Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Amanda Puspanditaning Sejati (2nd nomination)

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

The result was delete‎. It was deleted by Courcelles under G5. (non-admin closure)DreamRimmer (talk) 15:46, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Amanda Puspanditaning Sejati (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The individual lacks notability as an academic, failing to meet the standards outlined in WP:NACADEMIC. The only achievement listed in the article is authoring a guide on English writing techniques. Also, red link in Indonesian wikipedia. Ckfasdf (talk) 22:30, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It says that this is the second AfD nomination. Where is the first? Xxanthippe (talk) 05:01, 13 March 2024 (UTC).[reply]
@Xxanthippe: The initial nomination is in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mariah binti Ahmad. I've withdrawn from that nomination and opted to initiate a separate nomination based on the discussions there. Ckfasdf (talk) 12:04, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the explanation. I think it would have been better not to have unbundled the AfDs, whose bios are all junk. Separating them wasted the time of volunteer editors who had to look at individual AfDs. Xxanthippe (talk) 21:26, 13 March 2024 (UTC).[reply]
When I suggested a procedural close, the bundled AfD had seemed on its way to a trainwreck [2], and I was concerned about how much more sprawling one discussion could become while evaluating that many articles under varying notability guidelines. How the AfD now appears follows the conclusion of an SPI (I had initially been unaware of) and removal of sock comments/discussion; that context is only in the edit history [3]. Beccaynr (talk) 04:11, 14 March 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.