Wikipedia:Article Rescue Squadron – Rescue list/Archive 24

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 20 ← Archive 22 Archive 23 Archive 24 Archive 25 Archive 26 → Archive 29

List of works with the subtitle "Virtue Rewarded"

DELETE
Many words

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

List and notability. Interesting discussion. Sources should be easily found. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 18:25, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

The discussion continues. More references would help. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 11:40, 14 October 2020 (UTC)
Deleted Per the closer: "The result was delete. I wasn't around in 2004 but I joined in 2005 and read enough dramaboards to say that it was a very different place. It was certainly a more homogeneous community which allowed for us to have fun. Then we made the mistake of doing a good enough job on the whole be one of the world's largest websites and, despite our protests to the contrary, become one of the leading reference sources in the English speaking world.[citation needed] Our community is more diverse which carries certain advantages (we're only pretty systemically biased instead of being incredibly systemically biased!) but also means that we've had to "grow up". Rather than fun, in 2020 we have April Fools "jokes" that are so amusing that they find a way to cause multiple noticeboard discussions and RfCs. So instead we're left with policies and guidelines like "No Original Research" (an oldie but a goodie). The discussion here seems to suggest that the WP:Let whatever Floquenbeam likes exist guideline might have some support but alas that isn't the discussion I'm closing. So instead we end up with a delete consensus. However, there is clearly enough support for the tomfoolery of days gone by that it could certainly exist in someone's userspace (or perhaps even project space) and I would have to burnish the "no fun stick" that I was given instead of a mop to anyone suggesting it be WP:G4 (abbreviations impenetrable to outsides? Just as good in 2020 as 2005)." 7&6=thirteen (☎) 14:40, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
a more homogeneous community [in 2005] lol I wish that were true. Funny how we romanticize the past forgetting the bad and remembering the good. The period 2004-2007 was the most chaotic in Wikipedia history. Also the most active, it peaked in 2007 and then dropped and plateaued from there. They were the wild west days where incivility of any type went unchecked, copyright violation, back channel cabals, lack of rules and structure, lack of citation templates, crashing servers, exponential growth of users and articles, extended outages, epic flame battles, etc.. it was really crazy. -- GreenC 15:48, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Star Saga One: Beyond the Boundary

KEEP
Keep

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

I built this article from an existing redirect, using several reviews which I linked to, and a couple more reviews as found on its Mobygames page, as you can see in this version of the article, but it was reverted by another editor; can anyone help me find additional sources to help assert notability? 2601:243:1C80:6740:DC2B:6DF7:CF88:4464 (talk) 20:51, 30 October 2020 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Draft:Pro Wrestling Australia

Moving to draft is being used here as alternative to deletion, that's why this is a non-AfD.

Pidzz moved the article to mainspace twice, and it was reverted twice.

I agree with Pidzz that the article is ready for mainspace, but I felt like requesting assistance from experienced rescuers here would be better. Walwal20 talk ▾ contribs 12:46, 1 November 2020 (UTC)

@Pidzz:, and @Walwal20:, I formatted a few references; for the dead links and unformatted cage links I suggest using the “Wayback Machine” (Google it).
The roster section should be referenced otherwise anyone can add anybody there. Gleeanon 14:51, 1 November 2020 (UTC)
Thanks Gleeanon409. I'll see with Pidzz what can be done about the points you raised, although an IP user gave some help already (and added more unformatted links >.<). Thanks again. Walwal20 talk ▾ contribs 07:47, 2 November 2020 (UTC)
@Walwal20:, I would source every name on the roster list, while the links are still fresh, good luck! Gleeanon 08:00, 2 November 2020 (UTC)

Tomasz Jędrowski

KEEP
Keep

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Author with just one book but with, IMHO, enough sources to meet GNG. Gleeanon 17:28, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

Article ended in keep but was later renamed to be the name of the book, and edited to be a book article instead of one about the writer. Dream Focus 01:46, 6 November 2020 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

86 (term)

KEEP
Keep

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

It seems too ironic that there should be an attempt to 86 this entry. As I'm British, I am not familiar with it but am finding that there's much more to be found and written about this. Andrew🐉(talk) 09:46, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Kept Per the closer: "The result was keep." 7&6=thirteen (☎) 15:58, 6 November 2020 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Detecting Earth from distant star-based systems

KEEP
Keep

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Metaphorically speaking, WP:SAUCE? Being on the other end of the telescope. Could use more sources. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 21:14, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

Kept Per the nonadmin closer: "The result was keep." 7&6=thirteen (☎) 15:26, 8 November 2020 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Alexis Texas

KEEP
Keep

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

This is the 2nd nomination for deletion, at [[Wikiperesearch and sources for either of those pages -- thanks very much! Right cite (talk) 14:46, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Kept Per the closer: "The result was keep." 7&6=thirteen (☎) 15:27, 8 November 2020 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Mango (Saturday Night Live)

KEEP
Keep

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

I found some references, but mostly dead links to articles no longer where they once were. Anyone feel like searching for coverage? Do you find the Mango irresistible? Dream Focus 01:13, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

  • Kept Per the closer: "The result was keep." 7&6=thirteen (☎) 16:19, 8 November 2020 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Croatia women's national junior handball team

Multiple national junior handball teams nominated for deletion. Searching for a few of these teams turns up lots of results. — Ad Meliora Talk∕Contribs 11:03, 9 November 2020 (UTC)

Iman Farzin

DELETE
After nearly two weeks, a relist, sock blocks, and protection, a consensus to delete has emerged, so I think this is ripe for closure. Broadly, participants are not convinced that the subject meets our inclusion criteria, but there is also a minority of opinions that boil down to WP:TNT. By comparison, most of the non-sock keep votes are relatively weak. Few go beyond simply asserting the subject meets the GNG, and for the couple that actually analyze the Farsi sources, participants generally did not find them convincing as shown by some editors changing from keep to delete. Thanks to everyone who participated through comments and cleanup.

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Iman Farzin (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs|google) AfD discussion

Having just been relisted, the relisting administrator makes the excellent point that more eyes from established en-wp editors would be welcome at that discussion. Many thanks! 2A02:C7F:BE04:700:A9F8:23B7:6A9:AA40 (talk) 11:34, 6 November 2020 (UTC)

Deleted Per the closer: "The result was delete. After nearly two weeks, a relist, sock blocks, and protection, a consensus to delete has emerged, so I think this is ripe for closure. Broadly, participants are not convinced that the subject meets our inclusion criteria, but there is also a minority of opinions that boil down to WP:TNT. By comparison, most of the non-sock keep votes are relatively weak. Few go beyond simply asserting the subject meets the GNG, and for the couple that actually analyze the Farsi sources, participants generally did not find them convincing as shown by some editors changing from keep to delete. Thanks to everyone who participated through comments and cleanup." 7&6=thirteen (☎) 00:57, 12 November 2020 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Jamal Sims

KEEP
Keep

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Plenty of reliable sources, hard to believe nom followed BEFORE. Gleeanon 22:58, 2 November 2020 (UTC)

  • Kept Per the closer: "The result was keep." 7&6=thirteen (☎) 01:02, 12 November 2020 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Rural purge

KEEP
Keep

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

"Today, we no longer have to rely on such things as prognosticating beetles." Andrew🐉(talk) 10:49, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

  • Kept Per the closer: "The result was keep. Clear consensus that the subject is notable and the article should be retained. Improvements to the article may be discussed in an appropriate forum." 7&6=thirteen (☎) 01:04, 12 November 2020 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

List of tallest buildings in Augusta, Georgia

DELETE
In essence the keep arguments about the significance of the list has not overcome the the fact that there is a dearth of sources that discuss heights of buildings in Augusta, Georgia.

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

A rehash of the arguments at a lot of list of tallest buildings .... articles. This time Marching through Georgia. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 21:00, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Relisted. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 15:19, 8 November 2020 (UTC)
  • Deleted Per the closer: "The result was delete. In essance the keep arguments about the significance of the list has not overcome the the fact that there is a dearth of sources that discuss heights of buildings in Augusta, Georgia." 7&6=thirteen (☎) 10:20, 14 November 2020 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Railroad Tycoon Deluxe

I built this article from an existing redirect, using a few reviews which I found, and several non-English reviews, as you can see in this version of the article, but it was reverted by another editor; can anyone help me find additional sources to help assert notability? 2601:243:1C80:6740:DD50:EB04:4574:A2C0 (talk) 03:24, 21 November 2020 (UTC)

This is a clump/split debate. Split would make sense if the article was say twice as long. Suggest expanding the content using existing sources at hand. Do the expansion in the main article. Once it gets unreasonably long split it off, leaving behind a shortened version in the main article. That is generally how it should work. -- GreenC 06:04, 21 November 2020 (UTC)

Forgotten Realms cities

Neverwinter

Waterdeep

Two of the most important cities in the Forgotten Realms setting; independent reliable sources demonstrably exist for both of these, but I'm sure there are more out there. 2601:243:1C80:6740:DD50:EB04:4574:A2C0 (talk) 06:15, 27 November 2020 (UTC)

Kara-Tur

An important campaign setting for Dungeons & Dragons. 2601:243:1C80:6740:DD50:EB04:4574:A2C0 (talk) 14:48, 28 November 2020 (UTC)

Imperial Guard (comics)

Article was previously deleted once at AFD, but was rewritten from scratch by User:Stoshmaster using new sources. 2601:243:1C80:6740:DD50:EB04:4574:A2C0 (talk) 14:57, 28 November 2020 (UTC)

Snoopy's siblings

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Snoopy's siblings
Snoopy Defeating The Red Baron 7&6=thirteen (☎) 13:47, 23 November 2020 (UTC)

  • Kept No consensus. Per the closer: "The result was no consensus. The topic clearly does not deserve an independent article, but participants are split on an appropriate target. Will relist at RfD to make that determination." 7&6=thirteen (☎) 16:09, 28 November 2020 (UTC)
Redirect discussion is ongoing. And some of the participants are relitigating the deletion discussion. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 18:40, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

Gun serial number

KEEP
Keep+

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The argument here seems to be that Wikipedia is not everything; this is something, and so it should be deleted. WP:NOTSTUPID seems more appropriate, but so it goes. Anyway, I'm already finding that there are many interesting angles and so other perspectives will bring out more detail. Compare with vehicle registration plate, for example... Andrew🐉(talk) 10:10, 4 November 2020 (UTC)

  • Kept Per the closer: "The result was keep." Notwithstanding, I did put the "Globalize" template on the article. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 13:51, 10 November 2020 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

On 8 December 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Gun serial number, which was recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that a gun serial number can be any random set of numbers letters or a character string? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Gun serial number. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Gun serial number), and it may be added to the statistics page if it received over 400 views per hour. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cwmhiraeth (talk) 00:02, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

Michael Weist

Speedy Delete

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article has been deleted multiple times, over many years. Subject is the primary subject of his own Hulu documentary, Jawline (film), an Amazon documentary, and more. See: Draft: Michael Weist (entrepreneur), Draft:Michael Weist, Draft:Michael Weist III, Draft:Michael Weist (talent manager), at Michael Weist & Michael Weist (talent manager)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

User:SportingFlyer/Wells Fargo Building (Augusta)

Hi ARS, I requested this article be refunded to my userspace after improving it during an AfD. I'm inviting everyone here to look for additional sources and improve the article so it can be moved back to mainspace, as I identified a few of them, but that blasted geoblocker got in the way. I think that counts as a rescue! Thanks in advance. SportingFlyer T·C 20:26, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

Potions in Harry Potter

MERGE
The result was merge to Magic in Harry Potter to a limited extent, focusing on real-world and sourced information rather than plot summary. Sandstein 08:51, 19 December 2020 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The Half-Blood Prince said, "I don't expect many of you to appreciate the subtle science of the potion making." Is he right? Andrew🐉(talk) 11:24, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Mascots of Brazilian football sides

MERGE
The result was merge to List of association football mascots. I just chose a merge suggested by User:Spiderone. Feel free to suggest other merges on the appropriate talk pages. Missvain (talk) 04:32, 20 December 2020 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

I found some coverage. Anyone who speaks their language would probably find more. Dream Focus 16:05, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Cheese sandwich

KEEP
The result was no consensus. Views are split fairly evenly between keep, redirect and delete and I don't think there's going to be any agreement soon. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 11:24, 23 December 2020 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Per WP:BIKESHED, this is a topic on which everyone can and will have an opinion. I am reminded of pizza cheese, which generated lots of strife. See also Dream of the Rarebit Fiend... Andrew🐉(talk) 10:35, 16 December 2020 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Ach. Brito

KEEP
The result was keep. Keeping for now to allow for improvement using other language resources, etc. We can always re-nominate for deletion if needed in the future, but hopefully not. Missvain (talk) 15:56, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

This article on a Portuguese soap company is probably inadequate in its present form, but it has been suggested in the AFD discussion that potentially sufficient foreign-language coverage may exist. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 06:48, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Semaphore

KEEP
The result was keep. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 15:02, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Hello, this new +stub article Semaphore was nominated for deletion the same day it was created. The article has plenty of potential for expansion and that is all that is required to be at Wikipedia. Your Rescue assistance would be appreciated. Thank you! Blockhouse321 (talk) 10:11, 23 December 2020 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Bolt (fabric)

KEEP
The result was keep. While there was some talk about redirecting, the only editor who thinks this should be deleted is the nominator, and since this discussion has had no new comments in a few days that aren't personal attacks, I'm closing it early. Discussions on content can continue on the article's talk page. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 20:47, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

We seem to have a subject-matter expert on the job already but they may need some help with formatting or the finer points of English. Andrew🐉(talk) 18:29, 22 December 2020 (UTC)

Kept Per the closer: "The result was keep. While there was some talk about redirecting, the only editor who thinks this should be deleted is the nominator, and since this discussion has had no new comments in a few days that aren't personal attacks, I'm closing it early. Discussions on content can continue on the article's talk page."
There is an edit war on content that is ongoing. As background, you might want to see this,
Please review the ARS Code of Conduct, the canvassing guideline, and WP:5P4
Note the attack on WP:ARS at the AFD. Considering the source, one might think it a badge of honor. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 12:34, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
The person who first made personal attacks in that thread is you. That fact that you felt free to crow about it here speaks volumes about both you and this noticeboard. ApLundell (talk) 05:16, 2 January 2021 (UTC)
ApLundell You are wrong. That you are here taking this position speaks volumes about you. Reexmamine that thread. I note that the disparagement unapologetically continues unabated. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 14:47, 2 January 2021 (UTC)
Having reexamined it as you suggest, I see that the first overt personal attack is when a user pointedly links to WP:Competence to very directly imply that another long-time user lacks it. ApLundell (talk) 17:48, 2 January 2021 (UTC)
I invoked the words and thoughts of that very user and with a link. I was only dealing with the merits of the discussion. The obdurate refusal to read the sources and understand their import implies a serious problem. In fact, that this WP:PROD was misbegotten and that it was brought at all was a violation of WP:Before, which I chose to not mention. Saying the sources and words don't exist doesn't make it so. Continuing to argue the point in the face of the sources now cited in the article appears to be either willful, WP:Trolling, or incompetent — take your pick. Res ipsa loquitur. But discussing this further with you isn't going to change anything. I was not WP:Gravedancing. And I would have let this all go, but for the needless insults, which persist, and your intervention. WP:Dead horse. Have a nice day and a great New Year and New Decade. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 18:08, 2 January 2021 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Heads Up (video game)

KEEP
The result was keep. (non-admin closure) CaptainGalaxy 23:24, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

This game is sometimes known as "Heads Up Action Soccer" or just "Soccer" and as far as I know it was only released by General Consumer Electronics (GCE) on the Vectrex system.

I built this article from an existing redirect, and have found a few reviews, as you can see in this version of the article; can anyone help me find additional sources to help assert notability so that it can be restored? 2601:243:1C80:6740:2180:D204:E3B:485D (talk) 03:26, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

  • 11 people said to keep it, the nominator and one other wanted to delete it, it closed as Keep. Dream Focus 00:18, 9 January 2021 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Sargon III

I built this article from an existing redirect, using several reviews and additional sources. This article is not currently up for deletion, but it has been redirected multiple times already despite having several reviews from WP:RS publications, so maybe you can help me find more to make sure it can be kept as a viable article? 2601:243:1C80:6740:59CF:B77D:BCE8:D61D (talk) 03:35, 9 January 2021 (UTC)

It is large enough with enough content for just that one game to have its own article. They'll have to take it to AFD if they want to eliminate it. Why not register a user name instead of editing by a changing IP address? Dream Focus 04:36, 9 January 2021 (UTC)

Pyrausta quadrimaculalis

Surely this can be sourced. Deleting species seems wrong to me. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 18:38, 9 January 2021 (UTC)

There are three pages currently:
  1. Pyrausta quadrimaculalis
  2. Pyrausta quadrimaculalis (Dognin, 1908)
  3. Pyrausta quadrimaculalis (Dognin,1908), Species of moth
Only the latter seems to be tagged for deletion and, as it's an empty page created in error by a bot, that's best done by speedy deletion.
Andrew🐉(talk) 18:48, 9 January 2021 (UTC)
I posted this amidst a developing situation. Folks seem to be adding to the article that will be left standing. Cheers. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 19:08, 9 January 2021 (UTC)

Dee Jay

KEEP
The result was keep. Randykitty (talk) 16:52, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

This character is one of only three black characters in video games from 1990-1994 and has received coverage as such. I believe that more coverage is out there for its historicity and have begun to add some. I have also become concerned that that information from reliable sources was removed by an editor immediately after I added it. Archrogue (talk) 21:20, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Alp Akar

DELETE
There's suggestion that there might be some sources, but an overall consensus that at this time there is insufficient coverage to demonstrate notability.

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Turkish actor. I think we have an English language systemic bias. What we have here is a failure to communicate. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 15:01, 22 January 2021 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Draft:Bug Off!

This submission was declined for AFC, can anyone help find more sources for this retro video game so that it can be submitted as an article? BOZ (talk) 05:27, 22 January 2021 (UTC)

Draft was accepted! :) BOZ (talk) 16:02, 22 January 2021 (UTC)

Ark Invest

KEEP
Keep. There is a clear consensus that the article meets the notability guidelines and therefore that it should be kept.

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

I created this article a few days ago and it's now under Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ark Invest. I think this company is clearly WP:NCORP. Ark Invest has the largst largest actively managed ETF and is frequently mentioned in the media. A deletion would be completely arbitrarily and indiscriminately. There are enough reliable sources in the article (Forbes, Blooomberg, CNBC, The New York Times) to prove relevance.--Afus199620 (talk) 17:46, 23 January 2021 (UTC)

  • I read through the reliable search link at the top of the AFD and then remembered to check their official website and found where they list interviews and coverage about them. https://ark-invest.com/media-press/ Found some that confirm it passes the general notability guidelines. Dream Focus 19:23, 23 January 2021 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Anger

REDIRECT
The result was redirect to Here, My Dear. (non-admin closure) (t · c) buidhe 20:17, 22 January 2021 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Marvin Gaye single. Poignant lyrics. Finding sources is hard. Could be a redirect to the album it appeared on? 7&6=thirteen (☎) 20:05, 19 January 2021 (UTC)

  • Redirect Per the closer: "This article was nominated for deletion on 15 January 2021. The result of the discussion was redirect." 7&6=thirteen (☎) 23:11, 23 January 2021 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Pirates! Gold

I restored this previously redirected article and added a bunch of sources, as you can see in this version of the article, and yet the article was reverted to a redirect; can anyone help me find additional sources to help assert notability so that it can be restored? 2601:243:1C80:6740:59CF:B77D:BCE8:D61D (talk) 00:21, 23 January 2021 (UTC)

Rather than fighting the redirect, could you go with merging the content into a sub-section of Sid Meir Pirate article, and naming the section "Remakes"? If you are reverted in that, a stronger case for creating a standalone article exists. -- GreenC 01:11, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

Chris Yonge

KEEP
The result was keep. There is no reason to expect that relisting would yield a different outcome. BD2412 T 20:28, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

I believe this article meets WP:BASIC, WP:ANYBIO, WP:GNG and WP:MUSICBIO but has still been subject to deletion. Over 50 sources but not one is good enough? . TwinTurbo (talk) 14:13, 17 January 2021 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Stocker (video game)

I restored this previously redirected article and managed to find a couple of reviews, as you can see in this version of the article, but the article was reverted to a redirect; can anyone help me find additional sources to help assert notability so that it can be restored? I did some searching on it but got a lot of false positives because the same company also made a game a couple of years later called "Night Stocker" which got more coverage; I will try some more searching probably in the upcoming week. 2601:243:1C80:6740:59CF:B77D:BCE8:D61D (talk) 04:06, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, that looks generally useful! I tried with this game but did not come up with much; I had been going through archive.org but like I say, I got a lot of false positives because of the other game, but I will try again probably tomorrow. 2601:243:1C80:6740:59CF:B77D:BCE8:D61D (talk) 14:25, 24 January 2021 (UTC)
OK, I spent a lot of time looking through hits on archive.org, and I did finally find two more reviews for this game, so I tried restoring it – we will see. I had to filter out a lot of hits for Night Stocker, which easily has enough reviews to meet the GNG so should have its own article. (Also many hits in "Cashbox" magazine, which were almost all just classified listings for selling arcade cabinets.) My usual reverter argued that these were "blurbs in niche magazines", but keep in mind that he tried and failed with that argument in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Heads Up (video game). I also noted that the article is linked from User:JayTheBrainMann/Books/The Ultimate History of Video Games, but I have no information about that book to know how it may help for notability. One problem I encountered is that it looked like I was going to get a lot of hits in French magazines, until I discovered that "stocker" is the French word for "store".  :( So, I just had to skip the many French magazines that came up to save time and sanity... 98.32.192.121 (talk) 19:00, 25 January 2021 (UTC)
Well it looks like you saved it. I just added a link to where people can legally play it free in their webbrowser on the Internet Archive. Dream Focus 04:56, 26 January 2021 (UTC)
Awesome, thank you. :) It doesn't look like it is going to be reverted again, but if that happens I will alert here. 2601:249:8B80:4050:59CF:B77D:BCE8:D61D (talk) 05:13, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

"Tell it to the Marines"

KEEP
The result was procedural keep without prejudice for renomination. There are far too many articles here to evaluate in a single discussion, where each requires individual assessment, and I see no point keeping this open for the full duration.

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

I would normally refer to this as a trainwreck but we seem to need a nautical metaphor – a tsunami, perhaps? I'm not sure what's provoked this but they seem to be mostly naval heroes of WW2. There's certainly plenty to go round so we need all hands on deck! Andrew🐉(talk) 22:06, 19 January 2021 (UTC)

As well as the large group nomination, there seem to be a number of more recent military men who served in Afghanistan, it seems. Perhaps there's a series of purges of medal winners? Andrew🐉(talk) 23:06, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
  • Keep Per the closer: "The result was procedural keep without prejudice for renomination. There are far too many articles here to evaluate in a single discussion, where each requires individual assessment, and I see no point keeping this open for the full duration." 7&6=thirteen (☎) 13:40, 23 January 2021 (UTC)
Please review the ARS Code of Conduct, the canvassing guideline, and WP:5P4

Please explain to me how this is not Wikipedia:Canvassing. Mztourist (talk) 10:01, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Maurice D. Jester

KEEP
Consensus is that the subject meets the relevant notability guidelines. Jester's case, given the amount and type of coverage, is distinguishable from the other ship namesake AfDs.

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Coast guards operator that we can find sources. There is some urgency here. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 00:49, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Draft:Kalashtar

Article was redirected several years ago after Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kalashtar, but new sources were found recently so I moved it to draft and am hoping that more sources can be found to overturn the AFD officially by submitting through AFC. Incidentally, I also restored Warforged for the same reason, as it was never subjected to AFD. BOZ (talk) 21:21, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

Darkhold

PROD was added yesterday but then removed; if there are more sources out there, that could help sustain this one as an article. It has a little bit of good sourcing already from the TV shows it has appeared in. BOZ (talk) 21:21, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

Dennis Clifton

DELETE
The result was delete. Daniel (talk) 06:36, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Studio engineer. Allman Brothers, et al. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 14:30, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

David Garst

KEEP
The result was keep. Daniel (talk) 05:38, 5 February 2021 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

I came across this at AfD, nominated by Johnpacklambert. The subject played a significant role in international agriculture policy and US politics for nearly half a century. Any input on improving this article is appreciated.

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Purr by Katy Perry

REDIRECT
The result was redirect to Katy Perry. Consensus that these topics are not notable, however they are mentioned at Perry's article. (non-admin closure) (t · c) buidhe 21:11, 5 February 2021 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

hi all, as this is a "Good Article" and has had a DYK, thought you might be interested that it is up for deletion, thanks. Coolabahapple (talk) 02:13, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Kristoffer Domeij

KEEP
The result was no consensus. -- Amanda (aka DQ) 12:13, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Notable Army Ranger. Second nomination. 'nuf said. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 14:21, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Kristoffer Domeij 7&6=thirteen (☎) 18:49, 25 January 2021 (UTC)
I posed some questions. And now, as to how the AFD is going ... Crickets chirping. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 00:43, 26 January 2021 (UTC)
Per the closer: The result was no consensus
The DYK is still under consideration. Help in further expanding the article would be appreciate and recognized. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 15:54, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

TI Invaders

I restored this previously redirected article and added a couple of reviews, as you can see in this version of the article, but the article was reverted to a redirect; can anyone help me find additional sources to help assert notability so that it can be restored? 2601:243:1C80:6740:59CF:B77D:BCE8:D61D (talk) 04:49, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

That article reads The game is essentially a Space Invaders clone. So not seeing why you need to list minor changes and then explain how the game works. Any review for the game would be the same for the main game it ripped off. Dream Focus 16:10, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
I didn't write most of this one, I just restored the content that was previously redirected. 2601:243:1C80:6740:59CF:B77D:BCE8:D61D (talk) 05:53, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

Landspeeder

KEEP
The result was no consensus. Pretty much per Sandstein; some of the more recent comments are more substantive, but some aren't. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 22:07, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The nomination claims that most households are not familiar with this topic but how many of you do not instantly recognise it? It seems unlikely that the topic will be deleted as even the nomination does not propose that we do this. But I'm finding that there's lots of scope for improvement and working on such a familiar topic may be congenial. Andrew🐉(talk) 13:04, 21 January 2021 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

List of repertoire pieces by Ferruccio Busoni

DELETE
The result was delete. Ultimately, the creator is no longer interested in it, some of the handful of "keep" !votes were concerned about what title it should have and how it is structured. If anyone would like the page userfied, please let me know. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 18:28, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

A helpful list, IMO. WP:Not paper. WP:Preserve. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 23:04, 22 January 2021 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Alexander Skinner (surgeon)

DELETE
The result was delete. Every single Keep comment (bar one) here fails WP:ITSNOTABLE (as does the first Delete comment, to be fair). However, the Delete comments are generally policy-based and reference the fact that "significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources" per BASIC is required. Black Kite (talk) 22:40, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

There seem to be lots of military men in the firing line currently. Let's start with this surgeon who was part of Washington's army. From my British perspective, these were insurrectionists engaged in sedition against the constitutional authorities but Americans may take a different view. Anyway, the subject seems to show up in a variety of contexts and sources and I doubt that I will have time to do them all justice. Andrew🐉(talk) 10:11, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Bedtime toy

MERGE
The result was merge to Comfort object. Daniel (talk) 00:20, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Most of us will have some experience of these so this is a good opportunity for some bike-shedding. Andrew🐉(talk) 09:35, 2 February 2021 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Harry F. Bauer

MERGE
The result was merge to USS Harry F. Bauer. Black Kite (talk) 08:43, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

And a great many other articles. See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Edward Henry Allen.

Please review the ARS Code of Conduct, the canvassing guideline, and WP:5P4

As a matter of housekeeping, I would note that this is there is a previous nomination for deletion that just went down the tubes. This is he second nomination. This fact is being knowingly suppressed – on this and many articles. See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Edward Henry Allen. The record should be corrected accordingly. There is a systemic attempt to hide that fact over many articles.

This is relevant, and it should be fixed. It is a fact. It is always put into the history. I've never seen this, and it is a direct result of the misbegotten attempt to purge a couple of hundred articles. And all at once, overwhelming the limited number of editors who actively try to save articles, while at the same time trolling those editors to make their job difficult and discourage them with distractions. Apparently it takes no time to resurrect hundreds of Navy Cross/Ship name honorees for deletion. It takes a lot of time to respond and improve all of these articles. This is in fact a second nomination (among many). And given the fact that there is no good faith compliance with WP:Before and a blatant disregard of sources that exist but aren't cited — which do factor in to notability, this sneak attack is (dare I say it) ... a date that will live in infamy. You are distorting the process and rigging the outcomes.
Subject meets or exceeds WP:GNG. No compliance with WP:Before. The protocol is that one should not only look at the present cited sources, but available sources, too. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 12:53, 30 January 2021 (UTC)
If you spent as much time finding and adding references as you did complaining then its possible that you might prove the nom and those of us who say redirect wrong. Mztourist (talk) 16:16, 30 January 2021 (UTC)
Troll. Go do likewise, and sin no more. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 21:28, 30 January 2021 (UTC)
As I said my concern is ensuring that this pages isn't used for canvassing, if you regard that as trolling so be it. Mztourist (talk) 03:30, 31 January 2021 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

John C. England

KEEP
Consensus is that improvements made to the article since nomination demonstrate notability. This AfD is also distinguishable from others in that more than one ship was named after the subject, which also makes outright redirection/merging less desirable. -- Patar knight - chat/contributions 21:29, 2 February 2021 (UTC) ]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Navy Cross. Two ships named for him. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 21:18, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

Please review the ARS Code of Conduct, the canvassing guideline, and WP:5P4
I draw your attention to the bullet points at the top of this page. Please first explain how this is not Wikipedia:Canvassing. How are you proposing to improve the content, which is supposedly what this is all about. Why have you not complied with: "You should disclose in a deletion discussion that a post has been made at the rescue list"? Mztourist (talk) 10:26, 26 January 2021 (UTC)
User:Mztourist I have complied. And it is understood that improvements are the intent. Please improve the page. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 11:02, 26 January 2021 (UTC)
Please explain, how have you complied? You're a member of this project, so you (not me) should be improving the page, not canvassing here as appears to be the case. Mztourist (talk) 11:54, 26 January 2021 (UTC)
Don't presume to tell me what to do. Or where or when or how. This is an ill-considered AFD. We are all volunteers here. You apparently do not understand or apply WP:Before and WP:GNG. Please explain how you did that. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 13:18, 26 January 2021 (UTC)
I presume you to comply by all of the above bullet points that are supposed to govern the Article Rescue Squadron. I conduct BEFORE searches and apply GNG, you don't seem to understand what GNG requires: SIGCOV in multiple RS, because if you did you would search and see that John C. England (the man not the ships named after him) doesn't have it. Mztourist (talk) 13:50, 26 January 2021 (UTC)
If you didn't find it, you didn't look. I have. Your true credibility is showing. You either didn't look or didn't comprehend. WP:Competence is required. So stop posturing. We are done here. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 14:39, 26 January 2021 (UTC)
So you claim there's SIGCOV in multiple RS, but you won't add them and I am the one who lacks credibility and is posturing? Right...that's totally in accordance with the supposed purpose of this project which states "The provision of reliable-source references is the best way to save an article." Mztourist (talk) 03:59, 27 January 2021 (UTC)
It's not like sources are difficult to find. The impression is that because there is a sense there are too many Navy Cross articles, they need to be pared down and therefore checking for sources is not high on the list, the priority is to remove articles. It is a backassward approach to AfD, a preconception of a general problem applied to specific articles creating a bias against seeing or finding sources. -- GreenC 04:27, 27 January 2021 (UTC)
I thought we were done here? Single Navy Cross awardees are not notable unless they have SIGCOV in multiple RS. If SIGCOV exists the page will be retained at AFD, if not it will be deleted. The supposed purpose of this project is to provide references for pages that are up for deletion, but it seems from your earlier comments above and other discussions here that isn't really the purpose at all, rather its about votestacking AFDs. Mztourist (talk) 04:52, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

User:Mztourist Article has been improved. Go disrupt and troll somewhere else. As you said: "So you claim there's SIGCOV in multiple RS, but you won't add them and I am the one who lacks credibility and is posturing?" Now we know who was posturing. The right thing to do would be to admit you were wrong. But if not, go away. Just go away. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 22:18, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

No I wasn't wrong, you added references on the Talk Page in the middle of the AFD discussion. No disrupting or trolling by me, rather I have drawn attention to the fact that you and others aren't using this project for its claimed purpose. We will see how the AFD plays out.Mztourist (talk) 03:04, 28 January 2021 (UTC)
Shortcuts
Actually I didn't add the references on the talk page. I rewrote the whole article.
And WP:GNG includes sources that exist, even if they aren't referenced in the article. See the shortcut on the right hand side of this comment. And if you had done WP:Before before proposing the AFD, you could have found the sources — oh, you said you did that, so why didn't you find them?
Your thoroughness and compliance is again proved. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 13:41, 28 January 2021 (UTC)
I did a WP:Before and it is my view that there isn't SIGCOV in multiple RS to meet WP:GNG. As I said, we'll see how the AFD plays out. I hold your thoroughness and compliance in similar disregard. Mztourist (talk) 06:43, 29 January 2021 (UTC)
Really? Your performance and the current sources (which you say don't exist) tell a different story.  !!!!
As compared to your stellar performance of cutting and pasting: [1] or deleting my comments above: [2] ??? Mztourist (talk) 08:48, 31 January 2021 (UTC)
You lost the AfD. Everything else is bullshit. -- GreenC 22:02, 2 February 2021 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

A fact from John C. England appeared on the main page on February 10, 2021 ...

7&6=thirteen (☎) 13:04, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

Cooli Carlito

DELETE
The result of the discussion was delete. signed, Rosguill talk 17:14, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Hi everyone, a redirect that is up for a deletion discussion. I'm not sure if I still add these here but it is currently redirected to Grime (music genre) but I think it'd be better redirected to Scrufizzer as it mentions the subject in question. Any input on improving this redirect is appreciated. TwinTurbo (talk) 00:17, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Jack Schlossberg

KEEP
The result was keep. The nomination has received little support and plenty of opposition and so there is no consensus to delete. (non-admin closure) Andrew🐉(talk) 19:30, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

This is actually the 8th attempt at deletion not the 2nd. -- GreenC 17:50, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

W. Mark Lanier

KEEP
Speedy Keep (nom withdrawn)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Lawyer with claimed loss of notability, again. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 22:04, 21 January 2021 (UTC)

  • Speedy Keep Per the closer: "The result was speedy keep. Nomination withdrawn." 7&6=thirteen (☎) 23:13, 23 January 2021 (UTC)
  • This article is a classic case of a professional who has used PR firms, press releases and walled gardens of networks to increase their own star power. They even hired a UPE to make the article originally. But.. it is a notable person without doubt, and could be further improved if more neutral independent sources could be found. -- GreenC 01:03, 24 January 2021 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The nominator of this AfD has been blocked as a probably extortionist running some sort of paid editing scam .. along with a number of identified socks and more under investigation by ARB. -- GreenC 20:39, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Gabrielle Diana

KEEP
WP:HEY applies. (non-admin closure) Etzedek24 (I'll talk at ya) (Check my track record) 02:37, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Many reliable sources let them speak as an expert on the transgender issue, and short news articles covering the supportive mother giving her a cake after he became a she, but need help finding significant coverage of them to convince everyone else in the recently started AFD. Dream Focus 15:42, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Colossal Adventure

I restored this previously redirected article and added several reviews to the point which I thought would be enough to meet the WP:GNG, as you can see in this version of the article, but the article was reverted to a redirect; can anyone help me find additional sources to help assert notability so that it can be restored? 2601:243:1C80:6740:59CF:B77D:BCE8:D61D (talk) 02:46, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

Willard Keith

KEEP
The result was no consensus. After much-extended time for discussion, there is a clear absence of consensus to delete this article, with a solid majority of participating editors preferring to keep it, and the next largest group supporting a redirect to one of two potential redirect targets. Participants advocating keeping the article have articulate a somewhat more substantial basis for doing so in this case than has been done for other articles nominated for deletion on the same basis. BD2412 T 20:33, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Navy Cross, ship named. Yahdah, yahdah! Usual. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 20:06, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Alanna Devine

KEEP
The result was no consensus. The best arguments are from Bearcat and Beccaynr, who are diametrically opposed to each other. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 19:38, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The subject of this AfD is an attorney who has appeared in news coverage from 2009 through 2018, at least based on my initial research. I have added 11 news sources to the AfD discussion, and there are more sources available; assistance with efforts to incorporate/organize the sources and clean up this article, which also generally needs a 'wikification' rewrite (e.g. lead, separate sections for Career, Education, Personal Life), would be appreciated. Editors who understand French would also be helpful, because the subject's practice includes work in Quebec and some sources in the article are in French. Beccaynr (talk) 21:36, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Caramel Plug

DELETE
The result was delete. I can't weigh the keep arguments very heavily given the solid source analysis & ENT rebuttal. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 23:40, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Hi everyone, this is a notable article and has reliable and independent sources, it meets WP:GNG but still yet it is nominated as Afd. Ihadarack (talk) 21:46, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Farahnaz Forotan

KEEP
The result was speedy keep due to withdrawal by nominator. (non-admin closure) Vaticidalprophet (talk) 13:04, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Forotan is an Afghan journalist who has taken refuge in France since 2020 after being informed by the Afghan Journalists Safety Committee of threats to her life from the Taliban. The addition of sources and general editing would benefit this article. Beccaynr (talk) 17:28, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

George M. Campbell

KEEP
The result was no consensus. Barkeep49 (talk) 21:37, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Apparently it takes no time to resurrect hundreds of Navy Cross/Ship name honorees for deletion. It takes a lot of time to respond and improve article. This is in fact a second nomination (among many). 7&6=thirteen (☎) 03:12, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

Please review the ARS Code of Conduct, the canvassing guideline, and WP:5P4
Add references then as you claim there are "Lot of reliable sources" that's what this project is all about. Mztourist (talk) 04:27, 29 January 2021 (UTC)
You can do it too. There are a lot of articles under siege, and it takes more time to do that and create an article, than it does to propose it for deletion. Or are you just trolling, again? 7&6=thirteen (☎) 13:19, 29 January 2021 (UTC)
No, the SIGCOV isn't there. I'm just ensuring that this page is being used for the project not canvassing. Mztourist (talk) 16:28, 29 January 2021 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Tom Rees (airman)

KEEP
The result was speedy keep. Boldly closing speedily per WP:SNOW, consensus for deletion is extremely unlikely to develop. (non-admin closure) RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 17:33, 18 February 2021 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Curse you Red Baron. First of his victims. Eradicating history again. Well developed article, but anything can be improved. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 04:31, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

Please review the ARS Code of Conduct, the canvassing guideline, and WP:5P4
He's no more notable than any of von Richthofen's other 79 victories. Mztourist (talk) 04:39, 16 February 2021 (UTC)
The article was a DYK. And looks it. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 04:41, 16 February 2021 (UTC)
Yes lots of detail of von Richthofen's first victory, nothing much about Rees, pure WP:1E. Look at all of von Richthofen's victories, Rees wasn't an ace, had no significant decorations and has no SIGCOV except as von Richthofen's first victory. Mztourist (talk) 05:01, 16 February 2021 (UTC)
And it was significantly covered in multiple WP:RS. Perhaps you should actually read the article and the many cited sources. But that is too much to ask. Debate this at the AFD. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 15:37, 16 February 2021 (UTC)
I read all the sources, they're largely about von Richthofen, not Rees, perhaps you should read them yourself. Mztourist (talk) 04:08, 17 February 2021 (UTC)
  • Closed as Speedy Keep. Per the closer: "The result was speedy keep. Boldly closing speedily per WP:SNOW, consensus for deletion is extremely unlikely to develop." 7&6=thirteen (☎) 17:35, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Article_Rescue_Squadron_–_Rescue_list/Archive_24&oldid=1018843325"