not meet the requirements of WP:NSKATE. Google search turns up nothing outside of wikis and scoring databases. Previous AFD received zero arguments in favor of keeping this article that cited any evidence of notability. Bgsu98 (Talk) 15:30, 8 June 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Women, Skating, and Poland. Bgsu98 (Talk) 15:30, 8 June 2024 (UTC)
Comment: Some limited coverage here, here, and here, which I think is evidence of further offline coverage. JTtheOG (talk) 22:20, 8 June 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Not eligible for Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:22, 15 June 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:48, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

Tbilisi Waldorf School

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

The sourcing currently does not meet WP:NCORP. There may be other sources in Georgian, which I can’t read. Notability seems very uncertain and we’re long past the 90 day limit for draftification. Mccapra (talk) 22:34, 15 June 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Schools and Georgia (country). Mccapra (talk) 22:34, 15 June 2024 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 09:54, 16 June 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:18, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

Islamic Association of Palestine

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

Very obvious WP:POVFORK of Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development, spends much of the article talking about the trial and the same people from a very biased POV. Not certain if there are notable differences from the HLF article User:Sawerchessread (talk) 19:03, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

Some Info:

Initial Merge Discussion

I've been trying to solicit advice about Islamic Association of Palestine and merging it into Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development. I don't want to force a WP:SILENCE on this, as I assume this may be contentious and relate to WP:ARBPIA, but it seemed noone was interested in a merge discussion after a month.

Information about the trial

The IAP article is a POVFork about the same trial as the HLF, with the same individuals and facts of the trial, and the original version of the article IAP last month went really deep into various conspirary theories linking IAP to every other Muslim organization in some grand "Jihad" terrorist ring. Particularly egregiously, the support for the conspiracy theory was from a source that was attempting to debunk it. The sourcing for HistoryCommons.org is a deadlink. And a source from Matthew Levitt is used more than ten times to make up most of this article, a person from the very pro-Israeli Washington Institute for Near East Policy, and a key witness for the trial. Relying so heavily on sourcing that is intrinsically related to the trial seems like a good argument to suggest this is an article about the HLF trial and not the IAP as an organization.

Information about what the IAP

I can't seem to find anything specific about the IAP from a lot of searches that doesn't immediately reference the HLF trial, and some of the sourcing on this that seemed to talk more specifically about the IAP is from deadlinks. If the only thing notable about the IAP is the HLF trial, then the article should be just merged into the HLF trial page.

I cleaned up some of it, but there is not enough differences between the two versions I think to justify making a new article.

The HLF article makes more sense and seems more objective without having to go full "Civilization Jihad." User:Sawerchessread (talk) 19:13, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2024 June 22. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 19:24, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Islam-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 20:09, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 20:09, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Palestine-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 20:10, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Terrorism-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 20:11, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 22:47, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

DIDWW Ireland

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

Non-notable company. The sources in the article, and those found in my own WP:BEFORE, do not support a claim to notability under WP:SIGCOV or WP:NORG. Frankly, from what I can tell, there aren't even sufficiently reliable sources to support the text in the article. And the level of FV issues and apparent REFBOMBing is more than a little problematic. As raised by Bastun, Spleodrach and Ww2censor in the previous AfD discussion, the majority of the references available (in the article and elsewhere) are press releases, directory-style listings, ROTM industry publications and other trivial passing mentions that do not support a claim to notability. (In almost every case, they don't even support the text they are placed alongside.) That multiple versions of this article continue to be created in Draft form(s) is also confusing and disquieting... Guliolopez (talk) 19:21, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ireland-related deletion discussions. Guliolopez (talk) 19:32, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Guliolopez (talk) 19:32, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
Comment. Note that the separate Draft:DIDWW Ireland Limited was created shortly after the previous article was deleted and prior AfD was closed. It was AfC declined before yet another draft (Draft:DIDWW Ireland Ltd.) was created and promptly moved to the main article namespace. Draft:DIDWW Ireland was previously deleted as an abandoned draft. There's a lot going on here. And it's difficult to follow. But it seems that this content keeps being recreated. Without any of the issues raised (by multiple contributors) being addressed. Likely need a definitive AfD outcome/consensus once and for all....) Guliolopez (talk) 19:32, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

Delete Traumnovelle (talk) 21:10, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

Delete per nom - I agree with the need for a definitive AfD decision. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 10:41, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

Delete per nom - not a notable company. Spleodrach (talk) 11:08, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

Dalleth

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

Doesn't meet WP:ORG / WP:GNG. Boleyn (talk) 15:50, 15 June 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Language, Organizations, and England. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 15:53, 15 June 2024 (UTC)
Delete no sources and none when I search. Not notable— Iadmc ♫^talk 15:57, 15 June 2024 (UTC)
Keep. Have added references. Looks notable to me, and I think there will be additional coverage in offline sources and in Cornish-language texts - both whilst it was operating, and in memoirs and historical discussion of this period of the language movement. Tacyarg (talk) 00:03, 19 June 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Anyone able to find some sources like those Tacyarg mentioned?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Cocobb8 (💬 talk • ✏️ contribs) 19:05, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

Comment. I've added another couple of references, and tagged as citation needed the only sentence which is now not sourced. Probably need a Cornish history or Cornish language expert for more, or at least access to a decent reference library in Cornwall. Tacyarg (talk) 21:19, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

Marzieh Sotoudeh

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

WP:BLP of a writer, not properly sourced as passing WP:AUTHOR. The attempted notability claim here, that she won a literary award, would be fine if the article were sourced properly, but is not "inherently" notable without sourcing -- an award has to itself be a notable award in the first place before it can make its winners notable for winning it, so an award claim cannot clinch inclusion without sourcing for it. But I had to remove the citation that was present here as it led to a squatted page that tried to make me download a virus rather than anything that verified any literary awards, and that left the article completely unsourced — and going by its URL it looks to have been a primary source, not a reliable or GNG-building one, even before it got squatted.
Meanwhile, the award she purportedly won does not have a Wikipedia article at all, and instead substitutes a link to the biography of the other unrelated writer the award was named for, which is not in and of itself proof that the award is a notable one.
On a WP:BEFORE search, meanwhile, the closest thing to an acceptable source I found was one book review on a WordPress blog -- and even if I were to overlook the fact that it's WordPress, I just can't overlook the even bigger issue with it: this article was created in 2011 by an editor with the username Mohammad Rajabpur, while that WordPress review was written in 2020 with a bylined author credit of Mohammad Rajabpur, strongly implying the possibility of conflict of interest editing by a friend or colleague. And I can otherwise confirm that she's never had any WP:GNG-worthy coverage in Canada at all, as her name brings up absolutely nothing in either ProQuest or Newspapers.com.
Since I cannot read Farsi, I'm willing to withdraw this if somebody with better access to Iranian media than I've got can find evidence that she's had GNG-worthy coverage in Iran, but nothing here is "inherently" notable enough to exempt her from having to have any sources. Bearcat (talk) 17:51, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Iran, and Canada. Bearcat (talk) 17:51, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 22:45, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
Delete: Amazon sales listings, and many other sales listings, are what come up. This [1] appears to be a review in a RS, but I'm not sure. I don't find anything in Scholar or Jstor. Oaktree b (talk) 23:50, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

Tamasha season 1

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

Fails to meet the GNG. All I found on the web is some ROTM coverage, but nothing significant or in-dept Saqib (talk I contribs) 17:32, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. Saqib (talk I contribs) 17:32, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:41, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
Delete and REDIRECT to Tamasha (TV series) as we don't need a separate article for each season where the season has no review to meet WP:GNG. Twinkle1990 (talk) 07:28, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
Merge with Tamasha (TV series): as was done, I think, with season 2. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 09:50, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

List of places named Sokil

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

List that's been a stub since 2010 consisting of solely red links with little chance of expansion. I initially merged the content to the disambiguation page Sokil but was opposed by Bkonrad due to the lack of any blue links. As an WP:ATD, I still support merging this content into that disambiguation page but in any case don't think this topic is notable enough for its own stand-alone article. Dan the Animator 16:51, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography, Lists, and Ukraine. Dan the Animator 16:51, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
Merge to Sokil – the oblast links make up for the villages being red links, as WP:DABSTYLE says the link can be in the description if the entry is red-linked or unlinked. RunningTiger123 (talk) 19:03, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
Most if not all of the entries fail both WP:DABMENTION and WP:DABRL and would be removed if merged. As such, merging is functionally equivalent to deletion. older ≠ wiser 19:30, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
Delete per nom and Bkonrad. –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 21:02, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Disambiguations-related deletion discussions. –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 21:02, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
The formatting of that statistics website is weird, but if I get it right, it expresses the population numbers in thousands of people, so this is a number of villages with population in the hundreds, and at least one over a thousand? That's completely normal WP:POTENTIAL, so they should be listed in their higher level administrative unit article and these entries merged into Sokil (disambiguation). The Ukrainian interlanguage link from Sokil shows that they are included there and mostly have articles. --Joy (talk) 07:28, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
Keep. No policy reason to delete. This page is no less notable than any other in Category:Set index articles on populated places in Ukraine. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 20:34, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

TransPennine Express (disambiguation)

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

Since there are only two other topics that could be known as the 'Transpennine Express', I think that this dab page is not needed/useful. A hatnote at the main TPE article linking to the two could suffice JuniperChill (talk) 16:46, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Transportation, Disambiguations, England, and Scotland. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:43, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. JuniperChill (talk) 18:44, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

Comment. JuniperChill, I think you hint at WP:2DABS yet I see 3 items at the disambiguation page. Can you clarify? gidonb (talk) 13:50, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

@Gidonb I said 'two OTHER topics' per WP:TWOOTHER. I think you are confused that on the main TransPennine Express page, it will have links to the two pages TransPennine Express (2016–2023) and First TransPennine Express via a hatnote. Basically, TPE has a primary topic with two other topics is another way to put it. JuniperChill (talk) 14:09, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

Sure, yet we do not have a rule against disambiguation pages with three items either. gidonb (talk) 15:14, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

Keep. No policy reason to delete this valid disambiguation page. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 20:37, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
Keep. Please refrain from unnecessary AfDs. There are way too many AfDs. gidonb (talk) 20:49, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

Claude Bédard

AfDs for this article:

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

WP:BLP of a textbook translator, not properly referenced as passing inclusion criteria for translators. The strongest notability claim here, that he won a private internal award from a trade association, is not an automatic notability freebie without WP:GNG-worthy sourcing -- but the only attempt at "referencing" here is one of his books metaverifying its own existence, which is not the kind of sourcing we need to see.
Nothing here is "inherently" notable enough to exempt him from having to be referenced better than this. And we're much stricter on referencing articles properly than we were 20 years ago, so the fact that this was kept in an AFD discussion in 2005 is not definitive, especially since even some of the keep arguments at the time called for improvement that the article never saw. Bearcat (talk) 16:41, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors and Canada. Bearcat (talk) 16:41, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
Delete: This is a common name in Quebec and Canada, so I find hits on all types of individuals with this name. Nothing about this person in particular... The one source in the article is primary. I don't see notability. Oaktree b (talk) 23:52, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

Hugh James (law firm)

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

Coverage in the sources given and my before search are routine for a law firm, such as opening new offices, new hires etc. The coverage in Legal 500 etc. applies to any law firm worth its salt, and I think it is being well established that appearing in a ranking doesn't make a company notable. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 14:26, 7 June 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Law and Wales. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 14:26, 7 June 2024 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 16:41, 7 June 2024 (UTC)
Keep. Satisfies GNG with significant coverage in national newspapers and other sources. There is very extensive coverage in The Times. There is also coverage in The Financial Times, The Daily Telegraph, The Independent, and The Guardian. There is also coverage in The Scotsman and Reuters and The Week. There is very extensive coverage in WalesOnline. There is very extensive coverage in many periodicals and news sources in Google News. There is a very large number of news and periodical articles that are entirely about this firm. The last time I checked, it is not routine for any British law firm to receive the exceptionally large volume of coverage this one has. That is not surprising because most British law firms are not as large as this one. It is or was the largest Welsh law firm: [2]. James500 (talk) 00:15, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
@James500: There are 87 mentions of the firm in The Times, though one is not about the law firm. Which of those do you consider to be in depth, independent, secondary coverage? Four of those are articles by Alan Collins, a partner at the firm who is also a columnist at The Times, e.g. this. Most of the others are quotations. The article you linked to is four paragraphs about them, as part of 200 Best Law Firms 2019. Please cite some of the best examples? Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 15:06, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
Okay, I was not aware of Alan Collins. It will take me time to do a write up of the available sources. I have a lot to do at the moment. However, we could sidestep this altogether by a page move to Lawyers in Wales, Legal profession in Wales, Legal sector in Wales, Law firms in Wales or something like that, followed by a rewrite. That would satisfy GNG beyond argument eg [3] and other sources, including more modern ones. James500 (talk) 02:52, 10 June 2024 (UTC)

The search you ran does not bring up all the results in The Times that Google brings up. In the following, I shall confine my attention to The Times, as you requested. The following articles are profiles of Hugh James in The Times: [4] [5] [6] [7] [8]. These are entire periodical articles entirely about the firm. Such articles are in depth, secondary coverage. I am not aware of any notability guideline that requires more than four paragraphs of coverage. Whether they are independent would depend on whether Alan Collins had any influence over them. I do not know the answer to that question yet. The following articles are about the case of "Edwards on behalf of the Estate of the late Thomas Arthur Watkins (Respondent) v Hugh James Ford Simey Solicitors (Appellant)" in which the law firm Hugh James Ford Simey was sued for negligence: [9] [10]. The following article is about the internal affairs of the firm: [11]. There are also a lot of articles in The Times about litigation conducted by Hugh James on behalf of clients. For example, at one point they acted for 6,500 people in the Seroxat case, which has a lot of coverage everywhere. James500 (talk) 11:38, 14 June 2024 (UTC)
Keep, on the basis of multiple articles in general Wales business media, such as Business Live, or the general news outlet Wales Online [12], for example. Admittedly the article is currently poorly sourced but there is ample opportunity to add reliable citations if required. Sionk (talk) 19:05, 11 June 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: For input on the sources presented by James500.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 07:26, 15 June 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Can someone check out these sources?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Cocobb8 (💬 talk • ✏️ contribs) 14:40, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

Bhilwara Kings

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

Non-notable cricket team taking part in matches not having official T20 status. Couldn't find independent coverage about the team, to pass wider requirements of WP:NORG and WP:GNG. The highest to SIGCOV are the sources which says about the announcement of the teams, launch of jersey by the team owners- with all of these belonging to WP:ROUTINE. Robo^Cric Let's chat 07:54, 15 June 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Cricket, and India. Robo^Cric Let's chat 07:56, 15 June 2024 (UTC)
Delete. Per nom. Too many of these trivial nonsensical articles appearing of late! AA (talk) 09:42, 16 June 2024 (UTC)
Delete. Per nom. Poor sources and many are just announcements and hold no significant notability to warrant a page. Fails WP:NORG. RangersRus (talk) 13:21, 17 June 2024 (UTC)
Redirect to Legends League Cricket#Franchise tournament No way near enough coverage of GNG quality to warrant an individual team article, but can be redirected to the league page, which just about has enough coverage. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 18:55, 17 June 2024 (UTC)
Redirect to Legends League Cricket#Franchise tournament as a sensible WP:ATD. Joseph2302 (talk) 19:26, 17 June 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Redirect, or simply delete?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Cocobb8 (💬 talk • ✏️ contribs) 14:37, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

N-Toons (French TV programming block)

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

This currently non-notable article lacks sources to pass GNG, WP:NMEDIA and NTV. Listed this as a CSD G2 (Test edit) which was reverted, so listing it here. This has to go! Intrisit (talk) 12:23, 15 June 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and France. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 13:21, 15 June 2024 (UTC)
Merge: My suggestion is to merge this article with a related topic. At present, it is a single paragraph on the subject's history, thus it fails GNG, NMEDIA, and NTV. A merger would result in a more coherent and informative article for readers interested in French TV.--AstridMitch (talk) 02:40, 20 June 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:21, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

Redirect to Nickelodeon: as a WP:ATD. Does not have any coverage in reliable sources to justify for a merge. Cocobb8 (💬 talk • ✏️ contribs) 19:12, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
Merge: Per @AstridMitch's recommendation, I agree with the merging proposal. Would also help if some citations were added, as it currently violates WP:OR. --Mjks28 (talk) 04:59, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

Rob DePaola

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

I wasn't able to find significant coverage of the subject in reliable sources. I'm not sure what would be the better redirect target of the two bands mentioned in the article. toweli (talk) 14:19, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, United States of America, and Illinois. toweli (talk) 14:19, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
Redirect to The Honor System (band), as that band seemed to accomplish a little more. I'm not sure if his other band (The Broadways) is notable either. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 14:57, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

Mackay road network

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

Doesn't meet WP:NROAD because there isn't any independent significant coverage. Aydoh8 (talk | contribs) 14:01, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. Aydoh8 (talk | contribs) 14:01, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 15:15, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
Delete mostly sourced to GMaps (!) and not notable per GNG. RadioactiveBoulevardier (talk) 09:50, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
Delete you can't create an article mainly based on Google maps. Lacking third-party coverage to meet GNG. LibStar (talk) 13:45, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
Redirect to Mackay, Queensland#Transport per ATD and CHEAP. City of 84k. gidonb (talk) 13:54, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
Redirect as above. Bduke (talk) 23:43, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

Hram Hall

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

Subject does not meet WP:NBUILD due to a lack of independent non-routine coverage (Google search) Aydoh8 (talk | contribs) 13:55, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Handball and Serbia. Aydoh8 (talk | contribs) 13:55, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
Delete: No coverage found in newspapers or in books. Fails WP:NBUILD as there is no coverage to indicate the importance of that building in any way. We don't need an article on every single building out there. Cocobb8 (💬 talk • ✏️ contribs) 19:20, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
Delete: Article fails WP:OR, and is a WP:STUB despite being 9 years old. Overall, article seems to not be WP:N. --Mjks28 (talk) 05:01, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

WBBI

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

Non-notable local radio station with no significant coverage so proposing redirect to iHeartMedia. Aydoh8 (talk | contribs) 13:45, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Radio and New York. Aydoh8 (talk | contribs) 13:45, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
Keep Although our broadcast article guidelines have tightened a bit, they really haven't changed for known commercial FM radio stations owned by large-scale broadcasting companies like iHeart, and this is notable enough to be kept (though I'd like to see improvement in the article for sure). There is no result that ends with it just being redirected to the corporate article without any rhyme or reason. Nate • (chatter) 00:31, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

Keep: Per Nate.

I also want to mention that I mean, it's notable enough to be kept on Wikipedia without it being redirected (since I mean, it's owned by iHeartMedia) even though sources and just improvement in general are an necessary thing here. Also, just a note, it shouldn't be redirected to the corporate article for no reason, because chances are, in some of these cases, they often redirect it to the state list of radio stations. (In this case, it would be redirected to the list of Radio Stations in New York State.) mer764KCTV5 / Cospaw the Wolfo (He/Him | t • c) 03:36, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

Keep There is some SIGCOV in Binghamton paper, e.g. [13] Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 05:24, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

Andromeda Software Development

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

I wasn't able to find significant coverage of the subject in reliable sources and what's linked in the article doesn't establish notability. Surprisingly, there isn't significant coverage of the group in Freax: The Brief History of the Demoscene, Volume 1 (2005) by Tamás Polgár [hu]; "Andromeda" is mentioned 25 times, but in reference to the Norwegian demo group, not the Greek group that is the subject of the article. toweli (talk) 13:19, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Music, Video games, Visual arts, Organizations, Computing, and Greece. toweli (talk) 13:19, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

Marek Solčanský

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

Redirect to Slovakia at the 2014 Winter Olympics#Luge as ATD because I could not find any in-depth coverage about this luger to meet WP:GNG. All I found on news websites were passing mentions of his participation at the tournament. He was not even on top three luge winners. This article has been deleted from Slovak Wikipedia on 18 November 2018, possibly due to BLP concerns. The only interlanguage wiki available is Norsk Bokmål (Norwegian) Wikipedia but it listed exactly the same sources as the English article. ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 11:20, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Olympics, and Slovakia. ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 11:20, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

Balghar

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

This has been in CAT:UNREF for 16 years. I was unable to find reliable sources to confirm it meets WP:NPLACE / WP:GNG. Boleyn (talk) 08:17, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Pakistan. Shellwood (talk) 09:13, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
Delete - Editor created article in 2008 with two un-sourced edits, and then never edited on Wikipedia again. Lots of subsequent editors since then, but no one has provided sourcing. — Maile (talk) 10:46, 22 June 2024 (UTC).
Delete - agree wit above. Bduke (talk) 23:48, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

Cansolabao, Samar

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

Does not have any notability and has no sources. TheNuggeteer (talk) 08:00, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Philippines-related deletion discussions. TheNuggeteer (talk) 08:00, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:47, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
Keep: ~~Meets WP:GEOLAND as a legally recognized barangays.~~ Also, coverage found in books. Cocobb8 (💬 talk • ✏️ contribs) 19:25, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
@Cocobb8 barangays are not cities/towns of the Philippines. They are just administrative divisions. See the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Tambayan Philippines/Archive47#Are barangays notable? (can we please have a consensus now?). Only those that jave backing reliable, independent, secondary sources that are not mere statistic listings or listings of schools/establishments/tourist sites, like Forbes Park, Makati, are qualified to have standalone articles. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 08:20, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
@JWilz12345, I know that it is an administrative division, which is why I am saying that it meets WP:GEOLAND per [p]opulated, legally recognized places are typically presumed to be notable. I am using the guideline as a justification for my !vote, and the discussion you linked to was not officially closed, nor was it an official RfC in any way, so at this point WP:GEOLAND is the guideline to follow for this article. Yes, it lacks coverage, but it is presumed notable per GEOLAND. Cocobb8 (💬 talk • ✏️ contribs) 14:14, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
@Cocobb8 so, in your opinion, is Barangay 51, Caloocan (list of Caloocan's barangays) notable too? It is a legal administrative division, with a chief local executive (a "barangay captain or chairman") and a set of elected councilors ("barangay kagawad"). The country has more than 40,000 barangays or administrative wards of the country's 1,634 incorporated places. Hard to maintain all 40K+ articles as per some concerns raised by Filipino Wikipedians in debates concerning articles of barangays of the Philippines. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 15:31, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
@JWilz12345 I did not realize it was 40,000 barangays. Thanks for pointing it out. But, I would still keep this article per the coverage I found in books. Cheers, Cocobb8 (💬 talk • ✏️ contribs) 16:47, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
Redirect to Hinabangan#Barangays as per WP:ATD --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:51, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

Evernew Pictures

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

Fails to meet the GNG as well as relevant NORG. All I found on the web is some ROTM coverage, but nothing significant or in-depth. On a related note, this film production company produced some films that do not even meet WP's standards of notability. Saqib (talk I contribs) 07:39, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. Saqib (talk I contribs) 07:39, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 09:10, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
Redirect to Agha G. A. Gul. I agree with Saqib's assessment. This is a company so it has to meet WP:NCORP criteria. Unfortunately, the coverage is trivial and mostly related to Evernew Studios which is a notable topic. I still think there might be some offline coverage which we are missing in a simple before so please redirect it to Agha G. A. Gul for now. 2400:ADCC:144:8200:8483:7158:CABA:36A (talk) 11:39, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:47, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

A&B Productions

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

Clearly fails to meet the GNG as well as relevant NORG. All I found on the web is some ROTM coverage, but nothing significant or in-depth Saqib (talk I contribs) 07:34, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. Saqib (talk I contribs) 07:34, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Companies. Shellwood (talk) 09:09, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
Redirect to Asif Raza Mir - the coverage is mostly related to its founder Asif Raza Mir so redirect for now. Fails WP:NCORP due to trivial coverage. 202.47.46.115 (talk) 11:41, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

Kim Chang-myong

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

Fails WP:SIGCOV and WP:GNG. There doesn't seem to be anything here, and a single appearance for the North Korean national team in 2000 doesn't cut it. Anwegmann (talk) 07:18, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. Anwegmann (talk) 07:18, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and North Korea. Shellwood (talk) 09:09, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 10:50, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 10:51, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
Delete - there is no basis for an article here. We don't even know his DOB, position or POB! I note that Order of Kim Jong Il and this source have a person of this name achieving an award which might be a claim towards WP:ANYBIO, however, I am not completely satisfied that this is the same person. Unless we can prove it's the same guy, we should delete the article on the footballer. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 11:10, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

Cristiano Ronaldo Jr

AfDs for this article:

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

It does not appear that this player is notable on his own merit, beyond his connection to his father. If anything, this is way WP:TOOSOON, but I also think it fails WP:SIGCOV and WP:GNG on its own merits. Anwegmann (talk) 07:13, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Portugal. Shellwood (talk) 09:08, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
Redirect – This article previously ended as redirect under the name Cristiano Ronaldo Jr. You should gone to redirects per discussion instead. ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 11:23, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
Redirect to Cristiano Ronaldo#Family, children, and relationships per previous AfD. Broc (talk) 13:45, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

if there's Enzo Alves, why not him? Slancio2 (talk) 14:04, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

@Slancio2 we are debating whether to delete the page "Cristiano Ronaldo Jr" and not another one. If you think the article Enzo Alves does not fulfill notability criteria, feel free to nominate it for deletion. WP:WHATABOUTX is not a valid argument against deletion. Broc (talk) 14:37, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

Comment: Notability is not inherited, but there isn't an insignificant amount of independent coverage (see Google News). C F A 💬 20:13, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
Redirect to Cristiano Ronaldo#Family, children, and relationships Right now as-is the subject's career is fully tied to where their father is in the same way the son of Barry Bonds was in the 2000s as a batboy; there's really no 'there' to discern on a U15 team. One of the sources is fully disqualified as a clickbait 'how much is this child worth' article that's talking out of its you-know-what (it's zero. He's a kid.). Nate • (chatter) 00:35, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
Keep – Due to the player's passion, this article tends to be recreated over and over again. CR Jr. has some notability and the tendency is to increase. As pertinent as the nomination is, I don’t see it as a solution. Svartner (talk) 04:42, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

Comment The proper time for article creation is likely to be if they earn a cap on the main squad, certainly not before that. Who their parent is doesn't give them a notability multiplier regarding article creation since they're still only on a U15 squad as part of a national league that is effectively on par with a local AYSO club. Nate • (chatter) 18:48, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 10:49, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
Redirect per previous AFD and fully protect to prevent re-creation. Giant Snowman 10:51, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
Redirect and protect the redirect. Nothing has changed since the last AFD, his notability is still WP:NOTINHERITED. Joseph2302 (talk) 20:35, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

Programme level

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

Ambiguous term, unsourced and I found it difficult to find good sources to add. Boleyn (talk) 14:41, 8 June 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Engineering-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 14:47, 8 June 2024 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Music, Radio, and Television. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:30, 8 June 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Cocobb8 (💬 talk • ✏️ contribs) 14:52, 15 June 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:12, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

The Tao of Zen

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

It doesn't meet WP:NBOOK / WP:GNG. Possible WP:ATD is redirect to publisher, but I am not sure if the title is ambiguous. Boleyn (talk) 14:48, 15 June 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Philosophy and Religion. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 15:22, 15 June 2024 (UTC)
Comment. @Boleyn: Added some citations. There are also several books that cite Grigg extensively, including a University of Toronto Press one you can view through Project MUSE. (Sorry have to run now.) ~~The book is actually from 1938.~~ Cielquiparle (talk) 15:45, 16 June 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:11, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. PARAKANYAA (talk) 07:18, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
Keep, feel this makes the cut with what's been added. Hyperbolick (talk) 07:32, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
Keep from me as well per WP:GNG. In addition to what's been added to the article, I found that the book is widely cited in other books, like this one and this one. Just haven't had a chance to go back to read carefully, assess what's most relevant/important, etc. Cielquiparle (talk) 15:41, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

Keep per above. PARAKANYAA (talk) 20:50, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

Haytham Kenway

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

GAR isn't the right place to judge notability, according to most people. So, starting with WP:BEFORE, the character doesn't have any WP:SIGCOV. We're going to do source analysis now, which is in the reception section. First we got a PC gamer source with zero mention of character/game review, G4t7 dead source, [14] [15] Zero mentions about Haytham, GamesRadar+ has a short trivia content, IGN listicle with trivia content, another IGN's listicle, listicle with a short content, dualshockers' listicle with trivia content, Gamepro's listicle, Gamerevolution's listicle with short content, just a short interview, Comicbook source isn't reception at all, Heavy source contains only trivia quote content, while the last popmatters source is a bit useful, but with short content about the character. Overall, the article still fails WP:GNG; and has no SIGCOV at all. 🍕Boneless Pizza!🍕 (🔔) 06:43, 15 June 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements, Science fiction and fantasy, and Video games. 🍕Boneless Pizza!🍕 (🔔) 06:43, 15 June 2024 (UTC)

Strongly oppose. The article was nominated for deletion on similar grounds a few years ago, which was dismissed. Nothing has changed since then. Also, the argument that there is no significant coverage is baseless. The article has over 40 sources, you choose to focus on the reception section, ignoring all the others. Also, I don’t see how listicles indicate a lack of notability.

DasallmächtigeJ (talk) 10:46, 16 June 2024 (UTC)

If we're gonna include everything; not sure how these 3 sources with very short content, interview and another trivia-like content at dev info would help WP:GNG. This is not like other fictional characters; when there are a lot of reliable sources, it does not mean they are automatically notable, unless the character was really discussed by multiple reliable sources. 🍕Boneless Pizza!🍕 (🔔) 10:53, 16 June 2024 (UTC)

@DasallmächtigeJ Could you link us to that AfD? It's not on Kenway's talk page for some reason. In any case, consensus can change, so a renomination is valid. Additionally, Reception tends to be the biggest bulk of proving an article's notability. Usually, listicles tend to provide very little to Reception. While there are plenty of exceptions, the ones here seem to be very weak overall, from a glance. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 01:58, 17 June 2024 (UTC)

I was wondering why I couldn’t find it and after some digging I remembered it wasn’t even nominated for deletion. A user simply turned it into a redirect without seeking consensus first. The issue was resolved on my talk page, where the discussion can still be found here. DasallmächtigeJ (talk) 12:45, 19 June 2024 (UTC)

'keep - I think this just about meets the criteria. I'd agree there isn't three articles that only talk about the subject, but there's an awful lot that at least talk about them. this game radar article talks about how the character feels a bit like a red herring, this Kotaku article talks about them in terms of a game they aren't in and realistically, this interview is about as in-depth as you can get about a character. I think given them, and the other articles cited, the article does a good job showing that this minor character is indeed notable. The GA status, or lack of it, has nothing to do with this. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 11:10, 16 June 2024 (UTC)

The interview counts as a primary source, and thus does not count towards GNG nor SIGCOV. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 19:16, 16 June 2024 (UTC)

well, if it was an interview with the game's publisher, I'd probably agree. I don't agree that a voice actor being specifically interviewed by a third party would be primary. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 21:31, 16 June 2024 (UTC)

I mean, I'd argue it's primary since it's an interview with a person directly affiliated with the development of the game and the character in question. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 18:14, 17 June 2024 (UTC)

Merge to List of Assassin's Creed characters. Every source here is trivial to some degree, and there's a distinct lack of strong sourcing to anchor the article around. Ping me if more sources come up but I'm not seeing anything that's close to meeting the threshold needed to split off here. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 19:17, 16 June 2024 (UTC)

Merge to List of Assassin's Creed characters - his standalone notability is dubious and there's a clear and obvious WP:ATD to target him to. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 06:28, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
Merge a lot of the reception is trivial, and while one could argue it helps re-examine the series antagonists it doesn't have much substance beyond that and even then it's shaky. Importance outside the parent work just isn't indicated.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 10:56, 20 June 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: More specific commentary on the sourcing situation would be helpful in attaining a consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 06:56, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

Merge to List of Assassin's Creed characters - Discounting the primary sources and sources that are just trivial coverage, the sources currently in the article are largely reviews or coverage of Assassin's Creed 3 or the series as a whole, that just discuss Haytham as part of that larger review/discussion. These kinds of sources lend themselves much better for the subject to be discussed in a broader topic, in this case the character list, than spun out into a separate article. Searches are bringing up more of the same - smaller amounts of coverage as part of the broader discussion of the game and its plot as a whole. Rorshacma (talk) 19:45, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
Merge per Rorshacma. These are mostly WP:TRIVIALMENTIONs about the character when discussing the game. That reflects how this should be covered on Wikipedia, by mentioning the character in the main game article. Shooterwalker (talk) 23:52, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

Luno (band)

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

Does not meet WP:BAND criteria. Not notable in any way. FromCzech (talk) 05:05, 15 June 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Czech Republic. FromCzech (talk) 05:05, 15 June 2024 (UTC)
Delete: After careful consideration of the article on Luno (band), the appropriate action according to Wikipedia's guidelines is deletion. The subject does not meet the notability criteria outlined in the General Notability Guideline (GNG) or the Music Notability Guideline (MUSIC). Despite a detailed history and discography, the band lacks significant coverage in reliable, independent sources to establish its lasting impact or significance in the music industry. The sources cited primarily consist of routine coverage such as local newspapers and self-published content, failing to demonstrate the widespread recognition required for inclusion in an encyclopedia. Therefore, deletion is recommended to maintain Wikipedia's standards of verifiability, neutrality, and notability. This decision aligns with ensuring the integrity and quality of content available to Wikipedia's readership. Yakov-kobi (talk) 15:23, 17 June 2024 (UTC)
Huh? Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:53, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
AI-generated comment FromCzech (talk) 06:29, 21 June 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: If I were closing, I would ignore the AI-generated delete !vote.However, that leaves this with no discussion yet and therefore relist becomes necessary.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 05:51, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

Delete - although the Ceska televize source seems good, there is nothing else reliable here, and the article itself seems to be mainly a rewording of the band members' names again and again. Fails notability criteria. C 679 12:56, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
Delete - agree with above, Bduke (talk) 23:51, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

Duncan Turnbull

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

Can't seem to find any WP:SIGCOV on this player beyond basic coverage either from the clubs, his college, or transfer notes. It appears as though he never actually played a professional match, which might be a failure of WP:SPORTBASIC. The only thing of basic substance I found was this, which is local and behind a paywall. Anwegmann (talk) 04:27, 15 June 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. Anwegmann (talk) 04:27, 15 June 2024 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, England, and Illinois. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:32, 15 June 2024 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 16:17, 15 June 2024 (UTC)
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found please ping me. Giant Snowman 16:18, 15 June 2024 (UTC)
Transfermrkt has him playing in one professional match in the EFL Trophy for Portsmouth vs Peterborough (source). Same matched that was referenced in the paywalled article. Tpd13 (talk) 11:55, 16 June 2024 (UTC)
Transfermarkt is not a reliable source, but one EFL Cup match still doesn't make up for the lack of WP:SIGCOV. Anwegmann (talk) 22:39, 16 June 2024 (UTC)
@GiantSnowman and Anwegmann: Some coverage: Shaw Network, Daily Herald (2), Portsmouth News (2). Thoughts? BeanieFan11 (talk) 22:22, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
Thanks for posting these. I saw the first three when I was initially nominating the article. The problem with these is that they are focused almost entirely on his signing a professional contract and are very much local coverage—his hometown newspaper(s). This is hardly sustained coverage or, in my view at least, significant, meaningful coverage. The fact that the event these article cover happened, but then he went on to have a very brief career with no league appearances and no coverage at all makes me feel like it doesn’t/shouldn’t suffice for WP:SIGCOV. That said, I’m certainly open to other opinions on this. Thanks, again. Anwegmann (talk) 03:01, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
No issues with 'local' news per se - but to analyse the sources: Shaw Network is paywalled but what is available is a bit routine; DH 1 looks OK; DH2 is routine; Portsmouth News 1 and 2 routine. It's essentially all 'look at this American who signed for an English soccer team'. Giant Snowman 17:33, 21 June 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 05:49, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

Draftify: Since article isn't a WP:STUB, and isn't completely lacking sources, I suggest turning the article into a draft, so that it can be updated, and later apply to be published again. -Mjks28 (talk) 14:09, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

Jorge Calvo (baseball)

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

This does not meet the criteria for notability. A Google search yields no results outside of Baseball-Reference. Dennis C. Abrams (talk) 03:18, 8 June 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Baseball, and Mexico. Dennis C. Abrams (talk) 03:18, 8 June 2024 (UTC)
Comment: Found some brief mentions on newspapers.com such as [[16]] and [[17]], but not enough there to meet the GNG. I'd guess there is probably enough coverage in Mexico to meet the notability guidelines, though. Let'srun (talk) 11:44, 8 June 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:57, 15 June 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 05:47, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

Bernardo Calvo

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

This article does not meet the notability criteria. There are simply no references to him on the internet other than compendiums of baseball stats which include his name. Dennis C. Abrams (talk) 03:11, 8 June 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Baseball, and Mexico. Dennis C. Abrams (talk) 03:11, 8 June 2024 (UTC)
Comment: Found some routine coverage on newspapers.com such as [[18]] and [[19]], but nothing that is GNG worthy. However, it is quite possible that there are Mexican sources that could help this subject meet the notability guidelines. Let'srun (talk) 11:56, 8 June 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:56, 15 June 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 05:47, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

Catalina Larranaga

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

Fails WP:NBIO; non-notable actress who mostly appeared in adult films. Mvcg66b3r (talk) 05:15, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Women, Sexuality and gender, and Texas. Mvcg66b3r (talk) 05:15, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
Delete as its current state does not meet WP:BIO; its sole source does not seem reliable and does not establish notability. SunTunnels (talk) 22:28, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
Delete: I can't find book reviews, nor any sourcing the acting career. Plenty of sites selling the books though... Not passing ACTOR or AUTHOR notability. Oaktree b (talk) 23:56, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
Delete: Fails WP:GNG, WP:NACTRESS, and WP:AUTHOR. — YoungForever^(talk) 22:17, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

Kobeigane Divisional Secretariat

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

unsourced tautology Elinruby (talk) 04:26, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sri Lanka-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 09:10, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
Keep not a tautology. Satisfies WP:NORG, as the third tier of public administration in Sri Lanka, Divisional Secreteriats are notable. Independent reliable secondary sources provided. Dan arndt (talk) 23:31, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
Speedy keep. Nomination lacks any trace of effort, not even containing a capital letter or a full stop, and does not invoke any Wikipedia policy. Geschichte (talk) 14:38, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

Quintin Esterhuizen

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

Redirect to List of Namibia national rugby union players as I am unable to find enough coverage to meet WP:GNG. JTtheOG (talk) 03:03, 15 June 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Rugby union, Africa, and South Africa. JTtheOG (talk) 03:03, 15 June 2024 (UTC)
Redirect to List of Namibia national rugby union players There is some coverage out there on this player, but I don't think any of it reaches what's needed for a WP:GNG pass. No suitable redirect per WP:ATD. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 09:52, 15 June 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 03:08, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

Redirect. No coverage to support GNG in a PQ search of The Namibian and AllAfrica. JoelleJay (talk) 21:57, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

Raquel Anderson

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

I am unable to find enough coverage of the subject, a New Zealand women's rugby league player, to meet WP:GNG. A possible redirect target is New Zealand women's national rugby league team. JTtheOG (talk) 02:16, 8 June 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Women, Rugby league, and New Zealand. JTtheOG (talk) 02:16, 8 June 2024 (UTC)
Delete as I can't find any sigcov. David Palmer//cloventt ^(talk) 07:55, 8 June 2024 (UTC)
Week keep Some sources to indicate notability, but only just. Mn1548 (talk) 16:59, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
Keep. Has played at the highest level, having represented New Zealand including at a World Cup. Paora (talk) 12:50, 14 June 2024 (UTC)
- @Paora: Participation-based criteria for athletes were deprecated in 2022. BLPs require strong sourcing. JTtheOG (talk) 17:44, 14 June 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: It would be helpful to identify which sources establish notability, by current Wikipedia standards, rather than just making a claim.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:12, 15 June 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 03:07, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

Delete. Literally zero independent sources in the article--everything is from league press releases or directly from a governing body--and even then there's still zero SIGCOV. A search on PQ (including for Raquel Pitman) returned exclusively namedrops in squad list press releases and a couple trivial mentions in match reports. JoelleJay (talk) 21:43, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

Clipgenerator

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

Atrociously sourced, highly advertorial that appears to fail WP:NCORP. Graywalls (talk) 03:07, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Products, Technology, Software, and Germany. Graywalls (talk) 03:07, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

1884 Wabash football team

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

No indication this team, which only played a single game, meets the WP:NSEASONS or WP:GNG. The only source in the article gives this team merely a brief mention, and a cursory search didn't come up with anything better. Let'srun (talk) 01:50, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: American football and Indiana. Let'srun (talk) 01:50, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
Delete per nom. The article was created as a sub-stub almost 10 years ago with a single sentence -- "The 1884 Wabash Little Giants football team represented Wabash College during the 1884 college football season." The only addition since then has been a notation that the "Little Giants" nickname wasn't adopted until 20 years ago. Nothing of encyclopedic value is lost by deleting this. Cbl62 (talk) 03:29, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
Delete: Per the article having been a WP:STUB for 9 years, and only having one citation. Mjks28 (talk) 14:04, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

Science Bulletin

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

Not seeing how this journal meets WP:GNG or more specialized WP:Notability (academic journals). Does not seem indexed in anything significant: [20] (Engineering Source (EBSCO), MEDLINE (United States National Library of Medicine), zbMATH). _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 01:35, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academic journals and China. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 01:35, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
Keep. The article had the old ISSN and e-ISSN for Chinese Science Bulletin, which I have now replaced with the correct ones for Science Bulletin. https://miar.ub.edu/issn/2095-9273 shows that the journal is indexed in Science Citation Index Expanded (Clarivate) and Scopus (ELSEVIER) as well as Academic Search Ultimate (EBSCO), Natural Science Collection (ProQuest). Eastmain (talk • contribs) 02:21, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
@Eastmain It may be that Science Bulletin is notable, but which information in the article are about it and not about the Chinese Science Bulletin? What should be removed from the article - it has only one footnote to a press release currently. Zh wiki seems to have more, but right now our entry is asking for a WP:TNT, given the confusion. PS. Our article claims the publication was estabilished in 1956, zh wiki gives they year 1950, and there are many inconsistencies between en and zh. Language - for us, English, for zh, Chinese English (?). What is the publication relation to "Chinese Science Bulletin"? Zh wiki claims it is a former name, but miar has two different pages for it? It's a mess. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 11:32, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
@Piotrus If it helps, there is an article in Science Bulletin itself about the change of name: [21]. So, Science Bulletin was known as Chinese Science Bulletin until 2014. Regarding miar having two pages... if you're referring to the fact miar.ub.edu has a separate page for the title "Chinese Science Bulletin" (https://miar.ub.edu/issn/1001-6538), that would be because it has a different ISSN to the "Science Bulletin" title. So far as I'm aware, when serials are renamed they also get a new ISSN, so this seems pretty normal as far as I can tell.

The reason for the language confusion may be because there is also a Chinese-language version of the journal (科学通报 or "Kexue tongbao") with its own ISSN (which is documented on zh.wiki but not en.wiki). Chinese Science Bulletin aka Science Bulletin is the English-language version so far as I can tell. Monster Iestyn (talk) 13:42, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
@Monster Iestyn Thank you for looking into this. I was concerned that there may be another publication with the same name, not notable, that got merged into this article. If this is not the case, then I hope someone will try to untangle this and reference this - I agree the topic may be notable, but the current execution is terrible. Sure, WP:AFDNOTCLEANUP, but WP:TNT is a thing too. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 02:18, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:25, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

1896 South Bend Commercial-Athletic Club football team

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

After a review of the sources in this article, I'm not convinced this team meets the WP:GNG or WP:NSEASONS. In order of appearance in the article, the first source is merely informing readers of a blub meeting, the second is about the athletic club, not the team, the third is all of two short sentences, white the remaining sources are brief and routine game recaps. A check of newspaper archives didn't come up with much better. Let'srun (talk) 01:08, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sports, American football, and Indiana. Let'srun (talk) 01:08, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
Delete per nom. This is a creation of User:Murphanian777. Back in 2000, they created articles on every team that played a game against Notre Dame in its early years. Many of those opponents were local patsies who Notre Dame defeated easily. That also appears to be the case here as ND outscored this club, 46–0. While well intentioned, I have serious doubts about the notability of stand-alone articles on ND's patsies. Similar articles on ND patsies have been deleted as well. The rationales in the prior AfDs apply here as well. See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/1900 South Bend Howard Park Club football team, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/1905 Bennett Medical football team, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/1904 Toledo Athletic Association football team. Cbl62 (talk) 03:21, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events and History. ― "Ghost of Dan Gurney" (talk) 04:07, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
Delete - not every team is notable enough for an article, and the sources are rather sparse. Whizkin (talk) 20:09, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

Northeastern Centre for High School Research

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

Not a notable organization. Created by undergraduate students last year; no substantial coverage that is independent from the group. Walsh90210 (talk) 01:00, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and India. Walsh90210 (talk) 01:00, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
Delete. I do agree with the conclusions for this article @Walsh90210 Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 02:57, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
Delete. Poor sources and per nom, page does not satisfy the notability guidelines for organizations. Fails WP:NSCHOOL. RangersRus (talk) 14:12, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
Delete. I agree with the above. Bduke (talk) 23:40, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

Inquisiq R3

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

The company's website now redirects to another LMS, which does not have an article. I'm not sure if it was just renamed (the software was also renamed Inquisiq R4 years ago), or if this is a different program. This LMS has had a notability tag since 2021, and neither Inquisiq nor Hireroad having pages, I find it strange that a specific piece of software from them has a page. Searching for Inquisiq returns mostly SEO spam, or this article, which fulfills none of WP:GNG SekoiaTree (talk) 00:00, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2024 June 22. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 00:23, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education, Internet, and Software. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:26, 22 June 2024 (UTC)