Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Women

WP:DS/WOMEN

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Women. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.

Adding a new AfD discussion

Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:

Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Women|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.

Note that there are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.

Removing a closed AfD discussion

Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.

Other types of discussions

You can also add and remove links to other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Women.

Further information

For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.

This list is also part of the larger list of deletion debates related to People.

Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at:

Purge page cache

watch

Women edit

MaryEllen Miller edit

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

Ambassadors are not inherently notable. All the sources provided are primary. Fails WP:BIO. LibStar (talk) 05:03, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Bilateral relations, Norway, and Australia. LibStar (talk) 05:03, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Catherine Raper edit

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

Ambassadors are not inherently notable. 3 of the 4 sources are primary from her employer. LibStar (talk) 04:47, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Bilateral relations, South Korea, Taiwan, and Australia. LibStar (talk) 04:47, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dani Cavallaro edit

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

I cannot find anything on this author in both print and online sources despite them writing 28 books. I cannot confirm even the most basic of biographical information (age, country, etc), nor even whether this is even a real person. What if this is simply a collection of authors who publish under this name? I cannot find a single newspaper article on this person, or any kind of faculty biography attached to any kind of institution. There is a short overview that lacks any biographical information on one of her publisher websites. I cannot confirm whether this person is an academic or has any kind of academic background.

Doing online searches, you find people spending years asking the exact same questions and not coming up with anything definitive:

https://www.animemangastudies.com/2014/03/19/who-is-dani-cavallaro-part-1/

https://www.animemangastudies.com/2014/03/21/who-is-dani-cavallaro-part-2/

In principle, her works could be used as sources for Wikipedia (not every author is notable enough to have their own page). There are a handful of academic reviews of her books but this is simply not enough. Harizotoh9 (talk) 20:09, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep as article creator. I understand the concerns you're raising in your nomination, but they seem to be primarily concerns about the subject herself, which is a separate discussion from whether the subject merits a Wikipedia article. If your argument is that Cavallaro does not qualify for assessment under the academic notability guideline, note that she also meets criteria 1 and 3 of the creative professionals guideline: her Google Scholar results indicate that her work is widely cited, some of them having hundreds of citations, her work has been the subject of plentiful reviews in addition to the ones already present in the article, and physical copies of her works seem to be widespread, with this book and this book being available in hundreds of libraries. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 22:07, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

She fails literally every single criteria for the academic notability guideline (and rather badly I might add). She's made zero impact in her field, and merely spams out a lot of very low quality books that get trashed in reviews or cited in other low quality scholarship. She does not publish in any peer reviewed journal at all, and does not hold any position in any unviersity or academic setting, and does not go to any conferences (or even fan conventions). In the end, I can't even prove she's a real person and not 3 teenagers in a trench coat. The article will be permanent stub status simply because there's no sources and likely never will be. Harizotoh9 (talk) 22:59, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not certain whether the academic guideline applies in this case, but that's pretty irrelevant as I've already demonstrated how she passes the guideline for creative professionals. Again, none of the concerns you're raising here are relevant to the question of whether Cavallaro merits an article. A person does not need to have a public image or appear at events in order to be notable. Even if you think Cavallaro might be "3 teenagers in a trench coat", that isn't a reason to delete the article. Should William Shakespeare's article be deleted just because the authenticity of his work has been questioned for hundreds of years? Yes, that's a somewhat hyperbolic comparison, but quite to the point — I haven't seen that claim presented anywhere other than a single blog post, and I regard it as a fringe theory. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 23:44, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Plenty of books/papers written by her, nothing about her. I don't find much of anything outside of books she's written. No coverage, no critical reviews of her works, unsure about scholarly notability. Oaktree b (talk) 23:42, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Oaktree b: Did you click the links I provided in my comment above? —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 23:45, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes I did. The site is listed as a RS [1], but we need more than two articles from the same site to establish notability here. Oaktree b (talk) 23:51, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm confused. I'm not referring to the nomination but to my comment, where I showed her work has been widely cited and reviewed. Also, I will note that Anime and Manga Studies is likely not reliable as a whole, being a self-published source; the WikiProject only recommends a single page of references as a starting point for further research. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 23:56, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Women, Visual arts, Anime and manga, and England. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:06, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Beatrix Holéczy edit

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

Biathlete who placed lowly in two Olympic Games. No World Cup results of note either; 49th and 68th places tend not to get coverage. I did not find any coverage when searchnig either, apart from passing mentions (and I did search in the Hungarian name order. Therefore fails WP:SPORTCRIT. Geschichte (talk) 21:01, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Women, Olympics, and Hungary. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:05, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tamara Yajia edit

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

Does not meet WP:BIO, or the notability standards for authors or comedians. No SIGCOV, one self published book with no reviews, no secondary coverage for writing or comedy. Links in article are either dead links about twitter presence or interviews, a search turned up no other evidence of notability. Ruth Bader Yinzburg (talk) 22:34, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: I suppose having a funny twitter could be notable, but what's used for sourcing now is brief mentions. I can't find anything outside of social media; not meeting notability requirements. Oaktree b (talk) 23:34, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Bands and musicians, Women, Television, Entertainment, Internet, Argentina, and California. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:04, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Louisa Rachel Solomon edit

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

No obvious reason why bandmember should have own page. Doesn't seem to pass WP:BANDMEMBER. Very few internal links. Seaweed (talk) 18:43, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Women, and New York. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:20, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as "Louisa Solomon" (as this article should be called) easily meets WP:BASIC. Agree that not every band member should have their own Wikipedia article, but in her case, it is justified because of the focused coverage she has received about her anti-Zionist views while identifying as Jewish and queer. This was discussed in The Washington Post (Online) in 2014 when the band's scheduled performance at a festival run by the DC Jewish Community Center was canceled due to her stated political views. There is also a 2014 Wall Street Journal Online article about her as well as the band. If you compare the band's article (The Shondes) with her biography, the two are distinct – and it's important to note that many reviews about The Shondes (e.g. in Rolling Stone) don't even discuss their religion and politics and the band also includes at least one non-Jewish member. Cielquiparle (talk) 21:06, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Julia Kova edit

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

The significance of the person is not visible in WP: MUSIC. Among the links are her official website and social networks.--Анатолий Росдашин (talk) 20:41, 1 June 2024 (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/2024 June 1. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 21:04, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Women, Beauty pageants, Russia, and Florida. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:38, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Elizabeth Young, Lady Kennet edit

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

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

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Artists, Authors, Women, Poetry, Politics, and England. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:19, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - I have added in reviews of two of her publications. She wrote under the name Elizabeth Young, which makes searching for discussions of her work a challenge. I suspect there is more coverage of her work, but it requires sifting through articles about similar people. DaffodilOcean (talk) 21:41, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wives of Hussein of Jordan edit

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

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

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

Yeh Shu-hua edit

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

No observed changes in notability for WP:SNG (WP:SINGER, WP:BANDMEMBER) since Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Yeh Shuhua in 2021. The previous AfD resulted in redirect, this is the revision prior to the AfD closure. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 17:37, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I believe the references show that the subject meets the following criteria. The references has the person as the main subject and not just a passing mention as part of the group.

1. Has been the subject of multiple, non-trivial, published works appearing in sources that are reliable, not self-published, and are independent of the musician or ensemble itself.

A big difference from the other version is a reliance on published sources like news reports and magazines rather than Youtube videos. Firezzasd (talk) 18:10, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Don't see how "reliance on published sources like news reports and magazines" is of any differences to the pointers raised by Explicit in the previous AfD, pretty close in my opinion. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 18:41, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

can you link the previous AfD discussion, so I can see what points were raised? Firezzasd (talk) 18:48, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Already linked, above ^. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 18:49, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The main difference is that discussion is from June 2021. There's more reporting on the subject in the last three years, as evident in the references. I think if the concern is independent notability, that's no longer an issue as compared to back then. Firezzasd (talk) 18:59, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

More as in? Other than 1 hosting news releases (pretty much routine), health issues (ref bombing), 1 cover magazine featured, endorsements for 1 bag brand (ref bombing) and shoe brand (ref bombing). And minus here and there compared to the deleted article due to no reliable sources available. So where exactly does WP:SINGER and WP:BANDMEMBER criteria is fulfiled? — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 07:15, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Women, Dance, South Korea, and Taiwan. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:24, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep: I think the nominator is more likely arguing that Yeh Shu-hua does not demonstrate sufficient individual notability to have a standalone article and should be redirected, rather than filing for a deletion. Then I guess it would be more helpful if the nominator would elaborate on their rationale for considering the other four out of five members to have individual notability (Soojin debuted solo so I am not counting her), while singling out Yeh as lacking it. As a Taiwanese member whose career has been based in Korea, I have looked into sources covering her in both Chinese and Korean. I can't read Korean, so I could only run sources with a translator and it seems like there are quite a lot sources that cover Shu-hua personally, most notably is her solo work as the host of WORKDOL (see My Daily [ko][2] and Nate News[3], and I later also found coverage in Chinese sources, like Elle[4] and ETToday [zh][5]) and appearances in variety shows. (See Segye Ilbo[6], Global Economy Newspaper [ko][7], Zum [ko][8], etc.) I do read Chinese though, and found a lot more sources with SIGCOV about her career, personal life and controversies. (See Elle[9], GQ Taiwan[10], SET News[11], Nownews[12], United Daily News[13], Jusky [zh] [14], Storm Media [zh][15], TVBS News[16] etc.) There are also media coverage on some of her solo works in Taiwan, such as participating in the Taiwanese game show Mr. Player [zh] (see Liberty Times[17] and China Times[18]), a recent travel program with Bolin Chen, (see Oriental Daily News[19]), or performing at Golden Wave At Taiwan. (See Mirror Media[20] and ETToday[21]) Considering the sources already presented in the article and provided by Cunard in the previous AFD, as well as the additional ones I have listed out, I think it is more than enough to show that the subject person has well passed GNG. The SIGCOV on the subject person's solo works are also sufficient to demonstrate the individual notability. So it is a quite obvious pass of both GNG and BANDMEMBER in my opinion. —Prince of Erebor（The Book of Mazarbul） 10:37, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Read through the majority of the linked news articles above, still couldn't find where is the individual notability as a SINGER and BANDMEMBER.
1. Routine coverage and/or summary of her appearance in Workdol's episode
2. Another routine coverage and/or summary of her appearance in Workdol's episode
3. Digest/rundown/roundup's news article of her
4. Another routine coverage and/or summary of her appearance in Workdol's episode
5. Gossip coverage on her attitude on Civilization Express
6. Just a photo coverage of her aheading to Music Bank
7. Routine coverage and/or summary of her appearance on Knowing Bros, as part of promotion with (G)I-dle
8. Another digest/rundown/roundup's news article of her
9. Yet another digest/rundown/roundup's news article of her
10. An article about her debut with (G)I-dle, pretty much yet another digest/rundown/roundup's news article of her
11. Yet another digest/rundown/roundup's news article of her
12. Yet another digest/rundown/roundup's news article of her
13. Coverage of her Instagram post, yet another digest/rundown/roundup's news article
14. Coverage on Song Yuqi and Minnie, she mentioned in WP:PASSINGMENTION
15. Coverage of her Instagram post, basically a gossip coverage
16. Routine coverage and/or summary of her appearance in Mr. Player's episode
17. Same as #16, basically a copy-paste plus-minus coverage
18. Routine coverage of her returning to work after illness
19. Routine coverage on Golden Wave at Taiwan concert, she is mentioned in PASSINGMENTION as (G)I-dle is performing there
20. Routine coverage on her special MC/host apperance on Golden Wave at Taiwan concert (the same event as #19)
In relation to "[the] rationale for considering the other four out of five members to have individual notability", I'm not sure why I'm even answering this question when a quick scan through each (Cho Mi-yeon, Minnie, Jeon So-yeon, Song Yuqi) already given the obvious answer of meeting GNG and/or BLP and/or SINGER and/or BANDMEMBER criteria. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 12:58, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Paper9oll: Hi Paper9oll! Hmm... I believe it is necessary to clarify your expectations for individual notability in order to reach a consensus here. I am not particularly familiar with (G)I-dle, as far as I know, the key difference between Yeh and the other members is that she did not have any individual musical releases. (If I remember correctly Yuqi had her article before releasing her first solo single though) However, I don't think debuting solo is a crucial criterion for determining individual notability, and it is not explicitly stated in BANDMEMBER either. (Ryujin and Lia come to mind as a counterexample.) Aside from this, I do not think the media coverage of Minnie and Yuqi should differ significantly from that of Yeh. I also found it difficult to agree with about half of the summaries you provided. For instance, I cited sources mentioning Yeh hosting Workdol, participating in variety programs, and co-hosting an upcoming travel program with Chen Bolin (the latter was mistakenly labeled as covering her returning from illness). I was intending to emphasize Yeh's solo activities, which I see as demonstrating her individuality, rather than the overall notability. I am also slightly puzzled by how these can be considered routine coverage, or else an actor's entire filmography can be viewed as just their "another day of work" as well. Another key point of disagreement is the categorization of the Chinese sources covering her biography as news digests. SIGCOV never emphasizes that the subject person has to be a unique or major topic of the source, but rather require the source to address the subject person directly and in detail only. These few sources are entirely about Yeh's biography, even the title singled her out instead of referring her as a group. I guess there isn't really room of argument that those sources are direct and detailed addresses. I think this level of SIGCOV on Yeh's early life, career, and personal life far exceeds the requirements of GNG. While I may concede that Yeh's lack of a solo debut could be seen as not meeting BANDMEMBER for individual notability, it is still unconvincing to dismiss the aforementioned sources as run-of-the-mill. I agree to disagree, but respectfully I think the subject person has undoubtedly fulfilled GNG. —Prince of Erebor（The Book of Mazarbul） 14:53, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Prince of Erebor Maybe my standards are higher, I still don't see how she is meeting SNG (SINGER and BANDMEMBER) criteria. Maybe the previous AfD should have resulted in passing for GNG but failure for SNG i.e. keep instead of redirect, I would expect the same for this i.e. passing for GNG but failure for SNG unless other editor(s) changes the !vote scale or if the closer has other POVs, I believe this would be keep closure. I mistakenly written GNG instead of SNG previously until I realised that I'm trying to refer to the latter instead of the former as when I'm re-reading through your replies, I kept seeing GNG concerns even though this isn't my point of concern. However for the others (G)I-dle's members, they met both GNG and SNG hence this wasn't a typo. Regardless, I'm not expecting a consensus between us anyway since this is AfD. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 15:24, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Paper9oll: Oh, I do understand more of your arguments now though. Because assessments on NBLP standards can vary, but GNG should be very straightforward and I was really head-scratching when my sources were denounced as they are clearly providing SIGCOV to the subject person. In my opinion, the subject person has passed both GNG and SNG as she has demonstrated individual notability with her solo works. I agree to disagree on SNG as stated in my previous reply, regarding the determination of the individual notability stated in BANDMEMBER, and I agree that we have very different sets of bars and expectations. But I think the subject person has undeniably passed GNG, and because since the beginning of this discussion (I think) Firezzasd and I were building our points on how Yeh should have already passed GNG, (that was literally why I went for Strong Keep) I think the consensus should head to a keep as well. GNG is also a notability guideline after all, and an article can be kept simply by meeting those criteria. —Prince of Erebor（The Book of Mazarbul） 16:34, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ann'so edit

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

Doesn't pass WP:MUSICBIO or WP:GNG. Claggy (talk) 05:25, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Claggy (talk) 05:25, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women and France. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 10:00, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Vidya Gajapathi Raju Singh edit

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

BLP of “ a prominent figure known for her multifaceted contributions to various fields including women's associations, charitable endeavors, sports, fitness and journalism. She is also the founder of Sumyog Wedding Planners, President of the International Women's Association, and also the President of Soroptomist International.” I don’t see anything that makes this subject notable and the article appears to serve a mainly promotional purpose. Mccapra (talk) 09:49, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Women, and India. Mccapra (talk) 09:49, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Andhra Pradesh-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 09:58, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: minor aristocrat who has done a lot of admirable charity work, but doesn't meet WP:BIO, with no significant coverage of her in independent, secondary RS. Soroptimist International is a notable organisation, but the only mention of her I could find in connection with SI was apparently self-written profiles in The Hindu source cited and this organisation. It's also not clear whether president is an executive or patron role at SI. Wikishovel (talk) 09:36, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Chandni Mistry edit

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

I have carried out WP:BEFORE on this article about a local councillor; there is additional local coverage from the same newspapers already referenced, but no additional national coverage. She was a councillor for less than a year, was investigated for electoral fraud but no action was taken, and she was nominated for, but did not win, an award. She is a fellow of the Royal Society of Arts, but I don't believe that contributes to notability (see brief discussion from 2011 here). I do not think she meets WP:GNG, WP:ANYBIO or WP:NPOL. Tacyarg (talk) 08:06, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Politicians, Women, and United Kingdom. Tacyarg (talk) 08:06, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This wikipedia page has already been granted a B class Wikipedia status as defined The article is suitably referenced, with inline citations. It has reliable sources, and any important or controversial material which is likely to be challenged is cited. This therefore is relevant page and is particularly important given that this page represents the youngest BAME councillor in the history of the city. This seems like a malicious second attempt to request deletion of the wikipedia as the country falls into a general election. All aspects of the wikipedia page have been properly referenced as approved by various sources. With reference to Royal Society of Arts, the individual is listed on their pages. Handedits (talk) 11:17, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, regarding your use of the word "malicious" to describe my deletion proposal. I reject this. I have no conflict of interest regarding this councillor or the article about her. I'm not sure what you mean by second attempt, but if you mean the AFC decline in November, that was another person. I have not opened a previous deletion discussion about this article. Tacyarg (talk) 12:59, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - local councillors do not meet WP:NPOL so notability would need to be established thorough WP:GNG. There is coverage in local papers but no significant coverage beyond that. BBC coverage is about the controversy over residency which at best makes this WP:1E. -- Whpq (talk) 13:17, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep - Notability is valid. Local councillors typically do not meet WP:NPOL unless they have gained significant attention or achieved substantial accomplishments beyond their local sphere. WP:NPOL generally applies to individuals who hold or have held significant political positions, such as national or regional offices, that impact a broader population and receive wide media coverage. However, if a local councillor has influenced notable policy changes, been involved in major public controversies, or received significant media coverage, these factors can contribute to meeting WP:GNG or WP:ANYBIO. In this case, the councillor's investigation for electoral fraud, media coverage, and professional recognitions support her notability.
DrBhel (talk) 00:55, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. - The Wikipedia page should not be deleted as it meets the criteria for notability and has been assessed as B-class, indicating a substantial level of detail and reliable sourcing. Notability ensures that the subject has received significant coverage from independent sources, fulfilling Wikipedia's guidelines for inclusion. A B-class rating signifies a well-organized article with comprehensive content, appropriate structure, and minimal factual errors. Deleting such a page would disregard the effort to provide a valuable, informative resource that adheres to Wikipedia's quality standards and serves the public interest in accessing verified information. Individual considered as highly inspirational to others as youngest BME elected candidate.

Keep - good notability, well referenced and still relevant. Meets WP:NPOL just article needs a little attention as various edit wars occurring. Various sources used and balanced page, non promotional in nature.

Keep - meets notability. The Wikipedia page should not be deleted because it documents a politician with significant community impact, evidenced by multiple international newspaper coverages. Her investigation for electoral fraud, although resulting in no action, garnered substantial attention, highlighting her notability. Her nomination for an award and her fellowship with the Royal Society of Arts further contribute to her recognition and public significance. These elements collectively meet the notability criteria under WP:GNG and WP:ANYBIO, justifying the article's retention. The page provides valuable information about a public figure who, despite a brief tenure, played a notable role in local governance and continues to make contributions.

Johanna Bennett (producer) edit

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

Fails WP:CREATIVE and WP:BASIC. Lacking in-depth coverage and pretty much all of it is just because she's Tony Bennett's daughter. This People article is the best source I could find and it's an "All About Tony Bennett's Kids" article with a short section on her. Notability is not inherited. C F A 💬 22:37, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women and New York. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 23:06, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film and Entertainment. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:29, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Leaving aside "Tony Bennett's daughter" (because notability is not inherited) what's left doesn't amount to WP:SIGCOV.--AntientNestor (talk) 10:50, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Amanda Nylander edit

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

Non-notable figure skater who fails WP:NSKATE; medal placement at the junior level does not meet the standards of WP:NSKATE. Google search turns up nothing outside of wikis and scoring databases. PROD removed without explanation. Bgsu98 (Talk) 23:04, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am also nominating the following related page:

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Women, Skating, and Sweden. Bgsu98 (Talk) 23:04, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Both subjects seem to meet the GNG with the Skate Today article already in the article, which provides WP:SIGCOV, along with native language sources such as [[22]]. Let'srun (talk) 14:04, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. In addition to what Let'srun has pointed out above, I've expanded the article a little bit, building on Swedish news sources. /Julle (talk) 19:30, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Julles additions AlexandraAVX (talk) 05:48, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Julle (talk)'s expansion and additions of news sources. Meets WP:GNG and WP:BASIC. -AuthorAuthor (talk) 17:43, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Guan Xueting edit

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

Non-notable figure skater who fails WP:NSKATE; bronze/silver medal placements at the national championship level do not meet the requirements of WP:NSKATE. Google search turns up nothing outside of wikis and scoring databases. Bgsu98 (Talk) 22:32, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Women, Skating, and China. Bgsu98 (Talk) 22:32, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Much more results if one searches for the name with hanzi, rather than with pinyin. I've added a couple of sources. /Julle (talk) 00:02, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Devora Radeva edit

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 does 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) 15:35, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Women, Skating, and Bulgaria. Bgsu98 (Talk) 15:35, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Claire Rochecouste edit

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

Ambassadors are not inherently notable. 2 of The 3 sources are primary. A Google News search yielded nothing in-depth. Fails WP:BIO. LibStar (talk) 03:56, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Bilateral relations, Portugal, and Australia. LibStar (talk) 03:56, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Not notable like the other article. Fails WP:BIO too. Wolverine XI ^{(talk to me)} 15:17, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lisa Filipetto edit

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

Ambassadors are not inherently notable. The 2 sources provided are primary. Fails WP:BIO. LibStar (talk) 19:55, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Bilateral relations, Ethiopia, Cambodia, and Australia. LibStar (talk) 19:55, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Clearly not notable. If there were more sources then it would've been fine. Wolverine XI ^{(talk to me)} 15:15, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jana Mlakar edit

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

With only database source listed, the article of this WP:BLP1E#one-time Olympics participant clearly fails WP:GNG. According to Sports Reference results, Mlakar was not in the top three winners of 1984 Winter Olympics. She also never received any medal record. Corresponding article on Slovene Wikipedia is likewise an unsourced stub. Clara A. Djalim (talk) 10:10, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Olympics, and Yugoslavia. Clara A. Djalim (talk) 10:10, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:42, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Yugoslavia at the Olympics per no medal, no GNG coverage, WP:NOLYMPICS BrigadierG (talk) 11:10, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. There are Mlakar Slovenian news hits for Jana Mlakar. The news pieces are about a museum director/cultural heritage worker. Judging from pictures she doesn't resemble Jana Mlakar Adamič, a seemingly notable ethnologist (and museum employee) who was born in 1962 as well, but on 12 January [23] [24]. I would hope that someone can shed light on who these people are, and whether there is a relation to the skier. Geschichte (talk) 12:44, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. She seems to be notable (given the presentation in the podcast mentioned below) but in-depth sources are missing at the moment. The German Wikipedia contains some more information in de:Jana Mlakar and there may be offline newspaper articles that reported on her in more detail. The museum director/cultural heritage worker was born in 1955 (per Cobiss) and Jana Adamič Mlakar seems to be a completely unrelated person as she is from a different region. --TadejM ^{my talk} 02:37, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently she was the 'best cross-country skier' in Sarajevo? Hungarian newspaper archive Arcanum brings up a dozen-or-so matches, mainly in the Serbian newspaper Magyar Szó. There's mention of her in this tabloid-y article about the "divorces of the best Slovenian athletes". BeanieFan11 (talk) 16:19, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep If what the user above says turns out to be accurate, then this article deserves a place here. Wolverine XI ^{(talk to me)} 15:14, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per above, in my honest opinion GNG should be covered with these sources. Will also take a look at some sl/sh sources. A09|(talk) 15:59, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nina Menegatto edit

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

This page is really bad, it's presented as an actual biography of a politician/monarch when the country in question doesn't actually exist. It presents the subject as holding actual positions and titles, which do not exist. Not to mention that the page uses a few primary sources from the micronation itself. Presenting a micronation roleplayer as a real head of state is misinformation at best. Di (they-them) (talk) 06:11, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Politicians, Women, and Italy. Di (they-them) (talk) 06:11, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
weak keep - there are a few fairly long media reports in addition to those on the page. There may also be more in non-English publications. On that basis, in my opinion the GNG is met. JMWt (talk) 06:37, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge the content from reliable secondary sources to Principality of Seborga. Insufficient independent coverage for a stand-alone article per Wikipedia:Notability (people)#People notable for only one event. Celia Homeford (talk) 08:46, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as subject meets GNG (mostly established in non-English sources: [25][26][27][28][29][30][31][32][33][34], although English sources also exist: [35][36][37]). Notability is not determined by the validity of her claims/titles/positions/offices. Many articles exist on pretenders and claimants to defunct and non-existant monarchies. The question is if Menegatto is has received significant media coverage, and the answer to that is yes. -- Willthacheerleader18 (talk) 13:58, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions. Willthacheerleader18 (talk) 14:04, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Royalty and nobility-related deletion discussions. Willthacheerleader18 (talk) 14:04, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Principality of Seborga. She is no more notable than her so-called predecessors, Giorgio and Marcello. Keivan.f^Talk 19:17, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect Per the user above. Wolverine XI ^{(talk to me)} 15:12, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect I sincerely disagree with Di's and Celia Homeford's arguments, however I believe it indeed deserves a redirect as per the user above. Demagoras^talk 18:20, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge/redirect I don't see how she's notable on her own. She can be adequately covered on the main page for Seborga. BottleOfChocolateMilk (talk) 08:09, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Georgie Campbell edit

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

Fails WP:EVENTCRIT; subject is notable only for passing away. As this is a recent death, WP:BLP1E should probably apply here. See also WP:PSEUDO. Firestar464 (talk) 00:28, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Horse racing. Firestar464 (talk) 00:28, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Looks like a WP:BLP1E with little chance of WP:LASTING BrigadierG (talk) 00:55, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Women, and England. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:55, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - I think that as a top level 5* rider and on Team GB for FEI Nations Cup on multiple occasions she was already WP:NSPORT relevant, and lack of previous article probably more reflective of the overall poor coverage of equestrian sport on WP. Suggest that there should be enough for an article. OwainDavies ^(about)_(talk) edited at 09:00, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There are achievement standards set out for equestrian sports at WP:NEQUESTRIAN - generally, a medal is required to be notable, not just participation. BrigadierG (talk) 11:05, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Aside from this AfD, they were only ever guidelines but it was my understanding that WP:NSPORT, within which WP:NEQUESTRIAN falls, had been abandoned in favour of general WP:GNG notability, in-part so as to avoid the proliferation of single sourced historic competitors in favour of properly sourced, judged-on-their-own-merits, robust articles. A process which has clear merits, and without inbuilt asymmetry of certain sports having literally thousands of active competitors with WP:BLP articles and other sports granted three medalists at a time. If you permit a further example of the difficulties of the guidelines and how they could be perceived as a barrier to the collation of information; WP:RU/N had the criteria of only the semifinalists from the Women's World Cup, a tournament which takes place once every four years. However, in the pandemic the tournament was postponed for 18 months so a strict interpretation of the guidelines (which I saw being argued) would have no new 15-a-side female rugby union players permissible for over five and a half years. A hindrance to WP as an up-to-date information source, which an online encyclopaedia should have the capacity to excel at. Hildreth gazzard (talk) 13:07, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete If this person is only notable for passing then they fail the notability test, unless proven otherwise. Wolverine XI ^{(talk to me)} 15:07, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I noticed the article about her husband, and put up an AfD for that as well. Posting here as this would've been bundled had I noticed them at the same time. Firestar464 (talk) 00:33, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That AfD nomination was a dumb move as her husband is clearly notable, and bundling the two bios would have thus been a very bad move indeed. Schwede 66 03:05, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Article satisfies WP:GNG. Not uncommon to gain information from obituaries. Hildreth Gazzard (talk) 13:49, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bhoomika Mirchandani edit

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

Indian actress fails WP:GNG and WP:NBIO. Analysis of sources indicates they are all WP:TRIVIALMENTIONS (1, 12) WP:INTERVIEWS (2, 4, 8, 10, 11) tabloid coverage (which is not SIGCOV) (2, 9, 12), or just plain unreliable (5, 7, 13). Plus, per WP:NEWSORGINDIA, sources 1-4, 8, 10-11 should raise caution since they are unbylined and promotional in tone. Source 5 fails verification. BEFORE search turns up nothing else reliable. Dclemens1971 (talk) 23:52, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Women, Television, and Delhi. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:12, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I found no indication of notability. Wolverine XI ^{(talk to me)} 15:04, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Danialle Karmanos edit

AfDs for this article:

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

Routine coverage and awards; no reliable sources. Likely not meeting ANYBIO BoraVoro (talk) 12:33, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Some coverage of her philanthropy [38], [39], [40]. Sources 2 and 3 I've listed are more about a yoga program she founded, perhaps create the article and redirect there or to the Children's Hospital in Detroit? Oaktree b (talk) 12:58, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Women, Journalism, Health and fitness, Education, and Michigan. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:39, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Sorry, but the sources and article don't look notable in my eyes. Wolverine XI ^{(talk to me)} 14:56, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tahani Al-Yanbaawi edit

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

WP:TOOSOON for this footballer article probably. All I found was this transactional announcement and a few sentences here. Contested PROD. JTtheOG (talk) 17:34, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Women, Football, and Saudi Arabia. JTtheOG (talk) 17:34, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Fails in WP:GNG. Svartner (talk) 19:51, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found please ping me. Giant Snowman 18:15, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Looks like WP:GNG as the editor above suggested. Wolverine XI ^{(talk to me)} 15:03, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete—per above and per nom. Anwegmann (talk) 22:01, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

May Gilbert edit

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

Does not meet any of the criteria for WP:ARTIST. Only 1 article links to this. LibStar (talk) 14:03, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Artists, Women, Visual arts, and New Zealand. LibStar (talk) 14:03, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The article has no reliable sources and is essentially an orphan with no article linking to it. This evidence suggests the article does not fall on the notability side. Wolverine XI ^{(talk to me)} 15:01, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Her work is in the collections of the Museum of New Zealand and the Christchurch Art Gallery. TheSwamphen (talk) 23:25, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Victoria Starmer edit

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

I'm not seeing evidence that the subject is independently notable of her husband, Keir Starmer. The existing article can be adequately summarised at his article. Still, we might expect more coverage if Starmer becomes Prime Minister, so it may be a question of WP:TOOSOON. Consequently, I would be content with Draftify as an alternative to deletion, assuming more sources may become available within six months that nudge the subject past the notability threshold. IgnatiusofLondon (he/him • ☎️) 08:39, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Health and fitness, Law, Politics, and United Kingdom. IgnatiusofLondon (he/him • ☎️) 08:39, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

At least, hopefully this AfD can resolve the notability tag currently on the article. IgnatiusofLondon (he/him • ☎️) 08:40, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@IgnatiusofLondon, hey there. As creator of the article, I have no objection to draftifying it. I found as much as I could on the subject while keeping in mind that it is highly likely we will get more information in a couple of weeks. Omnis Scientia (talk) 09:29, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

While understandable, the issue is that this exercise, completed too early, leads to trivia-collecting articles that violate policy. For example, the article contains the name of her sister, which likely fails WP:BLPNAME. There's no reason for her sister to be named if there is no independent notability. There is no deadline. IgnatiusofLondon (he/him • ☎️) 09:47, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Keir Starmer. This is the only way I can think of given there's no way for making this article notable. Galaxybeing (talk) 10:31, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Galaxybeing, for now at least. Hence why it should be draftified. Omnis Scientia (talk) 16:50, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women and England. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:43, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sachiko Furuhata-Kersting edit

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

Subject is not notable, there are few (if any) reliable sources, and article appears to possibly be created by the subject herself (or someone close enough for a possible conflict of interest) LoganP25 (talk) 03:16, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. LoganP25 (talk) 03:16, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women and Japan. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:05, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: PROMO. I tired .jp and .de websites, the only items that come up are places to buy/stream the music, or concert listings. Nothing outside of these items we can use to build an article. What's currently used for sourcing is primary. Oaktree b (talk) 13:22, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bronwyn Labrum edit

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

Fails WP:AUTHOR. No inherent notability in the roles she held. LibStar (talk) 19:25, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Women, History, and New Zealand. LibStar (talk) 19:25, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep just barely. The Stuff profile and Wanganui Chronicle article establish some notability. I'm not sure if WP:AUTHOR is the only criteria that applies here, as she has been a curator and researcher at multiple museums and universities, most notably Te Papa which is the New Zealand national museum. To me, this establishes notability as an academic. David Palmer//cloventt ^(talk) 08:21, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
How does she meet WP:NACADEMIC? LibStar (talk) 14:04, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Claire Harris (artist) edit

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

Fails WP:ARTIST. LibStar (talk) 19:20, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Visual arts, and New Zealand. LibStar (talk) 19:20, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Artists-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:49, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Non-notable artist. 104.7.152.180 (talk) 03:42, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. I do not think any of the sources establish notability per WP:ARTIST. David Palmer//cloventt ^(talk) 08:24, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete only independent coverage is trivial. Traumnovelle (talk) 04:37, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bronwyn Holloway-Smith edit

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

Fails WP:ARTIST and WP:AUTHOR. Most of the sources are primary. LibStar (talk) 19:18, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Women, Visual arts, and New Zealand. LibStar (talk) 19:18, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Delete due to lack of secondary sourcing. 104.7.152.180 (talk) 03:24, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete because the sources do not establish notability as per WP:ARTIST. David Palmer//cloventt ^(talk) 08:26, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep the article needs some work but the subject is definitely notable. TheSwamphen (talk) 10:09, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Please explain how the subject meets notability criteria. LibStar (talk) 04:58, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I went through all of the sources, and don't see how this could meet WP:ARTIST at this time. Elspea756 (talk) 13:40, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Independent sigcov from 2018 in RNZ, Stuff. Hameltion (talk | contribs) 01:26, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per coverage mentioned by Hameltion. Randy Kryn (talk) 04:01, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep in line with WP:ARTIST bullets #3, #4, and even #2:
- "Ghosts in the form of gifts" is the subject of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews (ref1, ref2)
- "Pioneer City" has won significant critical attention by winning the National Contemporary Art Award (ref1, ref2)
- She is known for her 3D-printing techniques, using the medium to reproduce lost items ("Ghosts in the form of gifts")

CaptainAngus (talk) 01:52, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Policies and WP's and MOS aside, how can "we" not keep the page of someone who created the title "Ghosts in the form of gifts". Randy Kryn (talk) 03:04, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Freya Jayawardana edit

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

this subject doesn't meet WP:GNG criteria and can't stand-alone (WP:NLIST) as a musician (WP:MUSIC and WP:BANDMEMBER). May this subject have to be redirect to List of JKT48 members page. Ariandi Lie ^{Let's talk} 17:09, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Bands and musicians, Women, Dance, Internet, and Indonesia. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:22, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Charli Evans edit

AfDs for this article:

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

Fails WP:NSPORT. No reliable sources in the article or online. GMH Melbourne (talk) 13:10, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Martial arts, Wrestling, and Australia. GMH Melbourne (talk) 13:10, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Nothing found about this person, sourcing is largely match reports in non-RS. Oaktree b (talk) 14:05, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:29, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: (Keep) She is one of the most popular active female Australian wrestlers and a pioneer of Pro-Wrestling: EVE. Has worked for companies from three different continents and is accomplished. As for the sourcing, the article includes links to trustworthy sites such as fightful.com, voicesofwrestling.com, Squared Circle Sirens, Diva Dirt or Last Word on Pro Wrestling. They might not point her name out, but they clearly demonstrate her work. There also exist several interviews with her from YahooSports and WrestleSports. Unfortunately I didn't include them since they are only audio work. I think the article meets the notability criterias and also has a WikiData correspondent (item Q126186302), therefore I strongly believe that it should remain on the mainspace. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JeyReydar97 (talk • contribs) 21:52, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
keep Charli Evans is a major figure in the UK indie wrestling scene. Bigkhrisdogg (talk) 22:21, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Are there any sources that contribute towards establishing notability? - GMH Melbourne (talk) 23:25, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - fails WP:GNG. Most of the sources are results only and the others are trivia mentions only. One source is unreliable and I'll be removing it. Clearly not notable and not a major figure in UK wrestling by default for said lack of notability. Addicted4517 (talk) 02:57, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fight promotions and results, interviews, and wrestling databases do not constitute significant independent coverage. Being "popular" is also not a WP notability criteria. According to WP:NSPORT, pro wrestling is not classified as a sport here, but rather as entertainment, so wrestling records and titles are immaterial. WP:ENTERTAINER says notability is achieved if "The person has made unique, prolific or innovative contributions to a field of entertainment." There is no evidence that she meets this criteria. Papaursa (talk) 23:48, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Natalie Labbée edit

AfDs for this article:

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

City councillors are not presumptively notable based on WP:NPOL, they have to be notable for other things or pass WP:GNG or at least WP:ANYBIO. This subject fails all. Sources presented and from WP:BEFORE are WP:ROUTINE coverages/WP:RUNOFTHEMILL sources and cannot be used to establish GNG because there's no WP:SIGCOV anywhere. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 10:20, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians, Women, and Canada. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:55, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Still not notable, sourcing is mostly to Twitter and the same local stories used last time. Endorsing the Liberal leader isn't notable, the harassment isn't terribly notable either. Oaktree b (talk) 12:14, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I have added categories to the article as it entirely had none categories and its sources were only X posts. I tried to look for more sources online but all I could find are very few. Thesudburystar here: https://www.thesudburystar.com/opinion/columnists/if-i-had-strong-mayor-powers-i-would-make-greater-sudburys-bureaucrats-accountable-labbe is just a piece of opinion that is just more of a campaign like and fails GNG, including this: https://www.thesudburystar.com/news/local-news/plenty-of-candidates-in-ward-7-8-and-9 . The Villagereport here: https://www.villagereport.ca/village-picks/sudbury-councillor-has-faced-online-threats-since-she-was-elected-8817219 is just about her reacting to harassment at her home. I failed to find sources that explain deep about the subject. However, if someone manages to find other extra sources, I may change my vote.--Tumbuka Arch (talk) 12:19, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Sudbury still is not a city whose city councillors get an "inherent" notability freebie just for existing as city councillors — the bar that a Sudbury city councillor would have to clear to get a Wikipedia article is not "she exists", but "she has received such an unusually high depth and range and volume of more than purely local coverage that she could credibly claim to be one of the most uniquely significant city councillors in the entire country". But this article isn't showing that at all.
I would also note that there's some reason to suspect conflict of interest here, given that this is the second attempt to create an article about Natalie Labbée within the past year, while there have been no attempts that I know of to create an article about any other current or recent Sudbury city councillor but her (not even the one I had under active "watchlist the redlink in case somebody tries it" surveillance for a few weeks this past winter, whom I bet at least Oaktree can guess but I won't name lest I inspire somebody to try it.) And it also now warrants mention that I submitted an SPI request on the creators of the first and second versions of this article, which has already resulted in both of them (and another username who's also been playing FAFO games on our articles about other Sudbury politicians, such as mayors and MPPs) being sockblocked. Bearcat (talk) 17:11, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete previously deleted. Fails WP:NPOL. LibStar (talk) 22:58, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: per nom, doesn't meet WP:BASIC C F A 💬 00:07, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete city councillors are not automatically notable and there's no other real claim to notability here. BottleOfChocolateMilk (talk) 08:11, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Death of Shaylee Mejia edit

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

No evidence of sustained in-depth coverage; all local coverage from March; lead includes a weaseled potential BLP violation that this girl's death has been "widely attributed" to a fight she had at school. Zanahary (talk) 07:16, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Crime, and California. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 07:58, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Seems a clear WP:BLP1E situation. Reliable sources only cover her in the context of a single event, she is a low-profile individual, and the event itself is not significant (although it is of course very sad). WP:NOTNEWS also relevant, I think. Chocmilk03 (talk) 08:07, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't really get your argument here. If it's an event based article it can't really be a BLP1E issue? But this definitely doesn't pass NEVENT either and should be deleted on those grounds. PARAKANYAA (talk) 19:29, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, I guess it's not technically a bio but about the event of her murder? The line is maybe a little blurry in the case of an article that is solely about the death of a single person. But agree, WP:NEVENT doesn't seem to be met either. There's no deadline, but there's also no evidence of continued coverage since the event or that this event will have any sustained significance. Chocmilk03 (talk) 06:00, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I can only find a half-dozen articles in Gnews about the event happening from the time it did, then nothing. Another non-notable death with no lasting consequences, NOTNEWS. Oaktree b (talk) 12:17, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: The incident which could be a potential murder/manslaughter case is already gaining significant coverage in the entire country, not just from local news. There will likely be bigger matters and legal proceedings concerning the death, which if you thoroughly investigate the details you will find some connection between the bullying and violence that the victim endured.

Cheera L (talk) 19:51, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Well, we aren't a CRYSTALBALL. Oaktree b (talk) 04:08, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That's the article's author btw Zanahary (talk) 23:12, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lauren King (actress) edit

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

No evidence of notability under WP:GNG or WP:NBIO. All available sources are primary sources, trivial mentions, or affiliated with this actress's agency. Dclemens1971 (talk) 00:44, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: There's also an American actress with the same name, but I find nothing for this individual. The only website is the GMA one used in the article, which isn't enough to build an article here. Oaktree b (talk) 03:51, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Also doesn't have an article on the Tagalog (Filipino) wikipedia, limiting our search for sources and not helping the search for notability. Oaktree b (talk) 03:52, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
For topics about the Philippines, English sources are the most plentiful. If you can't find any English sources, it'll be much harder to find sources in other languages. Howard the Duck (talk) 07:13, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Women, and Philippines. Skynxnex (talk) 04:43, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Notability not found. Xxanthippe (talk) 07:15, 28 May 2024 (UTC).[reply]
Delete I only found primary sources or unrelated Lauren King's in my GSearch and GNews Search --Lenticel ^(talk) 11:35, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. I hope an admin can address; an editor moved the page to their userspace and now we are discussing a redirect. Dclemens1971 (talk) 13:12, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Flagging for @Liz - the cross-namespace redirect deleted above was to a page that had been under discussion here for deletion. Not sure what the procedure is when the page is draftified before conclusion of a discussion but mentioning in case you want to close this discussion now. Dclemens1971 (talk) 18:59, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, User:Dclemens1971, I've moved the article back to main space from User space. The editor clearly wants the article to be draftified or userfied. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:40, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for moving it back @Liz. ~~I'm OK with draftify as an AtD if others are.~~ Dclemens1971 (talk) 00:42, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Since the creator has not requested it, I am switching my !vote back to delete. Dclemens1971 (talk) 15:21, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Akiko Kitamura edit

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 does 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) 16:44, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Women, Skating, and Japan. Bgsu98 (Talk) 16:44, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:59, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jana Amin edit

AfDs for this article:

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

BLP of an activist, deleted at AfD in January and immediately recreated. Notability is not evident to me at all, as the article is a collection of activities which are run of the mill. Mccapra (talk) 22:20, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Egypt, and United States of America. Mccapra (talk) 22:20, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep (with small potential Wikipedia:CONFLICT) as I said in previous discussion. The recreated article removed non-notable information and sources to address previous reasons for deletion, so "it was deleted before" is insufficient reason: this is a new article that should be judged on its own merits, but I still believe the subject has established notability due especially to articles about her in non-English sources. There is a danger of underrepresentation due to Wikipedia:Systemic bias if we insist on more notable English-language sources without recognising the Egyptian coverage as notable. Also, the previous deletion occurred just 8 hours after a single extra delete vote was placed after 3 relistings, so I believed that immediately recreating the article in a form that addressed the reasons for deletion was justified. With regard to Jana's activities being "run of the mill", correct me if I'm wrong but my understanding of Wikipedia:Notability is that it's not up to us editors to judge whether or not a subject's activities are extraordinary in their own right, but merely to summarise what sources are saying if the sources meet Wikipedia's standards of reliability and notability. Hence the question should not be "did Jana do something worthy of a Wikipedia article" but "are sources giving Jana coverage that is worthy of a Wikipedia article". (My possibly-biased opinion happens to be that the answer to both questions is "yes" but if we're supposed to focus on the second then no need to argue about the first.) Silas S. Brown (email, talk) 16:08, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I’m not suggesting we need English language sources. We need in depth coverage in independent sources in any language. The piece in Elle is an interview where she talks about herself, as is the piece in Marie Claire. Two other sources are authored by her. Now This News is a passing mention. Some of the others have a strong whiff of PR placements. They tell us she works for an NGO, did a TED talk, and attended a lecture by Malala Yousefzai. She hasn’t received a well-known and significant award or honor, or been nominated for such an award several times; or made a widely recognized contribution in a specific field, and isn’t in a Dictionary of National Biography. So what exactly is notable about her? Mccapra (talk) 21:10, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If someone is interviewed by a source, then the fact that the source decided to interview the person might in itself confer notability if that source does not interview just anybody. So I don't think we should dismiss interviews just because they are interviews without also asking the question: how difficult is it to get an interview in that publication? I'm imagining it's not that easy to get into Egyptian Streets and Marie Claire Arabia for example. Silas S. Brown (email, talk) 07:20, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Um, the one interview isn't in Arabic, English, or French, all of which are spoken in Egypt, so I'm not sure what using an Italian source has to do with Egypt... Oaktree b (talk) 22:30, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I wasn't commenting on the Italian source. I was commenting on the Egyptian Streets article and the Marie Claire Arabia article, which are in English and Arabic respectively. Whether these articles also count as "interviews" depends on exactly how you define an "interview", but either way my point was that getting published in Egyptian Streets and in Marie Claire Arabia seems notable to me. My point is wrong if it can be shown that these publications have a low acceptance standard of what they document, but I don't think that's the case. Silas S. Brown (email, talk) 19:35, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:23, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Again? Same sources as last time, a TED talk and an interview don't make you notable here... As for the systemic bias, you're actually hurting the standards by using such low quality sources, thereby contributing ot the bias (oh, we'll give this one a "pass"). Still having a lack of sources and nothing we can use to create the article. Oaktree b (talk) 22:29, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
As mentioned above, I believe it's not that easy to get into Egyptian Streets and Marie Claire Arabia. And not exactly the same sources as last time: I deleted some of the weaker ones and added in a couple more. That's why I think it should be re-evaluated on its merits in its current state. Silas S. Brown (email, talk) 19:39, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Stacey Daniella Gabriel edit

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

AFD as I placed the wrong PROD and it should not be PROD again. She is not notable enough for inclusion, she is the runner-up of Miss Universe Philippines 2024. She is not the winner of the competition. Google search turn up results about her in the competition, but it is not notable enough. Thank you. ✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 18:30, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Beauty pageants, and Philippines. ✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 18:30, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete non notable pageant titleholder { [ ( jjj 1238 ) ] } 15:47, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I believe she is notable enough through her career as an actress as well as her previous stints in other beauty pageants such as Binibining Pilipinas, not to mention she has a large fan base and can easily be notable as an influencer. NathalieMendoza (talk) 06:33, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: While this article had a BLPPROD, not a PROD, I'm stating that this article is not eligible for Soft Deletion due to the unbolded Keep statement in this discussion. Also, "notability" can't just be claimed, it has to be demonstrated through significant coverage in independent, secondary, reliable sources. Do those exist?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:56, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

weak delete: Some critical notice of her advocacy [41], but that's about all I can find. Oaktree b (talk) 22:40, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Najma Akhtar edit

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

The subject fails WP:GNG and WP:NMUSIC Dowrylauds (talk) 13:19, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: No coverage found for a musician, this appears to be a different person [42]. The sourcing used in the article now isn't enough to meet notability. Oaktree b (talk) 15:02, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Women, and United Kingdom. Shellwood (talk) 16:43, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:25, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep in this reliable AllMusic staff written bio here it states that her second album reached No. 4 on the Billboard World Music chart and that another of her albums sold 50,000 copies in Japan. Some album reviews here, and here, imv Atlantic306 (talk) 20:52, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:46, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Carey Schueler edit

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

Subject's only claim to fame is that she was the first woman MLB drafted and thus, they lifted their ban on drafting women, both of which are already mentioned in Women in baseball and her dad's articles. While that may be the case, she never actually played in any MLB or even MiLB game unlike Kelsie Whitmore. Her time in high school and college are not worth mentioning as she was not a star athlete in either cases. The sources backing these claims are either dead links or only mention her briefly and I cannot find enough coverage for her in general to meet WP:GNG or WP:NATHLETE anyway. The Legendary Ranger (talk) 19:46, 21 May 2024 (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/2024 May 21. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 20:17, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Women, Baseball, Basketball, and Pennsylvania. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 21:20, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Keep. Besides the fact that it feels wrong to relegate a woman who broke through in a male dominated field to a mention in her male relative's article (in an encyclopedia which already has a gender gap issue), her drafting was very significant, lead to a rule change and also, notably not a publicity stunt but based on a genuine assessment of her talent. She is well covered in literature on the subject (1). The article could certainly use expansion (I'd like to find information on her performance in her senior year season, for instance), but that by itself is not reason to delete it any more than any other stub article. 🌸wasianpower🌸 (talk • contribs) 21:29, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

How you "feel" is not a legit reason to keep an article. I am sure many other editors' personal point of views conflict with the rules here, but they can do nothing about it. Most of those books in that Google search only mention her for a single sentence or paragraph. That is certainly not "well covered." The Legendary Ranger (talk) 22:58, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The first word in my comment is that besides the fact that it feels wrong. I'm also not talking about my personal feelings here, but commenting on how doing things like redirecting a woman's page to her male relative's only enforces systematic gender bias on wikipedia. Many of the books contain only a paragraph mention, but several of them do contain more coverage than that. 🌸wasianpower🌸 (talk • contribs) 15:07, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge with Women in baseball per WP:BLP1E. While being the first female drafted in MLB is a big deal, the subject did not sign with, let alone play for, any professional baseball organization. Outside of that, she had a rather unremarkable college basketball career. This person is clearly defined by a single event. She can adequately be covered at the proposed target article, even if information about her high school baseball career is added as suggested by Wasianpower. Frank Anchor 22:40, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect per WP:BLP1E. She was drafted by a team which had her father as general manager, she wasn't signed to a contract, and (per the Chicago Tribune reference) she hadn't played baseball for two years before being drafted. The facts suggest this was a stunt for attention. As there is no substantial coverage of her other than that event, I must vote to redirect. Leaning towards Ron Schueler as the target over Women in baseball, as that article is more likely to contain more than de minimis discussion of her. Walsh90210 (talk) 23:10, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I strongly oppose Ron Schueler as a target. Casey Schueler is most notable for being the first woman drafted by MLB, not for being Ron’s daughter. Frank Anchor 00:34, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Strongly agree with this. 🌸wasianpower🌸 (talk • contribs) 14:44, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep for two reasons: First, there is a discrete entry about Carey Schueler in two different baseball encyclopedias: Donald Dewey, Nicholas Acocella, and Jerome Holtzman's The New Biographical History of Baseball: The Classic—Completely Revised (Triumph Books, 2002) and Leslie A. Heaphy and Mel Anthony May's Encyclopedia of Women and Baseball (McFarland & Company, 2006), indicating that in the field of baseball history Schueler is considered sufficiently notable for inclusion in encyclopedias. Second, the second criterion of WP:ANYBIO is has made a widely recognized contribution that is part of the enduring historical record in a specific field, and Schueler precipitated the MLB to change a rule about signing contracts for women), an enduring contribution to baseball. Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 07:36, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:28, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Margaret Adamson edit

AfDs for this article:

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

Ambassadors are not inherently notable. Appears to fail WP:GNG. Uhooep (talk) 20:11, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Bilateral relations, Cambodia, Pakistan, Poland, and Australia. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 20:16, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The article was very stub-y so I did some work filling it out using the references that were there. Someone with better access to Australian sources can probably improve this even more. Lamona (talk) 03:30, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:28, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: A high office multiple diplomat professionally is notable. I disagree this doesn't meets WP:GNG as the nominator said. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 09:13, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Instagram face edit

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

"Instagram Face" is something very abstract and unverifiable, ie. two reliable sources may define it differently. It may also be inherently derogatory, as it is based on negative opinions about women's appearances. With Love from Cassie Schebel (talk) 01:17, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is something best discussed on the talk page. Thriley (talk) 01:22, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Why? Since these are reasons to delete the article entirely, I would think this is where it belongs. This is a genuine question, I've never nominated an article for deletion before, and I am probably doing at least two things wrong. With Love from Cassie Schebel (talk) 01:26, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Popular culture, Medicine, Technology, and Internet. ― "Ghost of Dan Gurney" (talk) 01:42, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Draft: Well the "Instagram face" is a thing, [43] and [44], but the wiki article seems to tell a different story. Should be sent back to draft to sort this out, topic seems notable. Oaktree b (talk) 01:50, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Draft, This is a topic I was able to find some sources on, so it's optimal for this to stay in draftspace until its ready for main space. -Samoht27 (talk) 18:40, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It definitely is a topic. [45] [46] If it needs more depth or a rebalancing, I'm happy to take that on. I note that all the sources listed on this page are written by women.
Keep Plenty of coverage in solid outlets. There is no reason for this to go to draft space with the citations it currently has. Thriley (talk) 19:35, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, I agree with Thriley. 12u (talk) 21:06, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Draftify For clearing up the remaining issues. ArvindPalaskar (talk) 12:09, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What are the issues that cannot be fixed through normal editing? If we send it to draft it risks being pruned after inactivity which would amount to backdoor deletion. ― "Ghost of Dan Gurney" (talk) 18:01, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the Article Rescue Squadron's list of content for rescue consideration. Thriley (talk) 18:15, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Click the reliable sources news search at the top and you'll see plenty of reliable sources give this significant coverage. https://www.wired.com/story/goopcore-body-horror-age-of-instagram-face/ https://www.bbc.co.uk/bbcthree/article/5c237a34-7a47-4deb-a5b4-a23e77cc88f7 etc. Dream Focus 21:47, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, divided between those editors arguing for Draftification and those advocating Keep as is.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:16, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, I've drafted a rewrite using 6 reliable sources including those mentioned in this discussion. It's now two paragraphs with a clear scope. The sources cover a span of about 6 years. I've used named references and welcome other editors to expand where appropriate, especially Lfstevens. @Oaktree b, Samoht27, and ArvindPalaskar: you all voted draftify, does it still seem too far off the mark or is this an acceptable start? Rjjⁱⁱⁱ (talk) 04:42, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, this is enough to make this page a safe Keep. -Samoht27 (talk) 16:38, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Seems properly verifiable and is now sourced fairly well; notable topic with interest from major publications. WeirdNAnnoyed (talk) 14:34, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I see the article has been improved since the nomination, which moots out the "draftify" into purgatory !votes. There are reliable sources sufficient to meet WP:GNG. As for the original nomination, i see the only valid ground of the nomination would have been whether the subject was "unverifiable," but it is.--Milowent • ^hasspoken 19:22, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep based on present citations and also additional coverage exists which I have added: The Zoe Report and Tablet Magazine.Hkkingg (talk) 07:52, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lori Wells edit

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

I have been unable to find sources to meet WP:GNG or WP:NBIO. The single source cited in the article is a Wordpress blog. She doesn't seem to me to meet WP:NACTOR either; Coronation Street is a notable show but her role in it was not significant, Kisses at Fifty is one episode of an anthology drama. Overall, she doesn't seem to meet notability requirements. Chocmilk03 (talk) 04:14, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Women, and England. Chocmilk03 (talk) 04:14, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete While she does have a Wikipedia page, most of her roles seem to be minor, except Get Some In! in which she has acted in 21 episodes, but as a minor role. She doesn't meet the notability criterion. Wikilover3509 (talk) 08:42, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Kisses at Fifty was a one-off TV play, but an important one, where she had an important role. It was one of the best-known plays in Play for Today, and the BBC repeated it quite recently. Here role in Get Some In! wasn't that minor, she appears in the list of characters, and in the box at the start (and I did not put her there). PatGallacher (talk) 14:20, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: seems to pass WP:NACTOR for 2 significant roles in notable productions. More sources wouldn't hurt. I would have suggested a redirect to Kisses at Fifty, but her role in Get Some In! is also rather significant. Worst case scenario, that might be a solution, though. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 16:11, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, _signed,Rosguill ^talk 15:54, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Blessing Ejiofor edit

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

Does not appear to pass WP:NBASKETBALL as they do not meet any of the criteria, or WP:GNG as the sources are insufficient to establish that. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 21:34, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Women, Basketball, Nigeria, Florida, New Jersey, North Carolina, Tennessee, and West Virginia. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 22:27, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Can I contribute more on this? SusuGeo (talk) 12:22, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, of course. Any editor may work to improve articles, even those that have been nominated for deletion. If you can demonstrate that the person is notable for some reason (you can see my reasons for questioning this below), then you might be able to prevent the article from being deleted! Good luck! P Aculeius (talk) 13:09, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete unless some reason can be keeping can be located. Normally I would point out that the nominator did not mention having searched for sources, as required by WP:BEFORE. However, this is a college basketball player, and the sources in which you would expect her to be mentioned are probably news sources. A quick search just using the "news" tool above appeared to show minimal coverage: university profiles focused on one of their student athletes, and a couple of basketball scores. Certainly nothing currently in the article demonstrates notability: there are thousands of college basketball players, some of whom are notable, but merely being one doesn't seem to indicate notability. I admit to some uncertainty: is it usual for all Vanderbilt Commodores players to have articles, even those who weren't part of the team for very long and who don't appear to have been primary contributors to their team? It's possible that there's some policy I don't know of here, or some other reason for notability I didn't think of, but it isn't indicated yet. P Aculeius (talk) 13:09, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@P Aculeius Usually the majority of college players don't have an article. The editor in question seems to have been creating articles of players from Africa rather than Vanderbilt players. There is no inherent notability from playing for Vanderbilt or any other basketball team, college teams or otherwise. All players must simply pass WP:GNG. There are some sources below that have been uncovered since your !vote if you are interested. Alvaldi (talk) 10:15, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Playing professionally would tend to make her more notable, but if the only thing to add is that she's done so, then it may not be enough. I don't discount local sources, but merely being interviewed by a student newspaper, however editorially independent it may be, doesn't confer notability. The question is whether she's done something to bring her to attention at some significant level. For instance, being a major contributor to a championship team, or mentioned (not just in passing, or noting the basketball scores) in news sources with a greater reach than college papers. Sporting figures profiled in national papers or similar sources may be notable. I'm not foreclosing the possibility of notability; just that so far it doesn't seem to be here. P Aculeius (talk) 14:07, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: This subject doesn't appear to have nearly enough to meet the WP:GNG. I found 1 paragraph of coverage at [[47]], and the subject was interviewed by 60 Minutes [[48]]. It is a close call though, so please ping me if more sources are found. This source provides depth but is quite local [[49]]. Let'srun (talk) 02:21, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There is also [[50]]. Let'srun (talk) 02:26, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Please note that locality of sources has no bearing on whether they go towards GNG or not. Proposals to discount local sources have been repeatedly rejected in the past. Regarding other sources, This has a few paragraphs about her. There is also this feature in the The Daily Athenaeum. It is the student newspaper at West Virginia University, something we generally don't consider going towards GNG, but it states in its article that it is editorially independent from the university and does not have a faculty adviser. I'm not sure that changes anything. There is also this feature in relations to the 60 minutes interview. Alvaldi (talk) 09:50, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It should be noted that since 2022, she has played professionally in Spain and France so there might be some sources there. She is also a member of the Nigerian national team which could indicate that there might be sources about her in the Nigerian media. Alvaldi (talk) 10:58, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Alvaldi, we have a strong consensus against considering any student papers as contributory to notability, regardless of their editorial independence: However, given their local audience and lack of independence from their student body, student media does not contribute to notability for topics related to home institutions. JoelleJay (talk) 16:28, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@JoelleJay I've usually never consider student papers being contributory to notability but the part about it being editorial independent cast a few doubts in my mind with this particular paper. Thanks for the clearup. Alvaldi (talk) 16:59, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The SI article is not independent and potentially not RS, as it was written by a WVU sophomore for the Mountaineers Now "FanNation" blog section of SI. JoelleJay (talk) 16:37, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I assume you are talking about the one Alvaldi posted? I posted a different one above that one. Let'srun (talk) 19:22, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: in addition to the WP:NBASKETBALL criteria mentioned above, WP:NCOLLATH may be relevant here. However, while the article has some improvements since this discussion began, I still don't see any evidence of notability. The subject doesn't seem to have won any titles or participated in any championships or tournaments of note, and the only details provided in any of the sources describe nothing more than a brief biography focused on her playing basketball at various schools or being a member of various teams or playing in certain places. Nothing that would naturally bring her to national attention, or distinguish her from thousands of other college or minor professional athletes. P Aculeius (talk) 09:46, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. based on presented citations 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 this person will meet WP:GNG and WP:BIO.Hkkingg (talk) 08:52, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Haven't had a chance to look at the other sources, but the first one you posted is from Vanderbilt (the school she played for at the time the article was written), and as such isn't independent. Let'srun (talk) 14:03, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

+1 to what Let’srun said. Also, I saw these sources you just mentioned before I made this nomination and they just can’t be used to establish GNG, subject already said WP:NBASKETBALL. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 14:29, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Still removing the primary source, we have 4 other sources. I stand by my Keep vote. Again you don't need to protect your nomination and argue every voter that opposes your nomination. this is not a good practice. Let the admins decide.Hkkingg (talk) 19:31, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Hkkingg This is not a matter of protecting my nomination (that sounds weird) or whatever, this is a deletion discussion, and this is a matter of letting you know what the policies and guidelines involved really is. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 21:19, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Only one of those sources is independent. The first is from Vanderbilt, the second from WVU recruitment affiliate WV Sports Now (written by WVU students/employees), the third from the Vanderbilt student newspaper, and the fourth from the WVU student newspaper. The remaining French source is routine transactional news. JoelleJay (talk) 19:49, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Per my above arguments. I don't see the sustained SIGCOV in multiple independent secondary sources to meet GNG. JoelleJay (talk) 19:51, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: This is unusual in that there are several editors here who have put in time to locate sources but they haven't given their opinion on whether or not this article should be Kept, Deleted or maybe moved to Draft space if it looks like they have a promising professional career ahead of them.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:50, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: This subject was covered extensively in this SI cover story from 2020 [[51]], and while somewhat local this story from the Patterson Times is dedicated to her [[52]]. Ejiofor was also featured on 60 Minutes in 2020. As such, we have multiple independent, reliable sources providing WP:SIGCOV of the subject with which to meet the WP:GNG. Let'srun (talk) 00:41, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The SI story is a single event, so we would need sources showing sustained SIGCOV to meet N. The (highly local) Paterson Times source fails YOUNGATH and does not count towards GNG, and the fact she was interviewed on 60 Minutes is also irrelevant as it is not secondary independent coverage. If the only good material we have on her is from a flurry of minor pieces regarding one event in 2020, and nothing else substantial since then, we really don't have an NPOV basis for an article. JoelleJay (talk) 11:30, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have no issue with the quality, significance, or relevance of the sources. My question is, what is the subject notable for? Her personal life doesn't establish notability, and being a member of college basketball teams or minor professional basketball teams doesn't establish notability. Being interviewed by sports magazines or similar sources doesn't make her notable. What is it that elevates her above the level of a good but not particularly outstanding young athlete? Has she done something unusual or important that would still be worth mentioning twenty, forty, sixty years down the road? Right now the only specifics about her basketball career, besides a list of teams that she's played for, are that she scored 28 points for the Vanderbilt Commodores over the course of twenty-two games in one season: an average of 1.27 points per game played. In any given year, there are literally thousands of college basketball players with comparable records. P Aculeius (talk) 14:32, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per the references above which establish notability. The SI cover story is one and the other pieces of independent and routine local coverage provided above can count toward the second as expected by GNG. WP:NBIO clearly states that If the depth of coverage in any given source is not substantial, then multiple independent sources may be combined to demonstrate notability. Frank Anchor 01:56, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
But what is she notable for? She's not notable for having been mentioned or even interviewed by multiple publications. These sources would help if they said anything about her that would be notable; do they? As a basketball player, she's got to be notable for doing something important in basketball, and other than a list of teams she's been on, all that we know about her basketball career is that she scored 28 points one year. That's not notable! Virtually every starting player on every college basketball team in the country scores more than that over the course of a season, and they're not all notable. What sets her apart from thousands of non-notable players? It can't all come down to the number of publications that have mentioned her. P Aculeius (talk) 05:17, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 05:07, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

The result was soft delete‎. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:08, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Vladlena Sandu edit

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

A screenwriter and theater director who has directed some non-notable films and documentaries fails to meet WP:GNG and WP:FILMMAKER. There is no significant coverage in third-party reliable sources. Almost all currently cited sources are interviews, with a few being unreliable or merely passing mentions. GSS ^💬 15:34, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Women, and Ukraine. GSS ^💬 15:34, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:53, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:30, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Anja Hirschel edit

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

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

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians, Women, and Germany. Shellwood (talk) 09:26, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Could potentially redirect to Pirate Party Germany and add a mention there, but I can't see any coverage meeting BASIC. Alpha3031 (t • c) 15:00, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

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

Redirect to Pirate Party Germany: Not much for GNG and NPOL. Considering WP:ATD. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 06:51, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Gemma Khalid edit

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

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

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2024 May 19. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 03:37, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Women, and Russia. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:12, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I added some references from the corresponding article in Russian. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 16:09, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

Polly Namaye edit

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

The first source is a blog, the 5th source is Twitter. Sources 2-4 are dead. Fails WP:BIO. No notability from the roles she has had. LibStar (talk) 00:30, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women and Uganda. LibStar (talk) 00:30, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Subject not notable, just known as a police woman. From searches on google she still doesn't meet WP:GNG.--Meligirl5 (talk) 10:21, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Please review improvements made to the article since its nomination.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:29, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep There is coverage of Namaye in the news, with the three best sources as follows [53],[54],[55]. These articles discuss her career path, her role in the police department, and cases she has been involved with. DaffodilOcean (talk) 22:37, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Sources provided above by DaffodilOcean enable subject to pass WP:GNG. -The Gnome (talk) 13:15, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 06:24, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Memoona Qudoos edit

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

At first glance, the actor appears to be well-known with numerous roles in television serials, films, and what not. However, upon closer inspection, it becomes evident that the subject only had minor roles in the majority of those television serials and films, thus failing to meet NACTOR. Anyone wishing to argue based on GNG must provide THREE, i repeat, THREE of the best coverages in RS -only. ROTM coverage like this, this and even INTERVIEWS like this is not enough to meet GNG. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 20:26, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 20:26, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Women, and Television. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:11, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: She is notable. In this source her education and how she started is all mentioned [56] and her married life source in this [57].(BeauSuzanne (talk) 07:46, 16 May 2024 (UTC))[reply]
- BeauSuzanne, Your comments sound WP:ATA. These coverages can be used for WP:V, but they're not enough to establish WP:GNG. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 09:46, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  - I am not talking about WP:V. I am saying that it meets WP:NACTOR. It has mentioned her drama roles and her recent role of Shehna.(BeauSuzanne (talk) 19:15, 16 May 2024 (UTC))[reply]
    - BeauSuzanne, Could you provide evidence that the subject had major roles? —Saqib (talk I contribs) 19:34, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, _signed,Rosguill ^talk 13:57, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep because the interviews in rather reliable sources have a presentation that might show her roles are signficant. If not why not DRAFITY until better sources are found, so as to avoid the risk of constant recreations/deletion and mutual frustration?-My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 13:40, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Mushy Yank, Roznama92News isn't even a RS. It's just one of the countless Urdu language newspapers circulated in Pakistan. And I wouldn't outright label the interview in The News as a paid placement since I lack evidence, but considering the nature of the questions posed by the interviewer, it's a plausible possibility. Anyhow, I'm fine with DRAFITIFICATION, though. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 14:28, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 04:41, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Clean up shouldn't be deletion. Appearing in multiple notable films meets WP:NACTOR though requires whether it is significant or not (though should be); it is a known role in the films. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 09:00, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- SafariScribe, Fwiw - In Pakistani TV dramas, supporting roles do not have the same level of significance as in Western or even Indian TV series. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 09:45, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  Then a policy should be initiated in Wikipedia:Village pump. Fwiw also, supporting roles can be notable when it has been done for multiple times. Why then do you see a supporting actor or actress awards? Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 09:49, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  SafariScribe, But the fact is she hasn't even really had any supporting roles in the series she's been in so far. No one's provided any evidence for it, not even for dramas like GT Road, Guddu, Farq, Nikah, Kalank, Umm-e-Haniya, and Jaisay Aapki Marzi, which she's known for. So, it seems she's just part of the ensemble cast. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 10:18, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Amber K edit

If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.

However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end.

Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts: {{subst:spa|username}}; suspected canvassed users: {{subst:canvassed|username}}; accounts blocked for sockpuppetry: {{subst:csm|username}} or {{subst:csp|username}}.

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

Article is a BLP of a non-notable author, references are self-published sources inc Facebook. No particular claim of notability, says she's exec director of some company but that's not immediately verifiable from their home page. She taught some courses at some organisations, that seems to be about it. -- D'n'B-t -- 17:35, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Women, Religion, Paganism, Illinois, and Wisconsin. -- D'n'B-t -- 17:35, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I say keep, see amazon link

https://www.amazon.com/stores/Amber-K/author/B0958H3NY3?ref=ap_rdr&isDramIntegrated=true&shoppingPortalEnabled=true

I have her Covencraft on my shelf.

I have no idea who you think you are when a simple google search can confirm

A)who she is

B)what books she wrote.

I say we nominate your account for deletion Timknit (talk) 13:18, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Anyone can write a book, we need confirmation of critical reviews of her books. Oaktree b (talk) 13:20, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

— Timknit (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

Delete: Doesn't pass AUTHOR, I can't find book reviews. I don't see anything other than books for sale on the usual platforms. Nothing for biographical notability as I can't find articles about this individual either. Oaktree b (talk) 18:43, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

* Keep: The page is in need of expansion and updating, not deletion. Amber K has writing books since the 1980s, the selection listed on the page is incomplete, as a cursory search for "Almber K bibliography" will indicate. Reviews of her books are likewise easily found on reviews sites, such as Goodreads, and her publisher's official sites as well. Ardantane, her "some company", is an independent, registered 501c3 non-profit corporation established in 1996 in the state of New Mexico and is one of the few Nationally recognized Pagan Schools in the United States. She is also a former First Officer (President) of Covenant of the Goddess (COG), an international organization of Wicca and Witchraft covens and practitioners, whih was founded in 1975. Amber K is also the originator of COG's Youth Service Award "The Hart and Crescent", which was originally designed for those in Scouting, may be earned by youth who are not Scouts as well.

When I have time, I will work on improving the article, provided that it is kept.

(POV: As an aside, I find it questionable that a new Wikipedian's earliest activities on the platform are to suggest articles for deletion.) Ashareem (talk) 00:45, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I did notice the Goodreads reviews but I don't belive user generated content counts towards notability any more than the period of time over which books were written or the particular tax registration of a given organisation. -- D'n'B-t -- 10:47, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

User-generated content can't be used for notability; that's part of the issue, can't seem to find any critical reviews in sites that aren't blogs or user-generated sites Oaktree b (talk) 20:13, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 22:34, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Doesn't pass AUTHOR, also failed WP:GNG. Youknowwhoistheman (talk) 15:45, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe she is more notable as a religious leader rather than an author? There's a 1993 Santa Fe New Mexican article (page 1, page 2) on the reaction of her local community to her work; a 2003 article (page 1, page 2) in the Albuquerque Journal on how she helped found a pagan learning center, Ardantane; a 2008 interview in the Santa Fe Reporter; and coverage of a ceremony in 2022 from The Santa Fe New Mexican (alternate link). There's also some info on her on in the Encyclopedia of Wicca & Witchcraft (Llewellyn Worldwide, 2000) by Raven Grimassi – see pages 9, 10, 19, and 246. Maybe someone else can find more coverage, given this history? Best, Bridget (talk) 19:16, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, maybe. I think some of that is a little letter-to-the-editor type of routine coverage, so I'd like to see something a bit more distant from the subject, but I could be convinced in that direction. -- D'n'B-t -- 19:10, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@DandelionAndBurdock: There were some correspondences, like letter to the editors, in newspapers in New Mexico and Wisconsin, but these aren't. After searching a bit more I found this article that briefly mentions she was elected leader (National First Officer) of Covenant of the Goddess in 1985. She contributed to Spiritual Parenting in the New Age (The Crossing Press, 1989), which was reviewed in the New York Daily News among other outlets. Bridget (talk) 11:48, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: An evaluation of newly brought up sources would be helpful.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:29, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I don't know what happened. IMO writing those notable books may meet NAUTHOR. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 06:59, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Leyla Abdullayeva edit

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

NO GNG. Created for advertising and PR purposes. --Correspondentman (talk) 12:46, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Bilateral relations, Azerbaijan, and France. ‍—‍a smart kitten_[meow] 13:47, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: The other language Wikipedias seem to have a better sourced version of this, with around ten separate sources, however I'm not sure about their quality.

=== Russian language ===

[58] [59] [60] [61] [62]

=== Azerbaijani Wikipedia ===

[63]

Testeraccount101 (talk) 13:52, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy close, because AFD is made by sock of the banned user. User:Correspondentman is banned in Azerbaijani Wikipedia as a sock of User:Elshad Iman (Elşad İman). Here is the discussion. He (User:Elshadiman) has been banned on English Wikipedia for sockpuppetry. You might check the archive through this page Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Elshadiman/Archive. On top of that he continues to use the same sock accounts in English Wikipedia that he used in azwiki: User:Redaksiya, User:90AA123 and User:Correspondentman, which has only 36 edits, all in AFD. Sock accounts cannot create AFDs. — Toghrul R (t) 06:59, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:31, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: If you believe an editor is a sockpuppet, please file a reports at WP:SPI. It's not a matter that can be resolved in a discussion about possibly deleting an article.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:11, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Doesn't meet the minimal inclusion for a journalist. Sources are PR as well as doesn't meet WP:ANYBIO and WP:SIGCOV. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 09:38, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hannah Ryder edit

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

Very questionable WP:SUSTAINED notability Amigao (talk) 01:07, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women and Kenya. Let'srun (talk) 01:16, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Head of a UN Agency might be notable, but sourcing is about the initiatives of this agency, not about this person. I don't find much else we'd use for RS either. Oaktree b (talk) 01:35, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
the subject worked at a UN Agency as head policy and partnerships. She was pivotal to the Initiative which is why I used as source Gold Junior (talk) 11:55, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete present version, which definitely does not comply with NPOV policy. "As the chief executive of Development Reimagined, Ryders's Afro-centric posturing is implicit in her reports" - for goodness' sake (and since when is her surname "Ryders"?) Deb (talk) 08:01, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hannah is very adamant on Africans developing Africa with win-win partnerships with other blocs. I should have put it this way to underscore this fact Gold Junior (talk) 12:04, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Are you saying that it was you who wrote that sentence? Deb (talk) 12:36, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have deleted that sentence, but added other coverage of Ryder. And, to be clear, the typo in her last name was my fault. DaffodilOcean (talk) 12:47, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, though I have edited the article a bit. She is cited in multiple reliable sources in conversations about Africa-China relations, and I have added some of this information to the article. The best coverage of her is here [64], [65],[66]. DaffodilOcean (talk) 12:50, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for those. The main problem, as far as I'm concerned, is the undeclared conflict of interest and the original promotional intent. If we keep it, we'll need to ensure it complies with NPOV. Deb (talk) 13:58, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sure, though to be clear I have no COI on this article. DaffodilOcean (talk) 14:43, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"Keep" I must state that for me I have no COI regarding this article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gold Junior (talk • contribs) 15:56, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:11, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

*: <~~/"keep">~~ this article has been edited to comply to NPOV since it's nomination allied by a declaration of COI from editors in the View AfD the page in its current existence complies with NPOV User:Gold Junior Talk 09:11, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

the Wikipedia:Deletion policy Number 7 states article can be deleted of it has no reliable sources. this Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hannah Ryder was edited by User:DaffodilOcean adding multiple reliable sources with encyclopedic knowledge highlighting the article notability across the spectrum of Africa-China economic trade. User:Gold Junior Talk 02:30, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Further opinions from as-yet uninvolved editors regarding the quality of sourcing available would be beneficial.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, _signed,Rosguill ^talk 15:33, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, she's mentioned in a broad range of reliable sources, many cited in the article including the BBC, The Guardian, Reuters, The New York Times, Bloomberg, and The Washington Post. The mentions are usually brief, but these three secondary sources at least offer brief bios to base an article:[67][68][69] Also, the article was almost entirely rewritten after its nomination. The writing has issues, but the subject seems notable. Rjjⁱⁱⁱ (talk) 06:17, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Natalia Mitsuoka edit

(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 senior-level national championships explicitly do not meet the requirements of WP:NSKATE. PROD removed. Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:36, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Women, and Argentina. Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:36, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Subject meets the WP:GNG with the SkateToday article already in the article in addition to [[70]]. Let'srun (talk) 13:51, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Let'srun (talk) 14:35, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:45, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Skating-related deletion discussions. Owen× ☎ 12:40, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:36, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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!} 04:20, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Siobhan McColl edit

(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 senior-level national championships explicitly do not meet the requirements of WP:NSKATE. PROD removed. Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:35, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Women, and South Africa. Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:35, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 02:41, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Skating-related deletion discussions. Owen× ☎ 12:41, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:36, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: There isn't any credible source to meet WP:GNG. The gross lacking in WP:SIGCOV made it difficult in popping any result for WP:RS. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 19:33, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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!} 04:20, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Aamna Malick edit

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

This actress does not fulfill the criteria WP:ACTOR as I couldn't find any major roles in TV shows NOR does their coverage satisfy the basic WP:GNG. A significant portion of the sources referenced lack reliability . —Saqib (talk I contribs) 19:26, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 19:26, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Women, and Television. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 21:51, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:52, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep- per WP:BASIC, [71],[72],[73]

[74], [75] Otbest (talk) 18:07, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Otbest, I'm curious how a user who just began editing 2 days ago is already participating in AfDs. BTW, the references you provided aren't even RS. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 19:02, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 02:58, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment sourcing seems to be weak (mainly tabloids), but it looks like she may have some notable television credits?-KH-1 (talk) 01:40, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- KH-1, No. Only minor roles. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 08:24, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: some of her numerous roles in notable productions look significant enough for her to pass WP:NACTOR -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 12:21, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- But I don't see any. If that had been the case, she would have definitely received some press coverage, at least some ROTM coverage at a minimum. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 18:29, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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!} 05:20, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Coverage consists either of tabloid coverage (see WP:SBST) or WP:TRIVIALMENTIONs; no significant coverage. Dclemens1971 (talk) 11:07, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Uzma Beg edit

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

So at first glance, this BLP looks legit but upon but digging deeper, I couldn't find any major roles in TV shows or movies as required per WP:ACTOR. Also, when I tried to find more about the subject per WP:BEFORE, I didn't come across enough coverage to meet WP:GNG either. Plus, it's worth noting that this BLP was created back in 2021 by a SPA Sahgalji (talk · contribs) and has been mostly edited by UPEs so there's COI issues as well. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 18:30, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 18:30, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 19:04, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 19:04, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 19:04, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Radio-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 19:04, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of France-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 19:06, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 19:06, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 19:07, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Arab Emirates-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 19:07, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:00, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: some of her roles in notable productions seem significant enough, so that she meets WP:NACTOR imv and deletion is not necessary. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 09:44, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Mushy Yank, In which shows, if I may ask? —Saqib (talk I contribs) 10:04, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

For example, Chupke Chupke, Pyari Mona, Hum Tum.-My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 13:50, 22 May 2024 (UTC) (Again, sorry but so many Afds related to Pakistan/TV series, I might not reply here any further, should you, as I expect, not find the sources to your liking for one reason or another or if clarifications are needed; it was already challenging for me to find time to check some of them and !vote).[reply]

It's not a matter of whether I like a source or not. It's obvious that the sources are clearly not reliable, no even for WP:V purpose. --—Saqib (talk I contribs) 16:36, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, _signed,Rosguill ^talk 14:10, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. In looking at the original article and the SPA creation & editing of this article, as well as other articles that mention the subject, it is likely this is an autobiography. 128.252.210.1 (talk) 16:25, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist. I am 100% certain that this is not an autobiography. Even if it were, that is not necessarily a valid deletion rationale. UPE might be an issue though.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:53, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lya Stern edit

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

This article is mainly a resume. Most of the sources in the article consist of dead links from websites that are related to Lya Stern; the rest of the sources either have brief mentions of her or don't mention her at all. After doing a Google search to see if there were sources that could be added to the article, the only significant coverage I found of her was from a website that listed Wikipedia as a source. The rest of the information I found was from her YouTube channel and mentions of her from her students. As a result, she doesn't met WP:GNG or WP:NBLP. That Tired Tarantula^Burrow 20:13, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Women, Romania, and United States of America. Shellwood (talk) 20:15, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Authors, California, New York, and Washington, D.C.. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 22:08, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment One source via Newspapers.com goes into some depth. Hameltion (talk | contribs) 03:55, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete (Weak) - There is a big gap in WP on instrumental performers who have created the American musical/movie music scene, and in general the encyclopedia is too quick to delete (especially for women and minority performers), but here I think the AfD is correct. The Baltimore Sun article gives a bit of notability, but the other sources do not. A blurb on the back of one's teacher's independently published book is not enough. There needs to be more and I could not find anything that led to more than what a local performing teacher would have. Glad to be proven wrong. -- Michael Scott Asato Cuthbert (talk) 08:13, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as there is a staff written bio at AllMusic here and an album review here to go with the detailed Baltimore Sun article linked earlier by Hameltion. Haven't done a full search yet, imv Atlantic306 (talk) 23:31, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What does Eudice Shapiro have to do with the subject of this article? That Tired Tarantula^Burrow 23:32, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:50, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Just agreeing with That Tired Tarantula above -- @Atlantic306 you have linked to reviews for a different musician. If Lya Stern had an Allmusic staff bio, that would be relevant, but I could not find one. -- Michael Scott Asato Cuthbert (talk) 01:37, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about that, have struck my vote and comment. In my defence the erroneous AllMusic bio is the first reference in the article but I should have noticed, imv Atlantic306 (talk) 22:11, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom lacks coverage fails WP:GNG.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 10:04, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Unverifiable claims of notability. doesn't meet WP:GNG and WP:SIGCOV. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 09:20, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bhavadhaarini

Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Women

Women edit

Proposed deletions (WP:PROD) edit

Deletion review edit