Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2025 February 6

Recent AfDs: Today Yesterday

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

< February 05	February 07 >

Guide to deletion

Purge server cache

Comparison of American football and rugby league

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

Fails WP:GNG. No particular interaction between these two sports, apart from one cross code game pitting two minor teams against each other, which is already mentioned (with a cited source) in Clash of Codes anyway. BilletsMauves^€500 12:08, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Jean Brismée

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

I do not see any indication that they pass Wikipedia:NFILMMAKER. - UtherSRG (talk) 12:05, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, and Belgium. UtherSRG (talk) 12:05, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Rust To Glory

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

No evidence for notability, no references, just a carrier for the spam link to the streaming platforms, so promo too. Jimfbleak - talk to me? 12:00, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

10 Lives (disambiguation)

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

A disambig disambiguating only one full page, which per WP:ONEOTHER has a hatnote to the only other use on Wikipedia. Can't be redirected to its primary topic 10 Lives as preposterously suggested by its prod remover, since that would make this a speedy. —Cryptic 11:33, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Disambiguations-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 11:57, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 11:58, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 11:58, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

R.K. Kotnala

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

Highly promo page for an academic full of issues. While he might pass notability WP:NPROF#C1, even after some cleaning of unverified statements the page contains far too much unsourced material. As general quality control I am recommending draftifying; somehow it has escaped the standard 3 month window for this. We need to ensure that articles in main space are not just notable, they are encyclopedic.

Issues:

No sources for #Early life and education
No sources for #Career as a scientist
Highly promo tone about the so-called hydroelectric cell which "generates green electricity by splitting water", for which the only sources quoted are news articles.
Claim of establishment of advanced measurement techniques for magnetic materials quotes a paper on biological extraction of metals
From what I can see no secondary sources, only a couple of his papers and news articles in the cleaned up sources. Ldm1954 (talk) 02:22, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Ldm1954 (talk) 02:22, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Science, Delhi, and Uttarakhand. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:19, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as a notable academic, but stubify this down to facts that can be independently cited and phrased neutrally. Nothing more. There's been some good work done on the article to demonstrate a lot of the claims aren't what they appear, so I think a serious and unapologetic cull is in order. Bobby Cohn (talk) 00:59, 25 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Vanderwaalforces (talk) 10:22, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ZyphorianNexus ^Talk 10:08, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Cambria Productions

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

Cambria Productions should be deleted as it lacks significant coverage from independent, reliable sources to establish notability. Additionally, the content in the article is minimal and doesn't provide substantial information about the company's impact or contributions to the industry Loewstisch (talk) 09:43, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and Companies. Loewstisch (talk) 09:43, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Comics and animation and California. ZyphorianNexus ^Talk 10:29, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Fred & Eric

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

The article lacks sufficient coverage from reliable, independent sources and also a lot of links to your own website Loewstisch (talk) 09:41, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Visual arts, Comics and animation, Organizations, Companies, and England. ZyphorianNexus ^Talk 10:34, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

CS Link

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

lacks significant coverage from reliable, independent sources, making it fail to meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines. Loewstisch (talk) 09:37, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Loewstisch (talk) 09:37, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Radio, Television, Czech Republic, Luxembourg, and Slovakia. ZyphorianNexus ^Talk 10:45, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Confluent, Inc.

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

Not notable, linkedin source and other references are not reliable sources; I managed to find only primary or not reliable sources online. Taking off shortly (talk) 09:26, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, could not find reliable sources or significant coverage. Note: I PRODed this but was contested. ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 10:25, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Companies, Technology, Internet, and California. ZyphorianNexus ^Talk 10:48, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Pharmazz

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

No single sources meets NCORP; routine not reliable and deep media sources; not notable company by its own Taking off shortly (talk) 09:21, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Medicine, India, United Kingdom, and Illinois. ZyphorianNexus ^Talk 10:56, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

TravelPerk

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

Promotinal routine coverage sources only about seed fund raising and similar event-based news. Not meeting NCORP Taking off shortly (talk) 09:20, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Business, Companies, Travel and tourism, Germany, Spain, England, Florida, Illinois, and Massachusetts. ZyphorianNexus ^Talk 11:03, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Finite promise games and greedy clique sequences

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

Only source is an email list, user generated content. AFAIK there exist no other sources or published work on this topic, as the author of the topic at hand (Harvey Friedman) primarily releases results through this email list. C7XWiki (talk) 09:12, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Games and Mathematics. ZyphorianNexus ^Talk 11:07, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wesean Student Federation

AfDs for this article:

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

notability KabirDH (talk) 12:25, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yup, this fails to meet Wikipedia’s notability criteria. Without significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources, the article does not meet the standard for inclusion. Chegouahora (talk) 13:02, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

— Chegouahora (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. — CactusWriter ^(talk) 18:04, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education, Fraternities and sororities, Bangladesh, Myanmar, and India. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 13:57, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Draftify: The article violates Wikipedia’s Neutral Point of View (NPOV) and Verifiability policies. There are multiple Extreme POVs trying to link the group with insurgents by using “seemingly” valid reliable sources, but these have nothing to do with how the term is used by the organisation itself. Stating this the Etymology section is excessive and unsupported by reliable sources discussing the term in the context of the organization, violating WP:UNDUE. Also Newspaper sources merely repeating the organization’s claims do not meet WP:RS standards as independent, third-party references. I don’t feel the lyngdoh paper is reliable as it’s written by a high schooler and newspaper articles mostly just repeat what the organisation has said. So this article needs to be further cut down and taking all the sources into account I don’t feel it will should be more than 1-2 paragraphs long ZoUnified (talk) 18:02, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There is a separate discussion happening regarding the undue weight on the Talk page, and a possible RfC if additional edit warring occurs. The POV issues can be resolved without deletion/draftifying EmeraldRange (talk/contribs) 01:12, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: All the sources listed are Third Party and Reliable. There is also considerable coverage on the organisation that would support keeping the Wikipedia article on it. Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 14:15, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: there's at least one article on the page that meets WP:GNG as an independent secondary source and WP:SIGCOV from other sources. The Lyngdoh source, the currently used Haokip source and the Mokokchung times source would each, by themselves, fulfill GNG. By policy, this article's content may need better verifiability but clearly meets standards for inclusion as an article.

As an outsider to WP:INDIA, I've additionally observed bludgeoning with citation tags that have been mostly resolved as well as a lot of wishywashy claims of a lack of notability over the last day. If these stem from an objection to the WP:POV views on the term Wesea, wikipedia is not censored and it's merely an uncomfortable fact that Wesea is in the organisation's name. All of this is, of course, irrelevant to this AfD but is perhaps relevant context to consider given that the nominee did not explain at all what their concerns are. EmeraldRange (talk/contribs) 14:26, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Fringe topic SN bastion (talk) 17:35, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

— SN bastion (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. — CactusWriter ^(talk) 18:04, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep. I am very surprised that there is this much coverage for a student group founded less than a year ago, but the sources narrowly get it over the line IMO. The best by far is the Haokip article, which seems to be a proper peer-reviewed journal article focused entirely on this group. The other sources are much less convincing. The Lyngdoh source is by a high school student and I'm sceptical that the site is a WP:RS. The other sources, including the Mokokchung Times, EastMojo, Shillong Times, and Hub Network pieces, don't have bylined reporters and seem to essentially repeat the group's announcements, so I think they should be discounted somewhat. But the Khasi language source is good, and the sources I can find make me strongly suspect there is much more out there in little-spoken northeast Indian languages that I'm just not able to find. I would also note that this group split off from Northeast Students' Organization, which seems to be unambiguously notable. So at worst I think this is potentially a case of WP:TOOSOON. MCE89 (talk) 02:44, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: The article clearly meets the inclusion criteria, contrary to the nominator's claim. The sources cited such as Lyngdoh,Haokip, Mokokchung Times and the Morung Express article strongly support the article's compliance with WP:GNG.--— MimsMENTOR ^talk 08:29, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Consensus is edging towards a keep since the opposing arguments are made by users who barely edited anything else. Nonetheless, a little more input from the community is appreciated for a clear cut consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Benison (Beni · talk) 12:55, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - there's enough here to satisfy WP:GNG in my opinion.--DesiMoore (talk) 15:56, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: What Benison said.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Randykitty (talk) 17:43, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Kautilya3, RangersRus, Raymond3023, and Walsh90210: Notifying, as concerned editors per WP:APPNOTE, all who participated in the previous deletion discussion. --Worldbruce (talk) 23:49, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Sources 2-5 say nothing about the WSF, they are only background about the term Wesean. EastMojo is paywalled, so I can't evaluate it fully, but the site follows a "citizen journalists" model, which is not a hallmark of reliable sources. From what can be seen, "In a statement, the WSF ...", it appears to be like Hub News, Ka Shelm, Mokokchung Times, Nagaland Post, The Morung Express, The Shillong Times, and Thingkho Le Maicha. All of them are essentially primary source press releases, repeating what WSF said in a letter - paraphrased for length perhaps, but without any critical analysis, evaluation, synthesis, or reference to sources other than the WSF. These do nothing to establish notability.

Lyngdoh is a high school student who doesn't appear to have published anything else, writing in the "Assertion" (i.e. opinion) section of Round Table India, which encourages visitors to "Please send your article submissions to [email protected]". This is not a reliable source for anything other than Lyngdoh's opinion.

Haokip is a political science student at Mizoram University. He doesn't appear to have published anything else. His paper has 7 notes and 39 references. Only two have publication dates after the March/April 2024 formation of the WSF, and neither of them can be found by Google or by direct searches of the Human Rights Watch and North East Now websites (the supposed publishers). This does not inspire confidence in reliability. If it is reliable, it is not enough on its own to establish notability. --Worldbruce (talk) 16:54, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This article is not notable and the sources do not justify it existing in Wikipedia. Halum Halum (talk) 03:32, 3 February 2025 (UTC)— Halum Halum (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. --Worldbruce (talk) 04:12, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - note to admin Please carefully consider the decision, as there are many sock accounts and anti-India editors trying to sway the outcome of this AfD using WP:IDONTLIKEIT. I'm unsure about voting on this AfD since I'm outside of India, but I can see many sock accounts involved. 49.49.25.233 (talk) 17:32, 4 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 08:47, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Harry Josh

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

The subject does not pass WP:GNG and WP:NACTOR, while the creator made a list of the Filmography, but have not cited the WP:RS to support it. I searched about the subject on google but got nothing that can establish notability. Taabii (talk) 14:14, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, Lists of people, India, and Chhattisgarh. Taabii (talk) 14:14, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Pass WP:NACTOR as an Indian, I know that they have worked in many popular movies listed in the filmography pass.𝒮-𝒜𝓊𝓇𝒶 15:00, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@S-Aura 'as an Indian'? does every Indian pass WP:NACTOR? Can you pls cite some reliable sources in the article? Taabii (talk) 15:05, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
S-Aura obviously refers to him/herself being Indian. :D -Mushy Yank. 16:30, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I mean to say that I have personally seen him in many movies as an india viewpoint, but I am trying to find better sources. 𝒮-𝒜𝓊𝓇𝒶 18:04, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Pass WP:NACTOR because he has played a significant role in a popular movie’s but need more WP:RS. Garvitpandey1522 (talk) 08:53, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: More than half of the films in the subject's filmography do not list him in the cast section or place him far down in the cast hierarchy indicating that he would not have had a significant role, so he fails NACTOR. Fails GNG as there is no WP:SIGCOV about this BLP in reliable independent sources, ultimately leaving us with nothing to write about. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 12:59, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 08:47, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Aave

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

Clearly not meeting WP NCORP; deleted last year at AfD and recreated Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aave Protocol; all the sources are or paid, or trivial with no reliable deep coverage. Taking off shortly (talk) 08:45, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Manisha Rani

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

Fails GNG and lack of significant coverages. AgerJoy talk 08:35, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Women, Dance, India, and Bihar. ZyphorianNexus ^Talk 11:11, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hussam Nabil

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

Non-notable, only trivial mentions of the person in references DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 13:46, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators and Egypt. Shellwood (talk) 14:30, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Psychology-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:45, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Japan, Qatar, Spain, and Ohio. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:46, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 08:34, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Noori Kiran

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

Non-notable publication, Unable to find significant or in-depth coverage. AndySailz (talk) 12:30, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: News media and India. AndySailz (talk) 12:30, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: This is a 60-year-old magazine. The passage adheres to WP:GNG guidelines, and offline sources provide in-depth coverage of the magazine in accordance with WP:OFFLINE. Baqi:) (talk) 08:22, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 08:34, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep provides notable coverage of her career, with references to her achievements and recognition in the field of acting. The article is supported by credible sources and offers information that meets Wikipedia's notability criteria. --Loewstisch (talk) 09:48, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- @Loewstisch Who is 'her'? Taabii (talk) 11:12, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- And "acting", as well. That rationale seems to have no connection with the article at hand whatsoever. Nor to any discussions around this one on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2025 February 6. Uncle G (talk) 11:57, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

M1 Group

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

No relialbe media coverage, only acquisitions coverage (not in-depth). Thus it fails per NCORP Cinder painter (talk) 09:34, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest that AfD volunteers should consider checking the article's history and following the link I put in when I first created it.—S Marshall T/C 09:48, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Finance, Companies, and Lebanon. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:45, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
[Later] Okay. To non-admins it looks like I created this article on 7 July 2011 (unless you happen to be one of those non-admins who check the logs). In fact, I created it after the community specifically authorized its creation at Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2011 June 28.
Admins will be able to see that the real original creator was User:Chadlupkes. After Chadlupkes created it, User:Prm1 made it a great deal more promotional. (Special:Contributions/Prm1 shows you that 100% of Prm1's contributions have been deleted.)
The promotional version was summarily deleted by User:JzG, who was at that time a sysop.
JzG's deletion was brought to deletion review by User:John Vandenberg, who was at that time also a sysop and sometime member of the Arbitration Committee, on the grounds that we ought to have an article about the M1 Group. The community, including tragically now-deceased sometime member of the Arbitration Committee User:DGG, agreed.
As you can see from the M1 Group talk page, I created it by translating from the French Wikipedia article, at fr:M1 Group. On checking this again now, I suspect that the French Wikipedia article was itself a translation of the en.wiki article version originally created by User:Chadlupkes.
Therefore the correct result of this AfD is to undelete the history from first creation in order to restore attribution for compliance with the Terms of Use.
Finally, I would note that although I translated this from French, I don't speak Arabic. You would expect any company based in Lebanon and owned by a former Lebanese Prime Minister to have sources in Arabic, but I don't know the correct search terms. In view of the company's entry on the Dirty List for its dubious activities in Myanmar, I would also suggest searching for sources in Burmese (and, considering the geopolitics, possibly Hebrew).—S Marshall T/C 16:19, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 08:23, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

All of the namedropping of the arbitration committee, which doesn't decide content, is irrelevant. The old history up to but not including the advertising blurb rewrite, is now undeleted. Perhaps we can concentrate on sourcing now. Uncle G (talk) 11:46, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Patanjali Wellness

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

The references in the article currently consist of routine coverage (WP:ROUTINE), which is typically found in Indian media (WP:NEWSORGINDIA). Apart from that, the article entirely fails to meet the WP:NCORP guidelines. Baqi:) (talk) 09:05, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Business, and India. Baqi:) (talk) 09:05, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Health and fitness, Companies, Medicine, and Uttarakhand. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:47, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 08:22, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Swami Tattwamayananda

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

WP:BEFORE shows no coverage in reliable, independent sources. Fails GNG. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 08:14, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Spirituality, and California. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 08:14, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:TNT and WP:BLP. The formatting makes no sense to me, nor even the title. The sourcing is far below what we expect from a biographical article of a person living in North America. Bearian (talk) 12:10, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Bearian,

I’ve gone ahead and made the necessary changes as discussed. I’ve worked to address the concerns, and I hope everything aligns with your expectations now. Please take a look and let me know if any further adjustments are needed!

Please appove it.

Thanks,

Shashi. Shashi Boinapalli (talk) 00:22, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Jeraxmoira,

I’ve gone ahead and made the necessary changes as discussed. I’ve worked to address the concerns, and I hope everything aligns with your expectations now. Please take a look and let me know if any further adjustments are needed!

Please approve it.

Thanks,

Shashi. Shashi Boinapalli (talk) 00:23, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: With an unbolded Keep opinion here, this can't be closed as Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 08:21, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Star Health and Allied Insurance

AfDs for this article:

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

WP:ORGCRIT. Unable to find significant coverage which are independent of the subject. Fails to satisfy WP:NCORP. Sooterout (talk) 07:29, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Health and fitness, Companies, and India. Sooterout (talk) 07:29, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Finance and Tamil Nadu. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:48, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"Delete Only the Data Breach case seems notable; yet, it does not sufficient to fulfill WP:NCORP. SATavr (talk) 10:56, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Already brought to AFD before so not eligible for Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 08:00, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tusayiwe Mkhondya

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

The article subject may lack the required notability. Est. 2021 (talk · contribs) 07:16, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

comment Well it may, but I'd be surprised, the article has been patrolled, it has multiple reliable sources over several years, detailed accounts that are both national and international, well sourced photos of both her and her creations.... and that is assuming we ignore the additional stuff on youtube etc. All of that together defines notability for me. Victuallers (talk) 11:04, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Est. 2021 (talk · contribs) 07:16, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Africa-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:49, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete - all but (3) Voice of America are less than reliable. (1) Newsweek has gotten such a weak reputation that it has its own nickname; (2) Malawi's nation is unknown to me; (4) Metro UK is on the list of unreliable sources; (5) and (6) are unknown; and (7) is basically a press release from a company that provided charity. If you find better sources, please ping me. Bearian (talk) 14:54, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I was surprised by Bearian's findings (as was s/he). I have removed the references to the unreliable sources of Newsweek and Metro and what remains is still independent coverage from different sources over time. cheers Victuallers (talk) 14:08, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 08:00, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Angela Owen

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

As a local councillor, I don't believe she meets WP:NPOL. Coverage merely confirms she was in council or contested the federal election. The misconduct incident doesn't add to notability. LibStar (talk) 07:55, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians, Women, and Australia. LibStar (talk) 07:55, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Topic does not hold a national or state-wide office. If there are atleast three sources that meets the GNG, I’ll be willing to change my !vote. Best, Reading Beans, Duke of Rivia 10:47, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Conologue, Indiana

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

Appears to be an early post office back-added to the topos from an old map. Need more evidence that that of an actual settlement as these maps recorded post offices as well as actual towns. Mangoe (talk) 03:09, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Indiana. ZyphorianNexus ^Talk 03:14, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Baker (p.101) says that this was a post office, and warns that we might have to search for Conlogue. So I did. The printed 1980s version of the GNIS database records this as "Conologue Post Office", which is a bit of a clue in itself. I found Conlogue in Jackson in an 1869 government listing of post offices.
But those of you fresh from the discussion of Fleming, Indiana (AfD discussion) will enjoy what I found after that, which was Conlogue in a table on p.65 of the 1876 Monitor Guide to Post Offices and Railroad Stations in the United States and Canada which says "(R.R. name, Fleming's)". So this is the earlier name for the post office by Fleming's station on the O&M.
But other than the shipping guides and post office directories: I found nothing.
Uncle G (talk) 08:33, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete both Conologue and Fleming. Thanks for your effort, Uncle G, and if we have to do this much digging to find whether a place actually existed, and there is still uncertainty, then we don't have enough info for an article. Essentially a WP:V fail. WeirdNAnnoyed (talk) 12:23, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep It meets WP:GEOLAND: a quick search of Newspapers.com shows that it had a school up to at least 1947, a cemetery, and a church in the 1960s and 1970s. There were still burials at Conologue Cemetery up to 2021. RebeccaGreen (talk) 10:20, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- OK, then where is it? The church is not at the location that GNIS gives for the "populated place", and looking at where the church was on the topos (and there is a building at that location appearing in the aerials up to 1960; it disappears before the next one in 1983), it sits in isolation; there's no town there. Unless the news clip says, there's no indication where the school was, and in any case neither schools nor churches require towns to exist. Again, it's a familiar issue: without direct evidence of a town from people talking about it as such, there's nothing inconsistent with this being a locale with no distinct village/town. Mangoe (talk) 22:17, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  - This article from 1986 [1] explains where Conologue school house, church and cemetery were (are, in the case of the cemetery). Looking at the sources again, I find none that describe Conologue as a town or village - at most they say "Conologue community". They all say things like "Conologue school, Redding township". I am now !voting to Merge this article (and the Fleming one) to Redding Township, Jackson County, Indiana - and editing that to list Unincorporated Communities (like Conologue) or to list schools, churches, etc (there are plenty of newspaper articles that do just that - eg, they published scores for each school in Jackson County, by township). There are sources which can be included in the Redding article to provide information about its facilities over time. RebeccaGreen (talk) 15:39, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    - I'm going to add other sources here, so they are available to add either to this article, if kept, or to Redding Township, Jackson County, Indiana. A 1963 report of a fire refers to "the old Conologue school" [2]. Sisters Eva and Phoebe Brooks Quinn reminisce in 1990 about Fleming and Conologue [3]. School attendance records in Jackson county, 1932, part 1 [4] and part 2 [5]. 100 year old Lydia Nichter tells kindergarten students about Conologue school etc [6]. Schools in Jackson county listed by townships (Redding and Carr) and scored, part 1 [7] and part 2 [8]. Jackson County Fair display about old schools, 1995, part 1 [9] and end of article [10].
    - I strongly disagree with an "unincorporated community" list in the township, simply because these aren't unincorporated communities. That's just sweeping the mess elsewhere. Yes, listing schools and churches is the way to go; and in other states this is what the (19th century) sources themselves do, too. In Kansas, for example, the government reports have lists of schools and churches in the Board of Agriculture annual reports (Biennial report — Kansas State Board of Agriculture at the HathiTrust Digital Library) for each individual county. The real question is whether Indiana naturally breaks down by county or by township as far as sourcing is concerned. Uncle G (talk) 11:26, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: No consensus here yet and new sources brought into the discussion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:50, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Fleming, Indiana

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

Not seeing evidence that this was more than a short-lived post office at a rail point. Mangoe (talk) 03:02, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Indiana. ZyphorianNexus ^Talk 03:12, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Especially as Baker says (p.133) outright that it was a railway station that later gained a post office. ☺ After no success with a lot of histories and gazetteers, I finally located this as Fleming's in a table on page 80 of W. F. Allen's 1874 Gazetteer of Railway Stations in the United States and the Dominion of Canada. It was on the Ohio & Mississippi. That source says that the station served a population of 200, but makes no statement about what form that population took. Fleming's is in the station listing for the O&M in James Macfarlane's 1890 An American Geological Railway Guide too. The post office is in the 1899 USPS directory. But no Lippincott's nor the Thomas gazetteer has a Fleming or Fleming's, out of the several that they do have, in Indiana. Uncle G (talk) 08:16, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete, does not appear to meet WP:GEOLAND. The only result I have found so far in Newspapers.com is this [11] from 1975, about a road crossing a railroad "at or near Fleming, Spencer-Redding Township", that two farmers used to get to their farms. It's not easy to search, as Fleming is a common surname, and there was a school in Duckcreek township called Fleming School five miles north and one mile east of Elwood, Indiana - but unlike Conologue, Indiana, it does not have lots of mentions as an inhabited place. RebeccaGreen (talk) 10:48, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:32, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Gikomba fire

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

The article fails Wikipedia:Notability (events) as I cannot find sources for it that are not simply routine coverage contemporary to the fire. Grumpylawnchair (talk) 03:00, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Kenya-related deletion discussions. Grumpylawnchair (talk) 03:00, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events and Environment. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:15, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: there are multiple sources for the event and others follow-up coverage, like BBC, DW, CNN, Kenya Star, The Nation, Nairobi News FuzzyMagma (talk) 17:15, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ZyphorianNexus ^Talk 03:02, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

delete The Nairobi News article specifically says that the issue at the market is that fires are common, basically every year of late. This implies that there's nothing special about this fire. Mangoe (talk) 03:05, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
People are murdered everyday but some murders are being covered more than the other. So, if we are to follow your analogy, murders should not be covered on the encyclopaedia because obviously, people are being murdered everyday. Best, Reading Beans, Duke of Rivia 06:48, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment – I don't think their point is that any event that happens daily should be excluded. A murder that's covered on Wikipedia has some kind of significance or notability to it. The nominated article at present doesn't have a claim of significance or notability to it, and the objections of the delete side is that the coverage appears routine. Yue🌙 07:06, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Per WP:MILL. Absolutely ordinary event, with no major consequences. Svartner (talk) 23:14, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and move. The sources provided by FuzzyMagma seem to indicate that while this event isn't notable, the market is. There's plenty of other coverage as well to meet GNG, since it's apparently one of the largest markets in East Africa. [12], [13], [14][15][16] -- Patar knight - ^chat/_{contributions} 05:30, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. It would help if participants reviewed the sources just brought to this discussion. And if this article is Moved (which would have to happen after AFD closure), what is the suggested new title?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:31, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Gabriel Edgal

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

Fails WP:GNG and all the sources cannot establish WP:SIGCOV. Ibjaja055 (talk) 07:26, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Businesspeople, Liberia, Nigeria, and Sierra Leone. Ibjaja055 (talk) 07:26, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Gabriel Edgal – Meets WP:GNG and WP:SIGCOV

I believe the article Gabriel Edgal meets Wikipedia’s General Notability Guidelines (WP:GNG) and Significant Coverage (WP:SIGCOV) standards based on the following points:
	1.	Substantial Leadership & Notability in African Banking
	•	Gabriel Edgal has held executive leadership roles in major financial institutions across Africa, including:
	•	CEO of Oakwood Green Africa, a financial and trade advisory firm.
	•	Promoter of Bloom Bank Africa, a banking group with operations in Gambia, Sierra Leone, and Liberia.
	•	Former CEO of First Atlantic Bank Ghana (2013–2016).
	•	Former Africa CEO for United Bank for Africa (UBA), overseeing 18 African countries.
	•	His leadership across multiple financial institutions aligns with WP:ANYBIO, which recognizes significant figures in business and finance.
	2.	Independent, Reliable Media Coverage (Meets WP:SIGCOV)
	•	Gabriel Edgal has been featured in multiple independent news articles, discussing his impact on banking, digital finance, and trade facilitation in Africa.
	•	Here are key references demonstrating substantial coverage in independent sources:

[https://www.ghanaweb.com/GhanaHomePage/business/African-youth-must-play-a-central-role-in-building-the-continent-Gabriel-Edgal-1937399 Ghana Web: African youth must play a central role in building the continent – Gabriel Edgal]

[https://ghanaiantimes.com.gh/mansa-papss-digital-platforms-to-facilitate-trade-boost-economic-development-mr-gabriel-edgal/ Ghanaian Times: Mansa PAPSS digital platforms to facilitate trade, boost economic development – Gabriel Edgal]

[https://dailyguidenetwork.com/mansa-platform-papss-to-boost-trade/ Daily Guide Network: Mansa Platform & PAPSS to Boost Trade]

[https://www.modernghana.com/news/656855/first-atlantic-bank-ceo-gabriel-edgal-woos-investors.html Modern Ghana: First Atlantic Bank CEO Gabriel Edgal Woos Investors]

[https://gna.org.gh/2023/06/digital-payment-systems-can-ease-currency-depreciation-oakwood-green-ceo/ Ghana News Agency: Digital payment systems can ease currency depreciation – Oakwood Green CEO]

[https://thecalabashnewspaper.com/afreximbank-oakwood-green-africa-engage-the-press/ The Calabash Newspaper: Afreximbank & Oakwood Green Africa engage the press]

[https://www.afreximbank.com/feda-invests-in-bloom-africa-holdings-limited-to-support-its-expansion-in-west-africa/ Afreximbank: FEDA invests in Bloom Africa Holdings to support expansion]

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BZFfAxUgoF0 Gabriel Edgal on Financial Markets (YouTube)]

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZZL78wJyPiw Trade Finance & Economic Policies (YouTube)]

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E3TTrrHZJEk Afreximbank Discussion (YouTube)]

	•	These sources provide substantial coverage beyond routine announcements, focusing on his impact in trade finance and banking innovation.

	3.	Comparable Wikipedia Articles Exist

	•	Gabriel Edgal’s notability and media coverage are similar to other African banking executives who have Wikipedia pages, such as:
	•	Daniel Wilson Addo – CEO of Consolidated Bank Ghana. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daniel_Wilson_Addo Daniel Wilson Addo]
	•	Given his equal or greater recognition and media coverage, his article aligns with precedent cases for business leaders.

	4.	Alternative to Deletion – Consider Draftification

	•	If concerns remain regarding WP:SIGCOV, I propose moving the article to Draft space instead of deletion.
	•	This will allow further improvements, sourcing, and verification rather than outright removal.

Gabriel Edgal is a highly notable figure in African banking with independent media coverage that meets Wikipedia’s notability standards. Instead of deletion, I suggest retaining or draftifying the article while improving references.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Towncrier99 (talk • contribs) 07:59, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Don't use LLMs to write rationales. Uncle G (talk) 11:37, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

IMurders

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

The article is tagged with {{sources exist}}, but none have been included in the talk page and I couldn't find anything particularly useful. Rotten Tomatoes only lists one critic review from Dread Central (no idea of the reliability of this source), and beyond that I could only find these Q&A interviews in Scars (a primary source at best, with little in the way of editorial additions). I don't know what Donaldd23 saw back in 2020 when they added the tag (pardon the ping Donald, but I figured I should just in case you still remember what you found and where), but I can't find it now. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 07:07, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 07:07, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Dread Central is generally considered acceptable for notability. (Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard/Archive_376#Dread_Central). Added a Filmdienst entry containing a very very short critical assessment. And a Hollywood Reporter entry. I would tend to think that the film making the cover of Scars is an indication too, with the opening editorial.(2 issues have interviews about the film (March and October 2009] Added 2 other reviews (Horror.com and Horror Society, see this about the latter). All in all, I consider it is safe to assume the film can be deemed notable.-Mushy Yank. 11:39, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Kofi Owusu-Nhyira

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

A non notable lawyer and entrepreneur. The sources in the article and a WP: Before could not establish notability. Ibjaja055 (talk) 06:51, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Businesspeople, and Ghana. Ibjaja055 (talk) 06:51, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I believe subject is notable has received significant coverage in third party sources. Owula kpakpo (talk) 09:37, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Zachary Basu

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

Based on a BEFORE, I do not believe Basu meets WP:JOURNALIST. The only sources I have been able to find are primary and/or lack significant coverage. Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 06:51, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Adam B. Sefkow

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

Assistant professor who works on team projects in high-energy physics with no major awards, WP:TOOSOON. Page was Prodded since his h-factor of 35 is small for the field, particularly as almost all of his publications have 5-32 coauthors. PROD was opposed by Espresso Addict with the argument that 35 is enough to possibly pass WP:NPROF#C1, it appears unaware of the consensus that h-factors have to be field normalized. As has previously been discussed at WT:NPROF, an h-factor of 35 is very notable in math; a good start in solid-state physics and low for high-energy physics. There is also the need to consider the number of authors, de-emphasizing large team citations such as he has been involved in. Ldm1954 (talk) 06:39, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators and Science. Ldm1954 (talk) 06:39, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Not unaware of any of that, just unkeen to set a trend of uncontested prods of academics with that kind of citation profile. I don't pay much attention to the h-index, more to the total citations and the citations of the top papers. Here both appear healthy (5386 in total, with the top papers 732, 506, 242, 189, 178 and a further ten papers >100); I don't think the wider discussion of AfD is unwarranted even if it turns out I'm the lone soul opposing deletion. Will look into it a bit further on the morrow. Espresso Addict (talk) 06:54, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. In a field where some of his highly-cited publications have 150 coauthors, we cannot set much store on h-index and citation counts of all publications. This sort of pattern of publication immediately gives most researchers publications with high citation counts, and the h-index is merely an indicator of longevity, not of being a leader. It is too indiscriminate and I don't think the standard should merely be that all high-energy physicists are notable. Alternatives are to look for notable awards and society fellowships, distinguished and named professorships, or heavily-cited first-author papers. His "Design of magnetized liner inertial fusion experiments using the Z facility" is first-author and has triple-digit citations, but it's the only one. He is an assistant professor so WP:PROF#C5 is out of reach. There is a 2017 reference for two awards [17], but one is really just a startup grant (not a prize or medal) and the other is also an early-career award [18]. I don't think it's enough. —David Eppstein (talk) 08:17, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hedwig Tusar-Taxis

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

Does not pass WP:NBIO. She has achieved nothing in her life, so she does not deserve own encyclopedic entry. Being married to a notable person does not make her a notable person. FromCzech (talk) 06:36, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women and Czech Republic. FromCzech (talk) 06:36, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Notability is not inherited. Article composed of various original research and does not demonstrate any notable achievements of the subject. C 679 08:32, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to her first, notable, husband Vlastimil Tusar. PamD 09:10, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect per PamD. ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 11:17, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Peter Lynch (mining engineer)

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

The only indepth coverage I could of him was his unfortunate death. Take away that and his career was unremarkable. So WP:BLP1E applies here. LibStar (talk) 06:15, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Engineering and Australia. LibStar (talk) 06:15, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Aviation-related deletion discussions. LibStar (talk) 06:16, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Mohammed Shoaib

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

Fails WP:NPOL. Taabii (talk) 05:54, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Politicians, India, and Rajasthan. Taabii (talk) 05:54, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Chaz Rainey

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

Promotional biography for a non-notable showbiz lawyer. Contested draftification; moved back to mainspace without improvements. Sources do not support WP:GNG, WP:NBIO or even WP:NPRODUCER as the films he has produced are not notable. The sources are WP:TRIVIALMENTIONs in coverage of other subjects: ([19], [20], [21], [22]), affiliated, non-independent sources: ([23], [24], his own website); and an LA Times reference, but it's in the sponsored/business directory section, not independent news coverage ([25]). Nothing else found in BEFORE search. Dclemens1971 (talk) 04:15, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Film, Law, and California. Dclemens1971 (talk) 04:15, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete sources in the article don't support BLP/Basic notability, as they are either trivial mentions or are about cases he worked on. Nothing to support NPROF. I couldn't find anything useful on google and scholar searches other than an SSRN paper from his time at LSE with no citations. Oblivy (talk) 06:22, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Gamble Hill

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

I prodded this due to being unable to find any sources discussing this location (only a couple mentioning the adjacent "Gamble Hill Drive" and "Gamble Hill Croft"). Another user expressed scepticism towards the completeness of my searching, noting that they found the location on Google Maps. I am listing it at AfD to see if anyone can find any sources that would establish notability. — Anonymous 03:43, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and England. — Anonymous 03:43, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Created more than a decade ago. Only three sentences total. No sourcing at all. — Maile (talk) 04:12, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The best that I can turn up are books on the mining industry (e.g. ISBN 9780118843553) that report that the quarry that you see here in Armley (which was a township and an ecclesiastical parish) was a mine into the Elland flagstone, and a couple of 1960s sources breathlessly announcing modernization programmes that report that it was flattened and built over by (subcontractors to) the Leeds Corporation in the 1960s. Uncle G (talk) 09:58, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Center, Jay County, Indiana

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

Once again the evidence for this being a "village" is Baker's say-so, and he has proven to be a weak reed. There is a cemetery, because there is a church, and that is what is there now. I expected searching to be mostly fruitless and so it mostly was, and in particular I didn't turn up a handy county history. But I did turn up this account of the founding of this church (which is very handsome on the outside, BTW) which turns out to have been United Brethren, at least when it was started; the largest portion of the UB church was eventually folded into the UMC, and in any case I could not tell whether the church is still in use. Anyway, what's particularly interesting about the account is that while it indicates that there was once a schoolhouse at the location, it rather conspicuously says nothing about a town. This proves nothing of course, but I would remind newcomers that a schoolhouse is not proof of a town either. That's basically all I found; possibly someone can find out more. Mangoe (talk) 03:21, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Indiana. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:34, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There are two county histories, Montgomery 1864 harvnb error: no target: CITEREFMontgomery1864 (help) and Jay 1922 harvnb error: no target: CITEREFJay1922 (help), the latter incorporating the former. Both have the school and the church, but no village nor town. Nor is there a Center in Jay county listed amongst the 23 entries for Centre in Indiana alone in the 1902 Lippincott's. Uncle G (talk) 11:00, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Montgomery, M. W. (1864). History of Jay County, Indiana. Chicago: Church, Goodman, & Cushing. (History of Jay County, Indiana at the Internet Archive)
- Jay, Milton T. (1922). History of Jay County, Indiana: Including Its World War Record and Incorporating the Montgomery History. Historical Publishing Company. OCLC 607766443. (History of Jay County, Indiana: Including Its World War Record and Incorporating the Montgomery History at the HathiTrust Digital Library)

William W. Cates

AfDs for this article:

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

for William W. Cates (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This article does not meet Wikipedia’s notability guidelines for biographies (WP:BIO). The subject lacks significant coverage in reliable, independent sources. The citations provided are either self-published, primary sources, or trivial mentions. The Los Angeles Book Festival award appears to be a pay-to-play contest rather than a widely recognized literary honor. The bibliography consists entirely of self-published works, which do not contribute to notability. Additionally, the National Geographic reference does not substantiate the claim regarding the winery. Given the lack of verifiable, independent coverage, this article does not demonstrate the subject’s encyclopedic notability and should be considered for deletion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by NicholasEyes (talk • contribs) 03:01, February 6, 2025 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors and California. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 04:00, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Louisiana and Virginia. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:35, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Calito Soul

AfDs for this article:

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

This is being done on behalf of 190.219.102.104. I have no personal opinion in this discussion. — Anonymous 02:46, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Bands and musicians, Music, and Panama. — Anonymous 02:46, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete — observe the reasons of Zzarch and Safiel for trying to eliminate that article, an article that in the Spanish version points out that the singer is still alive and reading the article there is nothing for which he stands out. article is that it indicates that the singer died in 2015. When in reality he died in 2019, that article was created in a mysterious way https://m.metrolibre.com/cultura/calito-soul-esta-vivo-KCML10581. 190.219.102.104 (talk) 03:13, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy withdraw — I now see that I've apparently been duped by someone who has done this several times and reliable sources have already been found in the past discussions. I'm not sure where this apparent grudge against this individual is coming from. The IP probably should be blocked as clearly NOTHERE.
- The IP has now shown just what a civil and honest contributor they are by deleting my withdrawal attempt. I've readded it here. — Anonymous 03:19, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  - That artist is unknown in Panama because they persist in maintaining an article that is singer by a subject that no one knows. 190.219.102.104 (talk) 03:24, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Cheryl Moana Marie Nunes

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

Subject is only notable due to her marriage with Antonio Sabàto Jr. - see WP:INVALIDBIO. Martey (talk) 23:56, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Women, and Entertainment. Martey (talk) 23:56, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - I disagree with the comment on her notability tied to her husband. The only section that has sourcing is her Personal life. The career section is totally not sourced, but that section shows her notability. — Maile (talk) 01:38, 16 January 2025 (UTC) I have changed my vote to Delete. I've been searching for info on her for weeks. Nothing comes up. — Maile (talk) 03:08, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, Advertising, Beauty pageants, American football, California, Hawaii, and Oregon. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:26, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Confused. This person is clearly a big celebrity, but she doesn't have a lot of coverage in mainstream media, leading me to wonder why she's gotten so little coverage, at least from what I see on Googling, from them compared to what's in the article. Has there been a blacklist? Is she just famous for being famous? What's going on? I'm genuinely interested in an answer, so please ping me. Bearian (talk) 03:31, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Beeblebrox ^Beebletalks 23:16, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - no answer from anyone else forthcoming, I'm going with "yes, the subject is famous, but not notable." Bearian (talk) 10:23, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 02:16, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: there are multiple claims to notability. She did more recently receive press from her marriage with Antonio Sabàto Jr, but she meets WP:SINGER for creating the Hawaiian Tropicè theme song, singing the Star Spangled Banner for various notable events, etc., WP:ENT for TV work such as Starz... CherryPie94 🍒🥧 (talk) 02:54, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

WP:SINGER says "regardless of what notability criterion is being claimed, the claim must be properly verified by reliable sources independent of the subject's own self-published promotional materials". Before listing this article, I looked but I couldn't find any reliable sources that predated her marriage to Sabàto.

If you are aware of any reliable sources that establish her notability as a singer (or anything else), please add them to the article. Without the existence of such sources, notability can't be proven and the article should be deleted. Martey (talk) 20:10, 30 January 2025 (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!} 02:04, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Bobtown, Indiana

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

This book's explanation of the name's origin for a place in Clay County strikes me as a bit of a "just so" story, but it's about all I get besides Baker. I'm just not finding a trace of the place searching and there's nothing there which suggests it was really a town. @Uncle G:? Mangoe (talk) 13:44, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Indiana-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 14:22, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 14:23, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The interesting thing is reading Baker, p. 71. Baker tells us that xe can only guess at what this is because it doesn't appear any maps that xe has consulted. It's like reading a deletion nomination rationale straight out of the source. ☺
Wanting to be thorough, although one could just leave it at that, I did some looking. There's a biography of John Mellencamp (ISBN 9780857128430) that says that this was the original working title of The Lonesome Jubilee because Mellencanp's grandparents "once lived there".
Other than that, though, I have turned up nothing. There are some soil surveys that name a soil type after this, but they aren't documenting the (supposed) town. The gazetteers only turn up the place in Massachusetts. I couldn't even construct more than a vague opening sentence of an article, with zero hope for expansion or clarification, because even the biography only narrows it down to Jackson County, and is only indirectly reporting the existence of the place based upon Mellencanp's recollection of how xe named a music album. For a place, I'd prefer a geographer to a biographer.
Uncle G (talk) 17:06, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: I added a 2015 local newspaper article source, as well as a Billboard magazine cite about the Mellencamp connection. The property owner name Mellencamp appears right near the location on some plat maps. eg [26]; though not listed as "Bobtown" on that one, you can see where the school was located, and there are a bunch of smaller plots centered at the location. It was/is an unincorporated community which has receded into remembrance, like so many U.S. midwestern locales.--Milowent • ^hasspoken 22:24, 4 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Adding: there are 101 hits for "Bobtown" in the archives of the Seymour Daily Republican (1898-1920), on internet archive [27]. Mostly mundane reporting of what's happening in the community. But more than enough to show it was a recognized populated community.--Milowent • ^hasspoken 22:35, 4 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  - Checking out a random sampling of the Daily Republican and finding random things like reports of football teams with "CORTLAND" as the headline, and "Lawrence Phegley sold a cow" without any sort of clue about a Bobtown, this seems to be another case of counting the number of hits rather than reading the sources. I challenge you to find just two of those newspaper hits that actually tell you what Bobtown is, the basic "Bobtown is a …" introduction part of an article. Should be easy, right, with 101 of them? So prove it. And as you note, Billboard is Mellencamp's recollection, as I discussed above. That map that doesn't say Bobtown at all is a contraindication, if anything, and yet more support for Baker saying that this isn't on any maps at all. The only real source is Spicer, which you've mis-cited by the way, but which doesn't say vital things like that it was a town, or a village, or even a hamlet. There's a one-room rural school and grocery story run by a Bob that apparently gave rise to a nickname. Uncle G (talk) 02:36, 5 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 02:00, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Altaf Tadavi

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

No other reason of notability except winning a season of Big Boss, a notable reality show. The subject fails WP:ENT and WP:MUSICBIO. Also see MC Stan, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/MC Stan, this and this Taabii (talk) 11:14, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Bands and musicians, India, and Maharashtra. Taabii (talk) 11:14, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Per nom. Media Mender 📬✍🏻 12:02, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete— No GNG-worthy coverage. Mostly covered for wearing expensive jewelry and winning Big Boss.EmilyR34 (talk) 05:45, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Per nom., mainly news sources are due to winning Bigboss (which dosent inherit notability) and fails WP:NACTOR as he didnt have sig. roles in multiple notable films. TheSlumPanda (talk) 09:47, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as has substantial coverage of his music career in three Rolling Stone India articles already referenced in the article. Also news coverage of his winning Big Boss certainly contributes to his notability and is a claim to winning a major competition as per WP:ANYBIO, also passes WP:GNG imv Atlantic306 (talk) 22:47, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Per nom. RangersRus (talk) 16:53, 25 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I'm going to be contrarian here for a reason. I recall that we generally keep articles about the winners of 'major' reality shows. Am I wrong? Bearian (talk) 21:57, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Isn't there WP:1E. Guide if I'm wrong. Taabii (talk) 06:12, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: The subject is not only a winner of the Bigg Boss event but also an established rapper. When considering WP:ANYBIO, the subject meets the criteria due to their notable achievement of winning the Bigg Boss event. Furthermore, even before their participation in Bigg Boss, they had a career as a rapper, which aligns with the WP:ENT criteria for entertainers. Additionally, the subject has received significant media coverage, including in-depth features by BBC and several Urdu newspapers, which further solidifies their notability. Baqi:) (talk) 09:41, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Vanderwaalforces (talk) 11:48, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Bigg Boss (Hindi TV series) season 16. The sources for this article are not great to begin with, since many of them fall under WP:NEWSORGINDIA. Still, according to WP:MUSICBIO #10, a redirect is appropriate in this instance.--DesiMoore (talk) 16:21, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Rolling Stone India articles are about his music career and don't fall under NEWSORGINDIA, imv Atlantic306 (talk) 23:04, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: The previous AfD happened before the three Rolling Stone articles were published. If we group all the Rolling Stone coverage as one and add the Bigg Boss title coverage, the subject seems borderline notable. Some sources call him an undeserving winner. Considering this and the fact that Indian media publishes a lot of articles, I wouldn’t argue for a strong keep, but it does pass GNG and there is enough to write a neutral article. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 11:42, 5 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 01:58, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, feels like this AFD is another case of systematic bias given that I've seen winners of many western reality shows keep their pages. He meets WP:GNG and seems like quite a notable figure. Also those deletions are from two years ago, much has changed. jolielover♥talk 02:33, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

ADInstruments

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

Fails WP:NCORP. Sources are routine coverage or directory listings. Deleted by PROD in 2006. Jfire (talk) 01:54, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Biology, Technology, and New Zealand. Jfire (talk) 01:54, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: This one's borderline but I'm leaning Keep. This source from the University of North Carolina at Pembroke discusses the use of ADInstruments products in their biology coursework, and this article from the Otago Daily Times is over the line for significant coverage. It's not ideal, but it is sufficient. HyperAccelerated (talk) 21:45, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:51, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

List of knitters in literature

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

WP:NLIST doesn't have the clearest criteria and lists usually seem to end up kept at AfD, but this particular one seems trivial enough to test usual convention. I don't think there are enough major literary characters specifically known for knitting to warrant the existence of this list. — Anonymous 01:40, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Literature and Lists. — Anonymous 01:40, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:35, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - An interesting list. Those of us who had required reading in school of A Tale of Two Cities remember Madame DeFarge knitting and knitting...and then knitting some more. The Knitting navbox at the bottom is helpful. — Maile (talk) 04:59, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete even if somehow notable (doubtful, and the article's 0 sources do not go any way to proving that) nothing here is salvageable. Knitting is not defining for any of these anyway, and almost all are not notable. PARAKANYAA (talk) 07:28, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. I think the broader topic of knitting in literature would plausibly be notable — a quick search found quite a few sources that discuss it as a literary theme (e.g. [28] [29] [30]). But WP:NLIST would require sources that discuss "characters who knit" as a group or set, and I'm not really seeing any evidence of that. There are sources that use specific characters/texts to analyse how knitting features in literature, but none that describe "knitters" as a defined group. And I agree with PARAKANYAA that there's really nothing salvageable here, this is just an unexplained collection of characters who happen to be described knitting. MCE89 (talk) 10:37, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]