Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/Today

Purge
Shortcut WP:AFD/T

10 April 2025

Read how to nominate an article for deletion.

Recent AfDs: Today Yesterday

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

< April 09	April 11 >

Guide to deletion

Purge server cache

Foresters House

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

Article about an office building, not properly sourced as passing inclusion criteria for office buildings. As always, buildings are not automatically entitled to have Wikipedia articles just because they exist, and have to be shown to pass WP:GNG on reliable source coverage and analysis of their architectural, historical, social or cultural significance -- but this doesn't make any meaningful notability claim over and above existing, and is referenced almost entirely to primary sources that aren't support for notability. The only reliable source present here at all is an insurance industry trade magazine, which is here solely to tangentially verify the name of the company's CEO rather than supporting any information about the building in its own right.
Since it's the headquarters of a company that does have an article under WP:CORP terms, any information we need about its head office can easily be contained in the company's article -- but in order to qualify for its own standalone article as a separate topic from the company, it would need a much stronger notability claim, and much better sourcing for it, than this. Bearcat (talk) 19:57, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Architecture and Canada. Bearcat (talk) 19:57, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Pascal Michon

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

While accomplished, I can't find any in-depth coverage of him, and while there is another person with this name who is widely referenced, this person is not, and I can't find anything to show that he passes WP:NSCHOLAR. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 10:34, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 10:34, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Philosophy, History, and France. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:43, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Searching only JSTOR found ten reviews of four books, now added to the article. Probably there are more elsewhere. This is enough for a pass of WP:AUTHOR, and (since they are in-depth publications by others about his work) for WP:GNG as well. —David Eppstein (talk) 16:12, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per WP:HEY after good work by David Eppstein to find and add sources. Bearian (talk) 21:59, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kingsmasher678 (talk) 19:50, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Jeevan TV

AfDs for this article:

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

I am nominating this article for deletion as it Fails WP:GNG due to lack of significant coverage in reliable independent sources; WP:Before search did not find sufficient sourcing. UNITED BLASTERS (talk) 15:32, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and India. Shellwood (talk) 15:44, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Kerala-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:04, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Keep the article and improve the references. Channel is available in most DTH and most Cable aggregators.
Anish Viswa 04:46, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Responding to the points raised: Availability doesn't satisfy WP:GNG's requirement for significant coverage in independent sources (see WP:NEXIST). The suggestion to improve sources falls under WP:HEY; the key is demonstrating such sources actually exist, which the WP:BEFORE search did not confirm. UNITED BLASTERS (talk) 07:14, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kingsmasher678 (talk) 19:49, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Goodness (TV channel)

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

I am nominating this article for deletion as it Fails WP:GNG due to lack of significant coverage in reliable independent sources; WP:Before search did not find sufficient sourcing. UNITED BLASTERS (talk) 15:41, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, Christianity, and India. Shellwood (talk) 15:44, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Kerala-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:04, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Keep the article and improve the references. Channel is available in most DTH and most Cable aggregators.
Anish Viswa 04:44, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Responding to the points raised: Availability doesn't satisfy WP:GNG's requirement for significant coverage in independent sources (see WP:NEXIST). The suggestion to improve sources falls under WP:HEY; the key is demonstrating such sources actually exist, which the WP:BEFORE search did not confirm. UNITED BLASTERS (talk) 07:15, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kingsmasher678 (talk) 19:49, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Harvest TV

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

I am nominating this article for deletion as it Fails WP:GNG due to lack of significant coverage in reliable independent sources; WP:Before search did not find sufficient sourcing. UNITED BLASTERS (talk) 15:43, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, Christianity, and India. Shellwood (talk) 15:45, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Kerala-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:03, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Keep the article and improve the references. Channel is available in most DTH (except SUN) and most Cable aggregators.
Anish Viswa 04:43, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Responding to the points raised: Availability doesn't satisfy WP:GNG's requirement for significant coverage in independent sources (see WP:NEXIST). The suggestion to improve sources falls under WP:HEY; the key is demonstrating such sources actually exist, which the WP:BEFORE search did not confirm. UNITED BLASTERS (talk) 07:15, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kingsmasher678 (talk) 19:48, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Shekinah TV

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

I am nominating this article for deletion as it Fails WP:GNG due to lack of significant coverage in reliable independent sources; WP:Before search did not find sufficient sourcing. UNITED BLASTERS (talk) 15:44, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, Christianity, and India. Shellwood (talk) 15:46, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Kerala-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:03, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Keep the article and improve the references. Channel is available in most DTH (except SUN) and most Cable aggregators.
Anish Viswa 04:44, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Responding to the points raised: Availability doesn't satisfy WP:GNG's requirement for significant coverage in independent sources (see WP:NEXIST). The suggestion to improve sources falls under WP:HEY; the key is demonstrating such sources actually exist, which the WP:BEFORE search did not confirm. UNITED BLASTERS (talk) 07:14, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kingsmasher678 (talk) 19:48, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Google Giggles

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

Not a real product, and not particularly notable hoax. Some of these sources aren't actually talking about Google Giggles but instead YouTube shorts, some are just talking about a meme. And a few of the sources just have the word Google Giggle together as an alliteration. Bluethricecreamman (talk) 17:22, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and Technology. Bluethricecreamman (talk) 17:22, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 23:07, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kingsmasher678 (talk) 19:46, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Priyansh Jadav

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

Indian singer who doesn't seem to meet notability guidelines. A WP:BEFORE search doesn't come up with any WP:SIGCOV. The is also a possible COI. The article was turned down at AfC several times, after which the creator move it to mainspace. John B123 (talk) 19:24, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Music, and Gujarat. John B123 (talk) 19:24, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Everyoned

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

Everyoned is a supergroup that released one album in 2004. They have a micro article, and the only source could find is this. Two bandmates have a wiki page, so "Everyoned" can be redirected to one of them. LastJabberwocky (talk) 18:50, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Music, and United States of America. LastJabberwocky (talk) 18:50, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Illinois-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:55, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Tim Kinsella, where the group is already mentioned and the found source in the nom could be used; a search on Newspapers.com turned up a couple hits in concert listings which confirm their existence, but nowhere near the SIGCOV required. Nothing on Google either. Jordano^5³ 19:08, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Stefan Pop (Dutch comedian)

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

The sourcing here is at best dubious: some theatrical database, a club and a festival. The subject is likely associated with all three; all three are promotional blurbs. Independent coverage is glaringly absent. — Biruitorul ^Talk 18:11, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Actors and filmmakers. Bobby Cohn (talk) 18:15, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This is the ugly side of Wikipedia. The sources used are qualitative in nature. But to satisfy you I have used a few more sources from the largest newspapers in the Netherlands. I also do not appreciate that you insinuate that I am in any way connected to Stefan Pop. Coriovallum (talk) 18:34, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Netherlands-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:55, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Subhash Khanna

AfDs for this article:

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

My comment in the last AfD discussion was "Subject is middle author on a couple of highly-cited, highly-coauthored papers. I'm not seeing a pass of WP:NPROF C1. The journal editorship is of a new journal [1], which does not pass WP:NPROF C8. Little other sign of notability, and WP:TNT is relevant." I am less certain of TNT, but the rest still holds. Russ Woodroofe (talk) 17:44, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Medicine, and India. Russ Woodroofe (talk) 17:44, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Assam-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:56, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please, check out some research papers authored by him, please, guide me if I am wrong in quoting it, thanks a lot. IQR (talk) 20:09, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Daniel Saks

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

Semi-advertorialized WP:BLP of a writer and musician, not properly referenced as passing inclusion criteria for writers or musicians. As always, writers and musicians are not automatically entitled to have Wikipedia articles just because they exist, and have to pass certain defined notability criteria verified by WP:GNG-worthy coverage about them and their work in reliable sources independent of themselves -- for example, you don't make a writer notable enough for Wikipedia by referencing his books to themselves as circular metaverification of their own existence, you make a writer notable enough for Wikipedia by referencing his books to third-party media coverage about them, such as professional book reviews and/or evidence that they've won or been nominated for major literary awards.
But this essentially just states that his work exists, without documenting anything that would meet WP:NMUSIC or WP:AUTHOR criteria, and it's referenced almost entirely to primary sourcing that isn't support for notability, such as his own podcast and the books metaverifying themselves. The only secondary source cited here at all is a (deadlinked but recoverable) Tiny Desk Concert, which just briefly namechecks his participation in the surrounding text without saying anything substantive about him, and thus isn't sufficient to get him over GNG all by itself.
Nothing here is "inherently" notable enough to exempt him from having to pass GNG on better sourcing than this. Bearcat (talk) 16:46, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Bands and musicians, and United States of America. Bearcat (talk) 16:46, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:56, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Vermont Square Park

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

Park that fails WP:GNG, and is pretty much WP:MILL, It seems like an ordinary local park with nothing special going for it. ロドリゲス恭子 (talk) 16:27, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. ロドリゲス恭子 (talk) 16:27, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:57, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Festival4Stars

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

Singing competition that fails WP:GNG. I was unable to find significant coverage about it. WhoIsCentreLeft (talk) 15:46, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Music and United Kingdom. WhoIsCentreLeft (talk) 15:46, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:58, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Vigor (software)

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

Extreme lack of notability. Stub article. Actual code is just a realization of an idea from a comic strip, and not meant for actual use. Hexware (talk) 15:37, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. Hexware (talk) 15:37, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Democracy Movement (Iceland)

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

Looking through sources that I was able to find online, I did see brief mentions of the party, mostly on visir.is, but did not find any sources that would convice me that the party has received significant coverage in independent sources. Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 15:33, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Politics, Europe, and Iceland. Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 15:33, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Larry Burchart

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

Non-notable pitcher. No sources beyond databases and obituaries. WhoIsCentreLeft (talk) 14:50, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Sportspeople, and United States of America. WhoIsCentreLeft (talk) 14:50, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Clearly notable as an MLB pitcher with nearly 30 games and, as every modern MLB player, plenty of coverage -- e.g. this (p2), this and this. BeanieFan11 (talk) 15:55, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy keep per BeanieFan11. This is why WP:NBASE was helpful. So we didn't have to have these endless debates about everyone ever. ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 16:10, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Oklahoma-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:59, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Khyati Madaan

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

The subject does not fulfill the criteria given in WP:NFILMMAKER. Insufficient in-depth coverage from credible sources. She has only experience in marketing campaigns. Bakhtar40 (talk) 14:39, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Entertainment, and India. Bakhtar40 (talk) 14:39, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and Women. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:00, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Harbinger (film)

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

Paid for promo for non notable film. Lacks coverage in independent reliable sources. No sign of any reviews. Being screened at minor festivals and winning minor awards does not satisfy NFILM. duffbeerforme (talk) 14:34, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 14:49, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

KC Nwakalor

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

Non notable photojournalist whose works are paid for projects by organizations and only attributed to him and the organizations he works for. All of the cited sources do not discuss him and his works directly or indirectly but only attributed to him. The attribution is a standard practice acknowledging copyright owners and cannot be used for notability CPDJay (talk) 13:27, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Journalism, News media, Photography, and Nigeria. CPDJay (talk) 13:27, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and United Kingdom. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 23:09, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:13, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Globus Bank

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

no reliable sources (NCORP), routine or affiliate sources only. Unicorbia (talk) 12:26, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and Nigeria. Shellwood (talk) 12:41, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Finance-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 23:10, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose nominator did not perform WP:Before nomination-- there are a ton of RS sources about this bank available, and as the bank is under a number of allegations for fraud it is considerably notable for Wikipedia. Some sources include 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 the organization fulfills WP:ORG and is notable.Nayyn (talk) 13:25, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:10, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Stonex India

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

The sources cited here lack WP:CORPDEPTH. Lack significant coverage from reliable sources. [1], [2]. These are Indian Business Listing Directories. Others are either self published or not reliable. Bakhtar40 (talk) 14:04, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, India, and Delhi. Bakhtar40 (talk) 14:04, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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

The result was speedy delete per G11 by Bbb23. (non-admin closure)‎ Shellwood (talk) 14:51, 10 April 2025 (UTC).[reply]

MNIKO14

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

Non-notable musician, promotional. ElENdElA (talk) 13:46, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Iran. ElENdElA (talk) 13:46, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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

Thapaswini Poonacha

AfDs for this article:

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

Declined G4. Non-notable actress. This version of the article is drastically different from the previous version which was deleted in 2022. Although it's still in very poor shape, and would need to be completely rewritten if kept. Fails WP:NACTOR. CycloneYoris ^talk! 21:57, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers and India. CycloneYoris ^talk! 21:57, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Women, Food and drink, and Karnataka. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:37, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Response to AfD Discussion: Thapaswini Poonacha

I oppose the deletion of this article on the grounds that Thapaswini Poonacha meets Wikipedia’s notability criteria for actors (WP:NACTOR) and has received significant coverage in multiple independent, reliable sources.

1. Notability as an Actress

Thapaswini Poonacha has been featured in multiple Kannada films, including:

Hari Kathe Alla Giri Kathe (2022) – Available on JioCinema

Gajarama (2025) – Upcoming release on February 7, 2025

Mr. Jack – Upcoming, co-starring Guru Nandan

Rukmini Vasantha – Upcoming, co-starring Shree Mahadev

She has received media attention for her performances and won the Chittara Promising Star Award, which is a notable recognition in the Kannada film industry.

2. Significant Media Coverage

Multiple independent and reliable sources have covered her career and achievements, demonstrating significant coverage beyond passing mentions:

Times of India:

"I do my research before signing a film"

"Not about numbers, want to do memorable movies"

"Roles have to make my soul happy"

The New Indian Express:

"I have no interest in chasing attention"

Kannada Prabha:

"Thapaswini Poonacha: I have no interest in chasing attention"

Hindustan Times Kannada:

"Thapaswini Poonacha in Christmas photoshoot"

These sources demonstrate that Thapaswini Poonacha is consistently covered in reputable media, indicating her notability as an actress and public figure.

3. Business and Coffee Industry Recognition

In addition to her acting career, she is a certified coffee cup tester and runs a coffee business in Coorg. This has been discussed in interviews and media coverage, adding to her notability beyond acting.

4. Conclusion

Thapaswini Poonacha meets WP:NACTOR by virtue of:

✅ Multiple roles in notable Kannada films

✅ Award recognition (Chittara Promising Star Award)

✅ Significant, independent media coverage

✅ Additional recognition in the coffee industry

Given the multiple reliable sources and her growing career in Kannada cinema, deletion is not justified. If improvements are needed, I encourage a rewrite instead of deletion. Akashmdp (talk) 16:37, 3 April 2025 (UTC) — Note to closing admin: Example (talk • contribs) appears to have a close connection with the subject of the article being discussed. [reply]

Agree on multiple roles in notable Kannada films, which is enough for a standalone page, but would you happen to have a source for the award, by any chance? -Mushy Yank. 17:40, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Seen the Youtube video. Added it. A better source might be needed for that, but as notability does not depend on that point (but on her 2 roles), not urgent. Advising you no to repeat the same things nor add long walls of text here or on the page. -Mushy Yank. 18:20, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Did you ask AI to ask if the article should be deleted or not? That might explain why Kannada industry became coffee industry. DareshMohan (talk) 18:06, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: 2 significant roles in (2) notable films (the second has no page yet but at least 3 bylined reviews [see page]) have her meet the requirements for WP:NACTRESS. I have cleaned up the page. -Mushy Yank. 17:20, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep – Thapaswini Poonacha meets WP:NACTRESS by having significant roles in two notable films:

Hari Kathe Alla Giri Kathe (2022) – Recognized and covered in mainstream Kannada media.

Gajarama (2025) – While the film does not yet have its own Wikipedia page, it has received at least three bylined reviews from reliable sources.

Additionally, she has been profiled in multiple independent, reliable sources, including:

Times of India (article)

New Indian Express (article)

Kannada Prabha (article)

Hindustan Times Kannada (article)

Her acting career and coffee business have been independently covered, reinforcing her notability beyond just press releases or promotional content. The page has been cleaned up to meet Wikipedia’s neutrality and sourcing guidelines.

Thus, per WP:GNG and WP:NACTRESS, the article should be kept. Akashmdp (talk) 18:00, 3 April 2025 (UTC) — Note to closing admin: Example (talk • contribs) appears to have a close connection with the subject of the article being discussed. [reply]
The Kannada Prabha piece is more interview. The Vinay Lokesh piece is also interview. These aren't nearly enough, IMHO. I don't see a single presented source which isn't routine entertainment news, mostly quotes. No direct detailing at all. To Akashmdp, repeating your bullet points over and over doesn't make your argument any stronger. You may be convinced, but you need to convince the other editors in this discussion. BusterD (talk) 18:14, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete User:Akashmdp is the page creator AND a paid contributor to this page. As for the sources already applied on the page, cite #2 (Asianet Suvarna News) admits it's a Kannada translation of The Times of India link (cite #1). Both consist entirely of identical quotes from the subject. Interviews do not count towards GNG. The two movie reviews are both (parenthetical) bare mentions, but do confirm the single role. Cite #5 is also an interview with a few bits of routine industry news. The photoshoot linked above is five pics of her in same outfit next to quotes from the actress. If this is all an avowed digital marketing professional with 7+ years of experience in the industry can bring, it's not very impressive to me. BusterD (talk) 17:56, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
For full disclosure, I was the administrator who declined the speedy deletion tag earlier. BusterD (talk) 17:59, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
~~Keep~~ – Meets WP:NACTRESS and WP:GNG.
I would like to address the concerns raised by User:BusterD regarding notability and sources.
Significant Roles in Multiple Notable Films
Hari Kathe Alla Giri Kathe (2022) – A commercially released Kannada film with media coverage.

Gajarama (2025) – Upcoming film, already receiving pre-release coverage.

Mr. Jack & Rukmini Vasantha – Both announced, with media mentions. Under WP:NACTRESS, an actor needs two significant roles in notable films, which she meets.

Coverage in Reliable, Independent Sources
Times of India: Multiple interviews and feature stories.

New Indian Express: Independent reporting on her career.

Hindustan Times (Kannada): Coverage of her work.

Kannada Prabha: Career analysis and industry perspectives. Response to the Source Criticism:

The Times of India article is a primary source, but it is still independent and features her career insights.

The Asianet Suvarna News article may translate TOI but does not invalidate other sources.

Movie reviews confirm her roles, fulfilling minimum WP:NACTRESS requirements.

The New Indian Express piece is not just an interview; it provides analysis of her trajectory.

Photoshoot coverage, while not the strongest evidence, still indicates media attention.

Regarding Paid Editing Allegations
While User:Akashmdp may have created the page, the subject’s notability stands independently.

Wikipedia has a system for COI disclosures, but that does not automatically invalidate an article’s merits.

Even if a paid editor initiated the page, the subject’s career must be evaluated separately from who added the content.

Conclusion
Thapaswini Poonacha meets both WP:GNG and WP:NACTRESS based on her coverage and career milestones.

The article has been cleaned up to remove promotional tone and improve sourcing.

If further citations or refinements are needed, that can be worked on, but outright deletion is unnecessary.
Thus, the article should be kept. Akashmdp (talk) 18:12, 3 April 2025 (UTC) — Note to closing admin: Example (talk • contribs) appears to have a close connection with the subject of the article being discussed. [reply]
Now you're screaming. You have made your argument. Let others speak. Mushy Yank can be helpful here. Consult with them. BusterD (talk) 18:16, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This article has significantly changed since its AfD nomination. -Mushy Yank. 20:01, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Passes Wp:GNG and Wp:NACTRESS. Multiple significant roles in notable movies and multiple significant coverage in WP:RS, both are available. Zuck28 (talk) 01:34, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep: As per above discussion and my search on the subject find this: [3], [4], [5] B-Factor (talk) 12:41, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
~~Weak Keep~~

Thank you, B-Factor, for your input. The references you provided—Times of India, Cinema Express, and The New Indian Express—are credible sources that establish Thapaswini Poonacha’s notability as an actress in Kannada cinema.

These sources provide coverage of her career, film roles, and interviews, which meet Wikipedia’s General Notability Guidelines (GNG). Additionally, her role in upcoming films like Gajarama shows ongoing relevance.

I believe the page should be retained, but I am open to improving it by adding more citations or restructuring content for better compliance with Wikipedia standards.

Looking forward to further discussion. Akashmdp (talk) 17:47, 4 April 2025 (UTC) — Note to closing admin: Example (talk • contribs) appears to have a close connection with the subject of the article being discussed. [reply]
@Akashmdp Is your !vote Keep or Weak Keep? (You don't need to repeat identical arguments over and over, even if it's to thank someone -we understood your point, I guess-, which is perfectly fine, though) Inviting you to "remove" your "Weak Keep" above (with ~~strikethrough~~) (So that it appears ~~Weak Keep~~) if your !vote (the only thing that should be bolded (theorically :D) in a !vote) is indeed Keep. And Gajarama is NOT an upcoming film, mind you. It was released in February and has received multiple reviews in reliable media outlets, this being one of the main arguments (with her other significant role) in favour of retention of the page. -Mushy Yank. 18:53, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, thank you for your kind suggestion. Yes, I was confused. Gajarams is released. I am sorry for that. Should I update that in the page? Also, there is no option to remove keep with strike. Should I send new reply regarding that? Akashmdp (talk) 15:55, 6 April 2025 (UTC) — Note to closing admin: Example (talk • contribs) appears to have a close connection with the subject of the article being discussed. [reply]

It’s OK, done it for you. The film is clearly indicated as released in the article so there’s no problem. -Mushy Yank. 17:57, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much. If you don’t mind, can you tell me what should I do next? Is the article live? Nomination header is still there. Akashmdp (talk) 18:26, 6 April 2025 (UTC) — Note to closing admin: Example (talk • contribs) appears to have a close connection with the subject of the article being discussed. [reply]

Just be patient :D. The discussion will take place until April 9 at least. The nomination tag will remain until the discussion is closed and a consensus (to retain/delete/redirect/draftify) is clear. Nothing to do in particular here; feel free to list new sources on the talk page if you find some and think they are useful to expand the page. Best, -Mushy Yank. 18:58, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

In the meantime, if you wish and can, you could upload a quality photograph of this actress if you can find one that corresponds to the guidelines explained in Wikipedia:Images. Be particularly mindful of copyright and legal issues if you can find one. Please note that the potential insertion of an image is totally unrelated to notability questions and that it will not change a thing in the current discussion. -Mushy Yank. 19:09, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. How long does it take to index on google? Akashmdp (talk) 08:08, 9 April 2025 (UTC) — Note to closing admin: Example (talk • contribs) appears to have a close connection with the subject of the article being discussed. [reply]

From their frequent use of the phrase, it appears Akashmdp gets paid when the page indexes. This was not written by an LLM, at least. BusterD (talk) 18:32, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Passes WP:NACTRESS who has worked as female lead in two films that have been released. Page needs to be improved though with secondary independent reliable sources. Sources with interviews are not independent of the subject. RangersRus (talk) 15:16, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: at the suggestion of another editor, I ran GPTZero on User:Akashmdp's extended posts in this discussion. They each came up 100% LLM created. BusterD (talk) 18:19, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yes I had used LLM to improvise my article since my english is not upto the par. So much allegations on me, I am the friend of Thapaswini, I am marketer by profession but doesn’t mean I am charging Thapaswini. I can provide any proof that she is my friend. I am solely doing this for a good will. If you insist me to add COI paid or something, I really don’t mind until it doesn’t affect our article. And I still stand on my stance that I am not being paid. In future I might write an article which will be paid I hope, that time I would definitely mention it. And this is my first article and I am still a noob. I would be expecting you people help rather than defending it. @Mushy Yank@BusterD please check this out.

Thank you Akashmdp (talk) 06:34, 10 April 2025 (UTC) — Note to closing admin: Example (talk • contribs) appears to have a close connection with the subject of the article being discussed. [reply]
Delete - The "two" significant roles argument is good as long as there is significant coverage on the subject themself. Simply having sources verifying a role is not enough. The sourcing here is no better than it was in the first two deletion discussions (mentions, NEWSORGINDIA, or otherwise unreliable). Apparently there are two other films they are involved in. Maybe when there is more coverage of them there will be more coverage of this subject. Until then, it is a case of TOOSOON. --CNMall41 (talk) 22:11, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Aside from the LLVM generated content, the views of experienced editors are split between keeping and deleting. Another week getting views of other editors is needed.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 13:44, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Per above. WhoIsCentreLeft (talk) 14:31, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unsure - whilst it is true she’s been an actor in two films, it’s not really clear that these are notable even in the context of Indian cinema where it appears more than 100 Kannada language films are released per year. It is true there are reviews from Indian newspapers, but these suggest that the critical reviews were not good. It seems plausible to me that Indian actors might only be considered notable if they’ve been in movies that are particularly notable. The use of LLM and closeness to the subject strongly suggests that the !keep votes above are clouding the issue. JMWt (talk) 15:27, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: passes WP:NACTOR (barely, but still...). The subject also passes WP:GNG. The sourcing appears good - at least two of them are WP:RS, and the coverage is significant enough to warrant an article. I agree that the page needs to be improved, though.--DesiMoore (talk) 15:34, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Reliable sources do not necessary mean significant coverage. Which references show the person meets WP:BASIC as that is still a requirement given the WP:NACTOR guideline says " meeting one or more does not guarantee that a subject should be included."--CNMall41 (talk) 16:13, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yutaro Yoshino

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

With 7 J3 appearances, [6], he doesn't seem notable, but as he played in Brazil briefly there may be stuff out there. RossEvans19 (talk) 13:07, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, Japan, and Brazil. RossEvans19 (talk) 13:07, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Corresponding article on Japanese Wikipedia only consists of routine announcements. ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 14:54, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Strong keep - Have fleshed out article with two in-depth articles detailing his time in Brazil, as well as multiple other smaller articles. Meets GNG. Zênite (talk) 16:05, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - Oh wow, fantastic additions Zênite! I would be very happy to keep the article now after the WP:HEY. I can't speedy close this due to Clara's delete but I will ping @Clariniie: to ask her to look at it again :) RossEvans19 (talk) - 17:41, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Masato Hashimoto

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

Prod previously declined. 13 J3 appearances before playing the rest of their career in non league. Has not played since 2023. Fails GNG. RossEvans19 (talk) 13:03, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Japan. RossEvans19 (talk) 13:03, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Corresponding article on Japanese Wikipedia only consists of routine announcements. ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 14:53, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yutaro Masuda

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

Prod previously declined. Made only 13 professional appearances, the rest are non league. [7] Fails GNG. RossEvans19 (talk) 13:02, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Japan. RossEvans19 (talk) 13:02, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Journal of Rudolph Friederich Kurz

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

No refs on the page for many years. Nothing much found which shows that the book has much notability outwith of Rudolf Friedrich Kurz and therefore seems to be an unnecessary fork JMWt (talk) 11:36, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Literature, Mississippi, and Missouri. Shellwood (talk) 13:35, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Not sure about the journal itself, but its translations have been reviewed abundantly, which to me demonstrates its notability. The version edited by J. N. B. Hewitt, Myrtis Jarrell has been reviewed in Ethnohistory (here), and the The Mississippi Valley Historical Review (here). There also seems to be a review in Anthropos (here), but the page is blank for some reason, even though highlighting it shows there is text. A different version, edited by Carla Kelly, and titled ON THE UPPER MISSOURI: The Journal of Rudolph Friederich Kurz, 1851-1852 has been reviewed in Journal of the West (here). ARandomName123 (talk)^{Ping me!} 21:17, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I would say that a review for the translation could be considered a review for the journal. I suppose that a good question to ask here, however, is whether or not the journal really needs to be covered separately from its author. As far as I can tell, it looks like this is his big claim to fame, so the question here is this:

The author is pretty much best known for his journals. The book in question is his collected journals. Does this really need to be covered in two articles or can we do it adequately in one? Everything in the journal article appears to be in the article on the author, more or less. The only thing that's missing is the quote.

My personal thought is that we redirect this to the author's page. We flesh out the article and create a new section that is specifically for the translations and publication history of the journals. Basically, the life section covers the experiences and the new section would cover the more technical stuff like translations, publication history, and so on. ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (｡◕‿◕｡) 20:19, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:22, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to author, Rudolf Friedrich Kurz, as a subsection of that article. Per ReaderofthePack, basically. If this gets too long we could spin it back out again, but that seems unlikely. I recognize that ReaderofthePack was suggesting a redirect because everything in the journal article appears to be in the article on the author, more or less, but I think it's better to have a separate section that highlights this info, at least until the parent article is expanded. -- asilvering (talk) 05:15, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Guerillero ^{Parlez Moi} 11:45, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Vision: The Journal of Business Perspective

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

Nothing much on the page to suggest the notability criteria have been met and I'm not finding much else to consider. WP:NJOURNAL is an essay and a bit opaque but I'm not seeing anything there that this journal unambiguously fits for inclusion. JMWt (talk) 06:43, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. JMWt (talk) 06:43, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

To add: the editor that worked on this page also worked on a number of other journals from the same publisher. Which seems a bit suspicious (of COI editing) given they didn't seem to do anything else in their editing history. JMWt (talk) 06:47, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Journal is indexed and fairly well-ranked in SCOPUS. Keep per WP:NJOURNALS. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 07:54, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academic journals-related deletion discussions. Nobody (talk) 08:09, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The journal is listed in Clarivate and Scopus. According to the Journal Citation Reports, it has a ranking of 136 out of 304 in the category of Business and 177 out of 407 in the category of Management.[8] Hence, it is not an insignificant journal and can pass WP:GNG. Nanosci (talk) 22:58, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: To discuss whether Scopus is sufficient for notability
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 11:36, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

My question is about the above (assuming that the numbers are correct); so there are more than 300 business journals and 400 management journals in the system. Are we saying all 300 business and 400 management journals are notable? Or the best 10%? Or some number? For me, I don't think anything outside of the top 25% of anything can be considered "the best" or "the most notable" in common language. JMWt (talk) 13:08, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Coinswitch

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

The company does not meet the notability criteria per WP:CORP due to a lack of significant coverage as required by WP:SIGCOV. The sources mentioned are trivial mentions and promotional in nature, failing to provide the depth needed to establish notability. Veeranshi Jha (talk) 10:52, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Veeranshi Jha (talk) 10:52, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 12:54, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Cryptocurrency and Karnataka. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:02, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Guy Schwartz

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

Lack of any notability whatsoever - prior print sources were bogus and unverifiable. Biased and POV statements littered throughout the article and the subject has flaunted said article on social media (facebook) many times. Large chunk of contributions to the article are from suspicious anonymous IP addresses that have only edited that page, as well as Guy Schwartz's own wikipedia account. Subject has not established notability and this page should be deleted. Brandonac4473 (talk) 09:08, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Politicians, Journalism, Television, New Jersey, and Texas. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:47, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Well, the article is unsourced, so that's of no help. I don't find anything for sourcing. Could be notable, but the lack of any kind of sourcing isn't helpful. Could be a hoax or an LLM article for all I know. Could likely speedy this. Oaktree b (talk) 14:47, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment is the nominator the ip who removed the references which are shown here on the basis that they were bogus such as the Houston Press?. However, I did find this piece in the Houston Press here so maybe they weren't as bogus as is claimed, imv Atlantic306 (talk) 21:59, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep also found these other Houston Press articles about him here, here,here, here, here, and here. Going by this evidence the other references removed such as Billboard may be genuine as well, imv Atlantic306 (talk) 22:21, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
For the record, yes I am the user who called the Houston press in an attempt to independently verify the articles he cited on his own wikipedia page - none of those print articles existed according to them.

Your first link to houston press is talking about MARTY schwartz, not Guy Schwartz - Marty is a youtuber with infinitely more notoriety.

Of the rest of the articles you linked, guy schwartz is the main subject of only TWO of those articles - and not to mention, they are all by the same publication. Which per WP:GNG - "Multiple publications from the same author or organization are usually regarded as a single source for the purposes of establishing notability."

The only cited source within the entire article that I could find that had any direct ties to guy schwartz was yet another Houston Press article from 2007 entitled "South By Due East↵Racket heads for Austin as Guy Schwartz and M. Martin bicker over the history of a local festival" and it was incorrectly cited for a statement that claimed they have been running said festival since 2003 - which the article mentions nowhere. Thus why I pulled it from the article.

Perhaps Guy Schwartz could write a new wikipedia page about himself with info from those two articles that he is the subject of, appropriately citing things that are within those articles for the information therein. But the article as it stands is a plethora of wild unsupported claims - such as claims of a 2016 presidential campaign that are based in nothing but fantasy. Claiming he toured with Duran Duran, Todd Rundgren and Huey Lewis.

If Guy Schwartz was truly notable, then one would think he would manage more than a couple articles in Houston Press about his band. Brandonac4473 (talk) 09:17, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Also, the Billboard references I confirmed were bogus through online archives of those issues he claimed he was in.

It also doesnt change the fact that none of those articles you linked were cited within the page. Had they been, this may have been a different story. Albeit the issue still stands: Per WP:GNG "Multiple publications from the same author or organization are usually regarded as a single source for the purposes of establishing notability." Brandonac4473 (talk) 10:12, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your response, I've removed the Marty Schwartz reference. Agree more sources are required, imv Atlantic306 (talk) 19:25, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If you agree more sources are required for notability, then please consider changing your recommendation to delete. Brandonac4473 (talk) 03:12, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Kindly remove the bold in your request as it might be considered a !vote and it is assumed that nominators are generally in favour of deletion and cannot !vote. ◇Not sure it is appropriate to ask a voter to change their suggestion the way you did, but maybe that’s not an issue. -Mushy Yank. 18:22, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

My apologies - unbolded that word.

They can obviously do whatever they want, but I figured asking them to reconsider their vote would be appropriate considering that they now agree with the basis of my issue with the article to begin with - that more sources are needed. Brandonac4473 (talk) 20:20, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not yet fully convinced that additional sources do not exist so am sticking with my keep vote pending further evidence, imv Atlantic306 (talk) 21:18, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Houston Chronicle has bits of coverage about him; including this presenting him as "an icon of the Houston scene". -Mushy Yank. 00:11, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

(and same media: https://www.chron.com/entertainment/music/article/guy-schwartz-new-jack-hippies-1979508.php (based on an interview)+ or this (short/similar to first and with similar appraisal, "a Houston institution"); this interview at Rag Radio (with an extensive presentation) (see WP:INTERVIEWS, an essay) can serve is this is kept to expand and verify. So that imv, he might meet one or two of the inclusion criteria as defined in the guideline about WP:Notability (music), namely:

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

(excludes interviews) and/or, more likely:

"Has become one of the most prominent representatives of a notable style or the most prominent of the local scene of a city"

Houston is a city. GS, at 73, seems to be listed among the most prominent Americana musicians of its local scene. Ergo (weak) keep? If kept, the article, currently tag-bombed, should be cleaned up. -Mushy Yank. 00:31, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Do any of these articles you linked support the plethora of claims made throughout the article?

This is why my attempts to verify them were so exhaustive. There are no credible sources for him having ran a 2016 presidential campaign, no credible sources for having toured with Duran Duran or Huey Lewis.

He might've passed WP:GNG if those articles were properly cited within the article but they weren't cited at all.

And Houston Chronicle calling his band an "icon" is a stretch particularly when their latest "music video" has 48 views on youtube. link

Houston Chronicle is open for business btw for paid promotions. Brandonac4473 (talk) 04:38, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Even if notability is established, WP:NDELETE still says a wikipedia article must cite sources for whatever information it presents - regardless of notability.

The entirety of the article is filled with unverifiable claims. He still doesn't pass WP:GNG in my opinion but the criteria to delete the page has absolutely been met per WP:NDELETE even if he is truly notable. Brandonac4473 (talk) 09:16, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Feel free to fix it, then and remove everything you think is inappropriate (please do not WP:BLANK the page, though). As for the idea that a page about a "truly notable subject" should (or even could) be deleted because the page has no sources cited, although sources exist (and in the case of an/this AfD, especially if sources are presented!!!!), I am very sorry, but: ABSOLUTELY NOT!

Just read Wikipedia:Notability#Notability_is_based_on_the_existence_of_suitable_sources,_not_on_the_state_of_sourcing_in_an_article, which is a WP:guideline. "WP:NDELETE" is an essay (="the advice or opinions of one [..] Wikipedia contributor[s]", not a policy or guideline). You are totally free to cite it and it is not a problem, but it has little, if any, weight as an argument to delete a page. (I completely disagree with that essay, personally, and find it is full of wild and reckless assertions). Also, articles that do not pass WP:GNG but meet a given WP:SNG may be kept, depending on the case. Best, -Mushy Yank. 10:43, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, so you disagree with WP:NDELETE, thats fine.

Do you think Guy Schwartz meets WP:SIGCOV?

A brief mention in a list of other houston musicians seems like a trivial mention. Brandonac4473 (talk) 22:09, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: fails WP:N. The phoney 2016 presidential campaign with no citations to back it up says everything to me. Nominator appears to have tried to independently verify the print articles thoroughly. My own searching of “Guy Schwartz” on the internet doesnt produce much either, except for his wiki page. Non-notable. Brenae wafato (talk) 21:56, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment found this here about his supposed 2016 Presidential bid but he doesn't seem to have made the ballot according to official records, imv Atlantic306 (talk) 19:07, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

so this guy connected with me on a site called ome.tv and one of the first things he told me to do was check his wikipedia page, trying to tell me he was famous. i googled him and literally this was the only thing i found on him. given that... seems like he shouldnt have a wikipedia page LOL. he has no followers or coverage anywhere else.

i saw the notification at the top of his article inviting me to leave an opinion..

so i'd say delete but i also dont know how wikipedia works. but this guy is not famous or notable and definitely shouldnt have a wikipedia page if he just goes around telling random people to check it out and has no real coverage anywhere else lmao. 24.27.40.108 (talk) 05:03, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Need more input from other experienced editors
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 10:49, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Mohammed Altoumaimi

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

Does not pass any notability criterion. Not reliably sourced D.Lazard (talk) 09:48, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators and Mathematics. D.Lazard (talk) 09:48, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Fails WP:PROF. Tito Omburo (talk) 09:54, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I believe the article about Mohammed Altoumaimi should be kept, as he meets several notability criteria outlined in Wikipedis guideline on notability for academics (WP:PROF).

To begin with, there is significant coverage in reliable, independent sources. As early as 2009, Altoumaimi was featured in major Swedish national media such as Dagens Nyheter and SVT, where he was recognized as a young mathematical prodigy. This early recognition indicates that his notability is not recent or fleeting.

In addition, he has academic contributions that demonstrate active engagement in research. He has authored peer-reviewed work in the fields of theoretical physics and applied mathematics, including a 2025 publication available on arXiv (arXiv:2502.12205). This shows sustained academic activity and relevance.

Furthermore, Altoumaimi public and academic presence has been consistent for over a decade, satisfying the criterion of enduring notability, as he has remained relevant both in media and in academic circles.

Based on these points, he clearly meets at least two of the WP:PROF criteria:

1. He has made a significant impact in his academic field.

2. He has received substantial coverage in multiple independent, reliable sources.

While the article could benefit from structural improvements and additional citations such as including sections on his biography, academic career, and list of publication it meets Wikipedias standards for notability and should not be deleted. 217.65.132.36 (talk) 10:42, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There is no evidence that he has made a significant impact on his scholarly field. He has not received any coverage in reliable scholarly sources. Tito Omburo (talk) 10:45, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Iraq and Sweden. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:46, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete until RS about this prodigy are found. Xxanthippe (talk) 11:38, 10 April 2025 (UTC).[reply]

Mohammed Altoumaimi received substantial coverage in multiple reliable, independent sources in 2009 when, as a 16-year-old Iraqi immigrant in Sweden, he developed a mathematical formula related to Bernoulli numbers. This achievement was verified by Uppsala University senior mathematics lecturer Lars-Åke Lindahl and reported in multiple international news outlets including The Local, Al Arabiya, and UPI.com, satisfying Wikipedia's General Notability Guideline.According to Wikipedia's guidelines, "Notability is not temporary." Altoumaimi established notability in 2009 through significant media coverage of a substantial achievement verified by academic experts, not a trivial or fleeting event.Altoumaimi has continued his academic career with his 2025 publication "A Rigid Beam Acting in the Shearing Manner to the Quasi-Crystalline Half-Space," demonstrating ongoing contribution to mathematics and showing his early promise led to a sustained academic career.His story has significant educational and inspirational value, particularly for young people from immigrant backgrounds, enriching Wikipedia's coverage of diverse contributors to mathematics.I propose the article be retained with improvements to its structure and sourcing, with a potential review in one year to incorporate any new developments in his academic career. Mohammed Altoumaimi clearly satisfied Wikipedia's notability requirements through significant coverage in reliable sources. His continued academic activity and the educational value of his story provide strong grounds for retaining this article. 94.191.137.26 (talk) 19:20, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete One fluff article does not satisfy WP:GNG, and professionally he is nowhere near WP:PROF yet. --Elmidae (talk · contribs)

Jenna McCarthy

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

Fails WP:GNG and WP:BIO. References limited to self-published sources. Lacks significant coverage in multiple, reliable and independent publications. WP:BEFORE search turned up little beyond self-published sources, book lists and one TED talk recording. Geoff | ^{Who, me?} 19:30, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Women, Florida, and New York. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:41, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Disagree with nomination. Jenna is linked to sources besides her own. She is an advocate for the truth as shown in the substack article referenced on her page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MikeJMyhre (talk • contribs) 18:57, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Just to note that substack isn't a reliable source, so this has been removed. No comment on the notability of McCarthy. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested «@» °∆t° 15:07, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

KEEP Jenna has a large national following from her books and TED talks, and a wonderful daily satire page on Substack. 2600:1700:79B0:F740:64D5:6B98:4232:4CDB (talk) 23:39, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

*Delete Agree with the nomination. Tried my own search and only found references from primary sources (author, publisher) + her Tedx talk. Don't consider reviews from Kirkus reviews to be significant due to potential to pay for review.

Anonrfjwhuikdzz (talk) 23:32, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I also pointed out that the conspiracy theorist label was wrong. They claimed that I was not presenting a neutral point of view. Below are my comments:

My comments were a neutral point of view. The text I was trying to change said:

"Jenna McCarthy is an American conspiracy theorist." with no links or arguments to support the claim.

I tried to change it to "Jenna McCarthy has been called an American conspiracy theorist." which is true without argument or need for support.

I then also included an article from Jenna McCarthy that explained what are and are not conspiracy theories. This of course was her opinion which was explained in my edit. To not include any relevant arguments and simply claim that 'she is a conspiracy theorist' is not a neutral point of view. You can't remove my edits trying to correct your current bias and claim that I don't have a neutral view 24.143.78.9 (talk) 16:19, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: The article no longer mentions the "conspiracy theorist" label. In any case, this is not relevant to whether the article should be deleted. Geoff | ^{Who, me?} 16:29, 27 March 2025 (UTC) [reply]

Are you sure this wasn't nominated for deletion because I pointed out that it was libelous to call someone a "conspiracy theorist"? I see you changed THAT. Hmmmmm. 2600:1700:60:1170:896B:C934:647B:6353 (talk) 01:50, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep - I see a few articles on Google news here and there. Also, herein is a brief description of her TED talk on their website. This is not an endorsement of her views on anything. Bearian (talk) 01:09, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The body of work consists of material that in the past has been censored and dismissed as "conspiracy based". But as with most COVID "conspriacies", much of it has turned out to be true. No downside to keeping, and not a good look to continue censoring. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dmatich (talk • contribs) 16:01, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed MikeJMyhre (talk) 18:59, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: This looks like the person we're discussing [9] and would be a book review, but one isn't enough. I don't find anything else about this person, this likely doesn't pass AUTHOR. (talk) 20:13, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: per nom, Oaktree b, and Anonrfjwhuikdzz. This subject does not pass WP:GNG or WP:ANYBIO on multiple reliable sources, and reviews do not appear to support WP:NAUTHOR. JFHJr (㊟) 22:50, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment, she does appear to be a prolific writer, according to Baker & Taylor Author Biographies: McCarthy is a writer whose work has appeared in more than 40 national and international magazines including: Allure, Parenting, Shape, Fit Pregnancy, Babytalk, Glamour, Seventeen, New Parent, Real Simple, New Woman, Self, and in anthologies such as the popular Chicken Soup series. She's had a decent amount of book reviews, and she co-authored (with Pierre Kory), a top-ten national bestseller. I found a lot of newspapers that quoted her and/or mentioned her books, but no significant coverage about her – that I could find. So I'm neutral on whether to keep or delete the article.

Lola Knows A Lot. Kirkus Reviews, 6/1/2016, Vol. 84, Issue 11, page 129
Lola Knows a Lot. Publishers Weekly, 3/28/2016, Vol. 263, Issue 13, page 89
If It Was Easy, They'd Call the Whole Damn Thing a Honeymoon: Living With and Loving the TV-Addicted, Sex-Obsessed, Not-So-Handy Man You Married. Publishers Weekly. 8/22/2011, Vol. 258 Issue 34, pages 57-58
If It Was Easy, They'd Call the Whole Damn Thing a Honeymoon: Living With and Loving the TV-Addicted, Sex-Obsessed, Not-So-Han:dy Man You Married. Kirkus Reviews. 10/15/2011, Vol. 79 Issue 20, page 1905
If It Was Easy, They'd Call the Whole Damn Thing a Honeymoon: Living With and Loving the TV-Addicted, Sex-Obsessed, Not-So-Han:dy Man You Married. St. Petersburg Times, 10/23/2011, page 7L
Jenna McCarthy discusses her book, "If It Was Easy, They'd Call The Whole Damn Thing A Honeymoon". 2011, Today Show
Poppy Louise Is Not Afraid of Anything. Publishers Weekly, 2/13/2017, Vol. 264, Issue 7, page 73
Poppy Louise Is Not Afraid of Anything. Booklist, 2/15/2017, Vol. 113, Issue 12, page 83
The Parent Trip: From High Heels and Parties to High Chairs and Potties. Foreword Magazine, May-June 2008
Maggie Malone and the Mostly Magical Boots. The Bulletin of the Center for Children's Books, July-August 2014, Vol. 67, Issue 11, pages 585-586
Maggie Malone and the Mostly Magical Boots. Library Media Connection, January-February 2015, Vol. 33, Issue 4, page 58
War on Ivermectin: The Medicine that Saved Millions and Could Have Ended the Pandemic. co-author with Pierre Kory, June 2023 – Top 10 National Bestseller (data from independent and chain bookstores, book wholesalers and independent distributors nationwide - Publishers Weekly) ProQuest 2826943152 – Isaidnoway (talk) 06:21, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I had a look and AFAICT neither of the Kirkus reviews are part of the paid Kirkus indie programme [10] [11] Nil Einne (talk) 12:49, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. (presumably) writing nonsense about covid is not a reason for deletion. The question is whether she's notable enough for a Wikipedia entry. Given her publication list she seems notable as an author to me, hence she should be kept. Keep in mind notability of authors/journalists/writers is not an assessment of the quality or correctness of their work.--Kmhkmh (talk) 08:10, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep Searching newspapers.com, I found one review, of The Parent Trip [12], and several other articles where she, or one of her books, is quoted [13], [14], [15]. So there's the review I found, the one that Oaktree b and Bearian found, the Foreword Magazine review, St. Petersburg Times review, and the Kirkus Reviews and Publishers Weekly reviews that Isaidnoway found. That's not a lot, for such a prolific author, but it's probably just enough for a pass of WP:NAUTHOR. RebeccaGreen (talk) 14:27, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:28, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep Updating my vote based on sources that others have found. Given her writing on ivermectin, I do think it would be appropriate for the article to include some mention of McCarthy promoting use of ivermectin for COVID despite the lack of quality evidence. Whether or not that includes the specific label of conspiracy theorist will depend on secondary sources about her.

Anonrfjwhuikdzz (talk) 23:01, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete agree with the nomination. Upon some research, her first PRIMARY source is literally a medium article written by her with the intent of amending her own wikipedia page.

Writing an article about yourself on medium with the intent of using it as a citable source absolutely fails WP:GNG - it is clear she is non-notable else why would she go through the lengths to do this?

The only other sources are a dead link, her TED talk (which can be paid promotion), and her own website.

Non-Notable. Arguably should qualify for speedy deletion. Brenae wafato (talk) 22:34, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. No WP:SIGCOV of the author herself in the book reviews that @RebeccaGreen cited or that @Isaidnoway researched. Writing nonsense about Covid is not a reason for deletion, but it's also not a reason for inclusion, either. Maybe someone will publish an article about her as an author/contributor at some point, but it's WP:TOOSOON to keep this now. BBQboffin^{grill me} 00:01, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 09:38, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Delete per nomination. Article is fails under WP:GNG and WP:BIO.

Two Sevens

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

Lack of notability Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 20:21, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Music, Popular culture, and England. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 20:31, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of News media-related deletion discussions. -Mushy Yank. 09:26, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to John King (author): or to Peter Mason (journalist), mentioned there. And in time, if secondary sources are added, expand back into a page (Redirect with possibilities). -Mushy Yank. 09:30, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Two different Redirect target articles suggested here. Any more support for either one?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:23, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 09:37, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ramadan in Turkey

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

This is one of a series of articles by the same editor; I'd bundle them if I knew how. All the articles are like this, they are not about Ramadan customs peculiar to one country but are merely descriptions of common customs. The long list of foods (I've edited out the more preposterous bits) are likewise merely lists of commonn foods of the country, such as (in this case) kebaps. TheLongTone (talk) 14:09, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Islam, and Turkey. Shellwood (talk) 14:59, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Prob delete - seems to me that the topic likely is notable in the sense that there probably are distinctive Turkish cultural practices during this religious time. But I'm also not convinced that the page, as it is currently framed, addresses that. Maybe someone else could try again later and make a better stab. JMWt (talk) 15:53, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and do the same with all the other articles (or at least draftify). Agree with nom and JMWt that, from what I know about Ramadan and Turkish culture and from looking at the sources, much of the content is pretty generic and not necessarily specific to Turkey. The sources are not the highest quality don't really specify what makes Turkish observances unique among countries. Obviously social visits and common dinners are not any different from elsewhere. The author just translated this from Arabic wiki, but it's pretty poor writing to say lentil soup or lahmacun are Ramadan food when Turks eat these every day (if I'm wrong, the article should be clearer). Ramadan#Cultural practices is quite short and should be expanded to cover the instances where there are significant practices that may not be universal, perhaps expanded to a Ramadan by country page or similar that puts differences in context, but not standalone articles. I mean, Ramadan in the United States does have a couple US-specific facts, but then generic crap that there are Tarawih prayers just like everywhere else! Reywas92^Talk 17:25, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: This article have been created as part of the Wiki Loves Ramadan Editathon. The articles hav been created in various languages in addition to English. Tuhin (talk) 17:50, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The topic is covered in many English-language books, not all of which are accessible through Google Books, but here are a few: How to Be Amazing at Speaking Turkish: Mastering the Heart of Türkiye [16], beginning of Chapter 7; Intellectuals in the Modern Islamic World: Transmission, Transformation, Communication [17] (the index shows that Ramadan in Turkey is covered on page 298, which is not part of the preview); World and Its Peoples Volume 1 [18] (again, the index lists Ramadan in Turkey on page 835, which is not shown in the preview). This book Introduction to Ramadan [19] may not be reliable (it looks self-published) but has info about Ramadan in Turkey which could be used to search for other sources (eg lighting traditional Ottoman lanterns apparently called fenerbahcesi). There are also several articles and chapters - "Celebratıon of Ramadan: The Case of Turkey" [20], "Does Ramadan Affect Happiness? Evidence from Turkey" [21]; "Aspects of Underlying Ramadan Consumption Patterns in Turkey" [22]; "Evaluation of the impact of the month of Ramadan on traffic accidents" [23]; "Can Religiosity be Sensed with Satellite Data? An Assessment of Luminosity during Ramadan in Turkey" [24]; etc. The topic is clearly notable - I don't think the fact that this article could be improved and expanded is a reason to delete it. I note that this article has been translated from the corresponding article in Arabic. Turkish Wikipedia seems not to have a specific article about Ramazan in Türkiye, but the article on Ramazan has some info specific to Turkey. RebeccaGreen (talk) 13:57, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 09:36, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep; Ramadan holds significant cultural and religious importance in Turkey, with unique traditions like Mahya, special communal prayers, and festive street celebrations. The article provides valuable insights into the social, cultural, and religious aspects of Ramadan, reflecting the impact on daily life and tourism in Turkey. Deleting this article would remove important information about a key cultural practice in Turkey, and it should be preserved and expanded. Also supported with Reliable Sources and passing WP:GNG. 1947inYamama (talk) 10:53, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Pathankot Campaign

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

Article describes a 1775 clash between Sikh Misls but fails to show its a distinct, notable event beyond skirmishes already covered in articles like Kanhaiya Misl, Bhangi Misl, or Sikh Confederacy. "Pathankot Campaign" isn’t a recognized term in historical scholarship, also WP:RS don’t treat it as a standalone event separate from typical inter-Misl strife. It leans on a narrow set of sources, like Gandhi (1999) and Gupta (1939), lack the mainstream weight or specificity to confirm details. NXcrypto Message 10:21, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Military, India, Pakistan and Punjab. NXcrypto Message 10:21, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events and Sikhism. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:42, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete No evidence of meeting WP:GNG and WP:SIGCOV. The so-called "Pathankot Campaign" is itself made up. Abhishek0831996 (talk) 10:45, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Yet another revenge nomination, [25][26][27] lol. Just take all of my articles for deletion. Not to mention the nominator has used AI to write this frivolous rationale. Like they don't even bother to go through Pathankot Campaign#References. Check these sources: (2 pages), (2 pages). Heraklios 16:42, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Haha, this is kinda funny to me, few days back, some dude was all over me for grammar slip-ups, and now this! Anyway, seems like you’re pretty worked up and running low on solid points. I did my WP:BEFORE check before tossing this article up for deletion. Check it yourself: Google Books (nothing relevant), Google Scholar (nothing), normal search (nothing), News articles(empty too). Looks to me like its got zero notability in mainstream sources. NXcrypto Message 20:05, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I’ve never even crossed paths with you, so don’t go saying this is some revenge nomination, that's nonsense. NXcrypto Message 20:21, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You’re pointing to these Internet Archive links like they’re gold:[28] and [29], but let’s be real, its just Hari Ram Gupta again, and that’s a shaky leg to stand on. Gupta’s stuff, like from 1939/1944 or whenever, isn’t some mainstream heavyweight and doesn’t prove “Pathankot Campaign” is a legit standalone thing. I dug through WP:BEFORE, Google Books, Scholar, news, nothing calls this a distinct event. You wanna keep it? Show me something solid, some mainstream scholar references, not just Gupta’s dusty WP:RAJ work. NXcrypto Message 20:55, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It's real bold to talk like this after someone has already accused you of using AI to format the deletion rationale. -- asilvering (talk) 05:45, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Not only the subject fails GNG but the article is seemingly pushing ethnic POV. Raymond3023 (talk) 11:57, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Then shouldn't it just be rewritten if the tone is biased? - OpalYosutebito 『talk』『articles I want to eat』 20:02, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep; there seems to be some significant and reliable coverage from scholars, historians, etc. The article looks a little biased, and there are some strong words like "enraged", but a rewrite can fix that - OpalYosutebito 『talk』『articles I want to eat』 20:11, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
You will have to cite the sources you believe have provided enough coverage. I don't see any scholarly sources that have. NXcrypto Message 07:42, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 09:35, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

REDCLIFFE Partners

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

Repost of previously deleted and salted material: WP:Articles for deletion/Redcliffe Partners * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 17:30, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Law, Companies, and Ukraine. Shellwood (talk) 17:45, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Of the sources cited: 6 are press releases published by the EBA, 2 are press releases published by the American Chamber of Commerce in Ukraine, 2 are press releases on the company's own WWW site, 1 is a press release published by the USIDFC, 1 is a press release on the company's LinkedIn page, 1 is a listing page that is empty, 1 the Financial Times is behind a paywall, 1 is a law firm directory listing, 2 are press releases/autobiography by Clifford Chance, 3 are ranked directories of companies, 3 are shortlistings for awards (not actually winning them), 1 is an interview published by a marketing consultancy, 2 are dead links, 1 is a press release on gazeta.ua, 2 are ranking listings and an interview on yur-gazeta.com, 1 is a list of corporate sponsors of an event, 1 simply mentions that the firm handled a contract, 2 are page not founds, 3 are about law and business practice in Ukraine in general (2 not even mentioning this company, the other quoting its CEO), 1 is about a person who worked at the company applying for another position, 4 are CEE Legal Matters recycling press releases, 2 are CEE Legal Matters covering itself, 1 is CEE Legal Matters interviewing executives, 2 are CEO interviews by the Kyiv Post, 1 is a recycled press release by the Kyiv Post, 1 is a corporate puff piece in Comments.UA.
There is not a single reliable in-depth on-point independent source in the lot of them. This is egregious corporate puffery. Delete.
Uncle G (talk) 22:19, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: This article was likely created in an attempt to evade the salting at Redcliffe Partners. This version should have been drafted and submitted it via WP:AFC, where a discussion on the article's merits could have properly occurred. Also importantly, the article fails WP:NCORP and WP:GNG -- this is obvious from the above analysis of sources by Uncle G. - tucoxn\^talk 11:10, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: I did find Kyivpost, and partly Comments and Gazeta.ua have the decent coverage, but it's true that interviews and paid placements are not included here. I think more sources exist, given the vast activity of the law firm at home. Unicorbia (talk) 14:14, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 08:56, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: fails WP:NCORP and WP:N and was previously salted. Brenae wafato (talk) 22:01, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep as one of the largest law firm in Ukraine with good coverage (both in law-focused and general media), huge government related topics involved.--OatPancake (talk) 14:03, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: With the exception of the Kyiv Post piece, I agree fully with Uncle G's source analyis and see no pass on WP:NCORP. The capitalization in the title is clear SALT evasion, and if page creator wants to recreate a page on a SALTed topic, a WP:DRV is the first step. Given this effort at evasion, I would support SALTing the all-caps title as well. Dclemens1971 (talk) 13:24, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep hmm. looks suspcious but when to dig deeper it likely meets Ncorp as the major law firm working on the big deals of the government and has so-so media coverage in the national press and government papers. I suggest, not all sources may be found online, as it changed the name (NEXIST). Mozzcircuit (talk) 16:15, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Keep or delete?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 09:35, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It's worth noting that all but one of the "Keep" !voters are very new users, and all of the "Delete" !voters are long-established users. That's suspicious. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 17:22, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Mexico's Next Top Model season 3

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

Redirect, unnecessary. Valorrr (talk) 05:07, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. Valorrr (talk) 05:07, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: The nominator actually blanked and redirected this article, but *then* sent it to AfD. Since redirects cannot be nominated at AfD, I have restored the article for now. No opinion. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:51, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Mexico-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:51, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Merge: I think a redirect would be more appropriate, there's been significant contribution on all five pages that were initially recommended for a merge with the main article, out of respect to the work that has been put in by other users.50.252.99.6 (talk) 18:21, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. We need some more opinions here.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:32, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 09:33, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, unnecessary is not an argument. Does it pass WP:GNG?Christian75 (talk) 16:55, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ahluwalia–Ramgarhia War

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

There is no conflict such as the "Ahluwalia–Ramgarhia War", sources do not support it and provide no significant coverage to a conflict under this name. This article is a part of a series of fringe pseudohistorical articles created for ethno-religious POV pushing. Srijanx22 (talk) 05:06, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Delete Obvious hoax article, if ends up on a section on Wikipedia's finest list of hoax articles I wouldn't be surprised. An editor from Mars (talk) 07:09, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Punjab-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 08:54, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 08:54, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sikhism-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 08:54, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 08:54, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 08:54, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:49, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy keep: Sources are quite clear in establishing the notability of this conflict, the nominator is currently on his spree of nominating my articles for deletion just to take revenge for this SPI:
- [30]: 3 pages of coverage.
- [31]: Another 3 pages of coverage.
- [32]: Same. Heraklios 17:04, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I can read only snippets of one source that I looked for, but at the very least the people purported to be involved in this conflict existed, and skirmishes are referred to. Unlikely to be a complete hoax from what I can see Recon rabbit 19:31, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Coverage exists and isn't a hoax. The article is fine. This seems to be part some sort of revenge spree. RachelTensions (talk) 13:23, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

*Delete sources exist that proves the content is genuine. But the article title is indeed pseudohistory. The available content could be merged into any of the parent articles. Academic sources lacks covering this as an individual war.Borax || (talk to Borax) 14:58, 4 April 2025 (UTC) Blocked sock. AlvaKedak (talk) 10:22, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per An editor from Mars. None of the sources provided by article creator Heraklios establish the authenticity of this conflict, let alone significant coverage. Koshuri ^(グ) 07:33, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: The subject matter is clearly notable when viewed through a neutral point of view. The only issue seems to be the title of the article, which could be changed later. Please refrain from filing articles for deletion simply to escalate disputes between editors or groups of editors, Wikipedia is not a battleground. AlvaKedak (talk) 12:39, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - The coverage in the sources is not enough and none of the sources support this neologism made up by the author "Ahluwalia - Ramgarhia war" , in fact sources do not even support that this was a war, sources at best refer to it as skirmishes and do not provide significant coverage to them. Anyway given the author's history of making copyvio, I doubt this article is free of it. The relevant details (not closely paraphrased) can be covered at the articles of relevant personalities. REDISCOVERBHARAT (talk) 15:39, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 09:32, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Armand Biniakounou

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

Declined prod. The added sources are not indepth. [33], [34] and [35] are merely small 1 line mentions and not SIGCOV to meet WP:SPORTSCRIT. LibStar (talk) 22:57, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Olympics, Sport of athletics, and Africa. LibStar (talk) 22:57, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep based on WP:NEXIST. I didn't create the article, but I found several new sources on the subject and improved the article with them just before it was nominated. Subject was a two-time Olympian and was honored as an expert representing his country to World Athletics years after the fact. There are newspapers in the Republic of the Congo that would have covered this at the time that can be used to further improve the article. --Habst (talk) 12:41, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
being a 2 time Olympian doesn't guarantee inherent notability. LibStar (talk) 23:07, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It's not guaranteed, but I think the WP:V info we have as confirmed by several WP:RS is enough to be confident that more sourcing exists out there. --Habst (talk) 13:04, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
WP:MUSTBESOURCES LibStar (talk) 13:44, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I actually agree with that essay, but I don't think it applies here. It says "Any claim that sources exist must be verifiable" and in this case we do have WP:Verifiable info evidencing that sources exist, namely his two Olympic appearances and coaching honors. --Habst (talk) 15:12, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
weak Keep: there are some coverage here and there for and beyond the Olympics, thus I favour keeping the article. FuzzyMagma (talk) 08:11, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete To meet GNG we need significant coverage in multiple independent reliable secondary sources. None of the sources in this article meet that definition. Per nom., 1 line mentions are not significant coverage. News reports and listings are not secondary. We are not even close to a GNG pass and as WP:NATH is not met, there is no presumption that sources are likely to exist so the NEXIST argument is spurious. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 07:37, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 09:31, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Not that it helps (it's an interview), but he seems to be involved with the national athletics association lately [36]. Match results here [37], and one other hit in that "Athletisme" magazine, again only a match report. Oaktree b (talk) 14:20, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Sources exist, but they're all trivial mentions. At least one SIGCOV and I'd probably give this a !weak keep vote. Oaktree b (talk) 14:24, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Passing mentions do not count as SIGCOV, which is required to be cited in the article per NSPORT. Searches in PQ return nothing. JoelleJay (talk) 15:39, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
What is PQ? --Habst (talk) 16:10, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I think that they might be referring to ProQuest. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 16:53, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oh. It's certainly worth a search and I appreciate the effort, but I'm not sure why we would consider searching that archive of primarily academic content sufficient enough to !vote delete while actual Republic of Congo newspapers that would have covered the subject haven't been checked yet. --Habst (talk) 18:30, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Proquest has a global newspaper search, including a historical newspaper collection which includes titles from the Republic of Congo. Definitely a good place to check. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 19:14, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Like I said, I agree it's a good place to search and I appreciate the effort. The issue in this case is the most likely venue for sourcing isn't on the ProQuest historical newspaper archives but the actual ROC newspapers listed above, whose archives are not available on any online resource including ProQuest. --Habst (talk) 20:44, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Republic of the Congo at the 1988 Summer Olympics#Athletics. Fails GNG due to lack of SIGCOV; everything in the article or discussed here is routine. Republic of the Congo at the 1992 Summer Olympics#Athletics is a suitable redirect target as well but I prefer 1988 because he had a better finish. Having multiple valid redirect targets is not grounds to choose neither and delete anyway. Frank Anchor 17:55, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

BillDesk

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

BillDesk should not be deleted because the company is a notable and influential player in India's digital payments industry, with coverage in reliable independent sources Xrimonciam (talk) 08:38, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Xrimonciam (talk) 08:38, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Close discussion on procedural grounds? Nom is for keeping the article, not deleting.

Anonrfjwhuikdzz (talk) 09:04, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Xrimonciam you can close this yourself if your intention was to keep. Anonrfjwhuikdzz (talk) 09:05, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Procedural close is acceptable, as long as that is not considered a keep, which would see the notability tag placed by S0091 being removed. There are notability concerns here, and perhaps AfD is the correct venue to address them, although I won't !vote while we consider the path to be taken. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 10:41, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the ping. As far as the tag, I did not do a WP:BEFORE or anything so if that is Xrimonciam's concern and they are confident it does meet notability, they can remove it. However, I encourage them to add another source or two that meets WP:NCORP. S0091 (talk) 16:51, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Finance, Websites, and Maharashtra. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:47, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Holywell, Swords

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

This appears to be a housing estate, or a common name between neighbouring housing estates. I don’t see that it fulfills the criteria of WP:NSETTLEMENT. Unlike nearby Drinan or Brackenstown, it doesn’t have a logainm.ie entry. One possible benefit of retention as an article is as an area in the broader Swords region which is part of the Kinsealy–Drinan census area, rather than the Swords census area, but that would hold as true for Seatown, Lissenhall, or Drynam, mentioned on that part of the Swords article. There could be a case to expand Kinsealy–Drinan from a redirect to include all such places, with a note on the historic townland of Drinan. But that doesn’t speak to the notability of Holywell as distinct from many other housing developments. Iveagh Gardens (talk) 08:33, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ireland-related deletion discussions. Iveagh Gardens (talk) 08:33, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:48, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Michelle McDowell

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

The result was speedy keep. Nomination withdrawn. (non-admin closure)‎ Agent 007 (talk) 11:16, 10 April 2025 (UTC).[reply]

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

Fails WP:ANYBIO and/or WP:ARCHITECT. She did some works but does not qualify for an article on her. Agent 007 (talk) 08:05, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and United Kingdom. Agent 007 (talk) 08:05, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Architecture, Engineering, and England. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:48, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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

VLS-equipped multipurpose attack submarine

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

The article is original research WP:OR. There are no reliable sources that verify the term used in the article "VLS-equipped multipurpose attack submarine". Melbguy05 (talk) 07:28, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. Melbguy05 (talk) 07:51, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete submarines have had vertical launch systems since the first SSBNs. This is WP:OR/WP:SYNTH. Also Youtube, which seems to be the inspiration for this page is not WP:RS. Mztourist (talk) 08:08, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete yes looks made up, do any RS define this as a separate type of submarine? Slatersteven (talk) 14:54, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - per Mztourist. And attack submarines have had VLS since at least as far back as the 1970s. Parsecboy (talk) 15:42, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and Snow per all the above; this is a clear POV fork not supported by RS. ⇒SWATJester ^{Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat!} 16:06, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per pretty much everyone else. Useless article. Intothat darkness 16:09, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Studio Flad

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

The article not meet Wikipedia's notability guideline for companies or studios. Kopnakolicti Kopnakolicti (talk) 07:33, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Kopnakolicti (talk) 07:33, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Anime and manga and Japan. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:49, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

JustiServ

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

the company is no longer active, and the article lacks reliable independent sources to establish notability. It primarily contains promotional content and does not meet Wikipedia’s guidelines for verifiability and significant coverage Kopnakolicti (talk) 07:31, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Kopnakolicti (talk) 07:31, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I'm surprised that when I did some clean-up many years ago I didn't register how promotional the article was and didn't take more measures than I did. Anyway, the sources in the article are of low quality for WP:N purposes, and I find nothing online now that lends itself to a finding of notability. Google finds only 120 mentions altogether in a verbatim search, and among them at best there's this one profile of its founders. On top of that, the only suggestion of significance in the article is "JustiServ has been selected to be a part of Highland Capital Partners' 2015 Summer@Highland, a startup accelerator which helps student entrepreneurs build their companies over the summer", which doesn't really indicate significance at all, it's like saying an American lawyer is significant because they clerked for a Supreme Court justice for two years after law school. Largoplazo (talk) 10:15, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Law, Websites, and Massachusetts. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:49, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Vikas Kapoor

AfDs for this article:

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

This article was previous nominated and deleted. It was then recreated. However the issue still seems to be there. Cannot find independent significant coverage about the person himself to indicate he is anything more than a run-of-the-MILL CEO. Imcdc Contact 06:10, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Businesspeople, Computing, India, and United States of America. Imcdc Contact 06:10, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Per nom. Did not find any sources that indicate significant coverage about the individual. Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 10:25, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Rajasthan, England, Australia, Massachusetts, and New Jersey. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:51, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Erinola E. Daranijo

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

Autobiography of a lesser-known journalist. Some sources are self-published, and there's very little indication of notability. Fails WP:NJOURNALIST. Author has also removed maintenance templates for no apparent reason. CycloneYoris ^talk! 05:47, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Nigeria. CycloneYoris ^talk! 05:47, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Only here for self promotion. A draft Draft:Erinola E. Daranijo already exists. Agent 007 (talk) 07:33, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Not yet notable. Best, Reading Beans, Duke of Rivia 08:58, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Journalism, and Poetry. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:51, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Self-promotion that reads more like a resume. Aspening (talk) 14:37, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete promotional Yoblyblob (Talk) :) 16:12, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Meenal Choubey

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

Mayors are not inherently notable under WP:NPOL. GrabUp - Talk 07:39, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians and Chhattisgarh. GrabUp - Talk 07:39, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep the guideline also mentions Major local political figures who have received significant press coverage - there are many news about her from google search.
Uncle Bash007 (talk) 08:48, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Uncle Bash007, can you atleast give 3 sources? Best, Reading Beans, Duke of Rivia 05:47, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
ok @Reading Beans..

[38]

[39]

[40]

[41] Uncle Bash007 (talk) 15:00, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Uncle Bash007, these are routine coverages about things that were said. What we look for are in-depth, independent coverage in multiple reliable sources and these doesn’t cut it. Best, Reading Beans, Duke of Rivia 15:28, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:46, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Per my comment. Best, Reading Beans, Duke of Rivia 20:03, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Mayor of Raipur passes WP:GNG have added references.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 00:05, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Pharaoh of the Wizards, how does the mayor of a city pass GNG? And I’m seeing press releases and speeches here. Best, Reading Beans, Duke of Rivia 09:56, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

^[1] ^[2] ^[3] ^[4] ^[5]^[6]^[7] ^[8] ^[9]

References

^ Bajpai, Shashank Shekhar (4 March 2025). "रायपुर महापौर मीनल चौबे ने संभाली कुर्सी, शहर के चहुंमुखी विकास का किया वादा". Nai Dunia (in Hindi). Retrieved 1 April 2025.
^ Marut raj (28 March 2025). "रायपुर में 4 नए फ्लाई ओवर और कामकाजी महिलाओं के लिए 3 हॉस्टल बनेंगे". Sootr (in Hindi). Retrieved 1 April 2025.
^ "RMC's 1.5k crore budget prioritises urban devpt". The Times of India. 29 March 2025. Retrieved 1 April 2025.
^ Hitavada, The (6 February 2025). "BJP's Minal Choubey pledges to prioritise basic amenities". The Hitavada. Retrieved 1 April 2025.
^ "Raipur: जानें कौन हैं मीनल चौबे, जिसे बीजेपी ने रायपुर नगर निगम से मेयर प्रत्याशी के लिये चुनावी रण में उतारा". Amar Ujala (in Hindi). 27 January 2025. Retrieved 2 April 2025.
^ Mallick, Avdhesh (28 March 2025). "Raipur Mayor Meenal Chaubey Presents ₹1529.53 Crore RMC Budget, Focus On Women Empowerment & Infrastructure". Free Press Journal. Retrieved 2 April 2025.
^ Behera, Partha Sarathi (1 March 2025). "Develop public facilities based on citizen input: Raipur mayor Meenal Chaubey". The Times of India. Retrieved 2 April 2025.
^ "Raipur mayor's oath-taking sparks debate over religious slogans". cgkhabar.com. 28 February 2025. Retrieved 6 April 2025.
^ तिवारी, पवन (15 February 2025). "raipur news people choose us for development know what meenal choubey said after the victory". Navbharat Times (in Hindi). Retrieved 6 April 2025.

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:10, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - she's the mayor of a city with a million people, not Schenectady. Bearian (talk) 19:37, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Big Population is common in India, that should not be compared with western cities. GrabUp - Talk 04:13, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Every Chinese mayor is entitled to an entry we follow this “one million population”. The subject clearly does not meet NPOL#1 and the sources presented as evident to everyone is not GNG-worthy. Best, Reading Beans, Duke of Rivia 05:53, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep – Meenal Chaubey is the currently serving Mayor of Raipur, which is the capital city of Chhattisgarh, India. Holding the mayoral office of a state capital is a position of significant political importance and public interest. Her election has been covered by multiple reliable and independent news sources such as The Times of India, NDTV, and Hindustan Times, which establish her notability under Wikipedia's general notability guidelines (GNG) and WP:POLITICIAN. Furthermore, her political career, public engagements, and influence on local governance are well-documented, making her a notable figure in Indian municipal politics. Deletion of such a page would remove verifiable and encyclopedic information about a currently elected public official.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Thesurajsahu (talk • contribs)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 05:22, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topic: India Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 15:51, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ibrahim Al-Rabeeah

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

Declined prod. All sources are still just databases and insufficient for meeting WP:SPORTBASIC. LibStar (talk) 02:24, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Olympics, Sport of athletics, and Kuwait. LibStar (talk) 02:24, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, coverage found in Al Qabas, 6 August 1978 page 16: [42]. There is also coverage in Al Qabas 19 January 1985 edition page 10 though I am not sure if that one is a namesake. Subject was a 1976 Olympian from Kuwait where sourcing access is sparse, but I think that there's enough indication here to know that further coverage exists. --Habst (talk) 03:25, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Page 16 appears to be just adverts. Do you mean page 17? What have you found? Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 19:46, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

AMP (streamer collective)

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

most of the notable stuff are about a member of the group, not the group itself. the only significant coverage about the group are from the tubefilter article, the rest are mainly about kai cenat. Http iosue (talk) 00:28, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games, Entertainment, Internet, and New York. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:27, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:32, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Men.com

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

This porn site is not notable under any criteria. It is not covered by any news sources and hardly even mentioned by Aylo themselves. Most of this article is just Men.com releases video, generates controversy or fame. The article's citations are also generally unreliable and not independent of the subject. Most of the websites are gay porn sites or LGBT forums which are not reliable and the gay porn websites could have been paid for a biased review given Aylo's power.

Note: I tried to PROD the article but an IP editor contested it. Now that I am unblocked I will move it to AFD. DotesConks (talk) 01:25, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Film, Organizations, and Europe. DotesConks (talk) 01:25, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Sexuality and gender, and Websites. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:14, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Non-notable gay porn site that also sounds like a toxic masculinity forum. An editor from Mars (talk) 08:33, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep And I would admonish editors to at least look at the references section of an article before calling a subject non-notable. There is WP:SIGCOV from Pink News, Queerty and several other LGBTQ+ publications currently in the article. The claim by the nominator that this website was not covered by news sources is factually incorrect. Simonm223 (talk) 12:39, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Pink News is the only one listed as a RS by Cite Highlighter, the others are yellow, so of marginal notability. We basically have one good RS and several iffy ones. Oaktree b (talk) 14:27, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'll be honest I'm not familiar with Cite Highlighter - I'm assuming it's a plugin - but it's giving you incorrect information. Queerty does not appear at WP:RSP and as such it is not "of marginal notability" nor is it an iffy RS. Merely one that hasn't had regular discussion at RS/N.Simonm223 (talk) 14:52, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Furthermore if your Cite Highlighter is calling CNN, Slate and Buzzfeed news of questionable reliability I'd question its usefulness as a tool. Simonm223 (talk) 14:56, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Atul Tandon

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

The only significant coverage I'm seeing does not appear to be independent. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 🛸 01:10, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, India, and United States of America. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 🛸 01:10, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Businesspeople, and Delhi. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:15, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Gravitic density meter

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

PROD nomination was refused due to discussion on the talk page of the article. During my original WP:BEFORE of the article, the only source about this specific type of density meter were primary from the company MPV Tech, the same company that produced the brochure in the wiki article. This article fails to meet WP:NOTABILITY and appears to be WP:PROMOTION for a product that never gained widespread adoption.

Link to the talk page where Ldm1954 and I discussed his concerns about my nomination.

Summary of what I found during my original BEFORE and from my additional checks during the discussion on the article talk page:

253 total hits for "gravitic density meter" on google, of which google only showed 26 due to similarity. Of these, only two seem to be discussing the specific apparatus described in the wiki article: the linkedin page of the manufacturer (2 hits) and a forum post linking to the linkedin page

Remaining sources fall into several categories:

Wikipedia pages (2)
2 pages to a manufacturer/seller of density meters in China (sunp-electric)
those from unreliable sites like chegg or studocu which are also behind registration pages (I count 5 total)
Youtube: 2 videos showing how to make a "gravitic density meter" both of which describe how to measure specific gravity and are not related apparatus described in the article. 2 more hits that mention gravitic density meter.
5 sources that just copy the text of the wikipedia article https://www.definitions.net/definition/gravitic][43][44][45][46]
4 that just seem to have the words "gravitic density meter" on the page somewhere
1 about an exploding cybertruck for some reason

Searching for various combinations of "gravitic" "density" and "meter" bring up numerous results about density meters but I have not found anything that describes the deflected-rubber-hose-for-slurries apparatus described in the article. However, this is a difficult search due to the similarity between the concepts of specific gravity and density which can be confused in translation so there still may be sources that demonstrate notability out there. Anonrfjwhuikdzz (talk) 00:36, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Engineering-related deletion discussions. Anonrfjwhuikdzz (talk) 00:36, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: This term doesn't appear in Gsholar or Jstor, you get scattered hits in Gbooks [47] or [48] about density measurement. This almost appears to be a hoax. Oaktree b (talk) 00:45, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral. I have no skin in the game here. I raised questions on the talk page; if I had objected strongly to the PROD I would have just removed it. Liz decided that the talk page was enough that AfD was more appropriate. I read the page, and I think the device would work. Of course there will be nothing on Gscholar or Jstor, nobody would write a science article on this! Even though I have spent most of my life writing science papers, those are not the only sources for notable devices.Ldm1954 (talk) 01:10, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. It's clearly non-notable. Warm Regards, Miminity (Talk?) (me contribs) 02:45, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

[g169-1] Bajpai, Shashank Shekhar (4 March 2025). "रायपुर महापौर मीनल चौबे ने संभाली कुर्सी, शहर के चहुंमुखी विकास का किया वादा". Nai Dunia (in Hindi). Retrieved 1 April 2025.

[q418-2] Marut raj (28 March 2025). "रायपुर में 4 नए फ्लाई ओवर और कामकाजी महिलाओं के लिए 3 हॉस्टल बनेंगे". Sootr (in Hindi). Retrieved 1 April 2025.

[y307-3] "RMC's 1.5k crore budget prioritises urban devpt". The Times of India. 29 March 2025. Retrieved 1 April 2025.

[q637-4] Hitavada, The (6 February 2025). "BJP's Minal Choubey pledges to prioritise basic amenities". The Hitavada. Retrieved 1 April 2025.

[m618-5] "Raipur: जानें कौन हैं मीनल चौबे, जिसे बीजेपी ने रायपुर नगर निगम से मेयर प्रत्याशी के लिये चुनावी रण में उतारा". Amar Ujala (in Hindi). 27 January 2025. Retrieved 2 April 2025.

[r405-6] Mallick, Avdhesh (28 March 2025). "Raipur Mayor Meenal Chaubey Presents ₹1529.53 Crore RMC Budget, Focus On Women Empowerment & Infrastructure". Free Press Journal. Retrieved 2 April 2025.

[o828-7] Behera, Partha Sarathi (1 March 2025). "Develop public facilities based on citizen input: Raipur mayor Meenal Chaubey". The Times of India. Retrieved 2 April 2025.

[z867-8] "Raipur mayor's oath-taking sparks debate over religious slogans". cgkhabar.com. 28 February 2025. Retrieved 6 April 2025.

[g406-9] तिवारी, पवन (15 February 2025). "raipur news people choose us for development know what meenal choubey said after the victory". Navbharat Times (in Hindi). Retrieved 6 April 2025.

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

[6]

[7]

[8]

[9]