Reason: Not every country at every event needs a separate article. We have
Italy at the World Athletics Relays, and we have
2015 IAAF World Relays (with subarticles aplenty already). Italy didn't really do anything special at these championships, and these are a lot less important or popular than the actual athletics World Championships (or the Olympics obviously).
Reason: No evidence of notability. One source (Burke's) listing all British nobiity (and which is very closely paraphrased here), and one source from long before the birth of the subject. Looking for more sources
[1][2] doesn't give the impression of any notability for this baronet, at best he gets mentioned a bit in articles about his daughter
[3] who would be a more likely subject for an article.
Reason: No evidence of notability for this tournament, just one local source of a reporter regurgitating a press release
[4]. No coverage of the actual tournament from independent sources.
[5]
Reason: There seem to be no good, secondary sources about this person. The film they refer to was about a Jewish boy, and it looks as if some "conspiracy theory" or similar is doing the rounds on some fora about this being in fact based on some until then unknown Arab(?) boy who converted "millions" of people. Seems like a fringe theory which doesn't belong on enwiki, but perhaps it is true and I just haven't found the right sources?
Reason: An impressive 29 references, and claims of global recognition and a number one in specialized German charts. However, the sources are mostly self-published, or blogs, or other minor or unreliable sources, nothing that actually seems to give
notability. I can't find any evidence that they topped any charts, and the very, very limited hits I get when searching for the album
[6] indicates that this hasn't made much of an impact. Searching for the duo
[7] gives equally poor results.
Reason: Fails
WP:BIO. Lack of good independent sources about him (a book review from a book reading club, and some opinion pieces on a website, aren't sufficient).
Reason: There doesn't seem to be enough notability for the individual events at this U23 championship to have separate articles. There will be some routine coverage (hopefully), but that's about it (e.g. for this event, all I could find was
this). An article about the championship, listing the medalists per event, seems more than enough.
Reason: A very detailed, long list of statistics based on primary sources and databases. The actual topic (who were the top sprinters of tournament X or of team X at the Olympics) doesn't seem to have received significant attention from
reliable, independent sources though. Fails
WP:LISTN.
Reason: Ascension has some 800 inhabitants. This is basically a small village tournament, which can perhaps have one article for the total history of it. Individual articles for each year are completely unnecessary. Fails
WP:N.
Reason: I know this was just closed at AfD as "merge", but, well, there is absolutely nothing here to merge, and it isn't worthy of a redirect, as this completely unsourced, and there is not a single reliable source for this either["Live in Buenos Aires: The Dangerous Tour" -wikipedia]. This is from an editor who has nearly all his work either deleted or draftified for the same reason; fancruft. Please reconsider this (I haven't taken it to
WP:DRV, as the previous AfD was closed correctly based on the votes, it's just that the result shouldn't happen per our policies). @
Meatsgains,
Pahiy,
DagosNavy,
Suonii180, and
Premeditated Chaos: (all participants in the previous AfD)
Reason: Very incomplete, and what is there is sourced to an unreliable site, indianfootball.de
[8]. Another site used in this article, 11v11.com, gives a list of players for India in 1993 (not specifically for this tournament, but for the year) which is very different from the one we have here
[9]. So the one team we have is unreliably sourced, and the other ones are missing.
Reason: Sources may look good at first sight, but are in fact some form of press releases / promo pieces written by Darshan Patil, who shares his name with the subject and his full name with the author of this article. There seems to be a distinct lack of
reliable, independent sources about this local politician.
Reason: A poorly sourced article about a young adult who did stupid stuff when he was a minor. I had moved it to draft and discussed it with the article creator on my talk page, but they prefer to have it AfD'ed instead. Something like "biographymask", the first source, is absolutely terrible and should probably be blacklisted (the same goes for "celebritygossip", source 5, whihc is very similar and seems equally computer-generated bullshit). The remainder are mostly "funny" articles from long ago, when the subject was a child, plus a bunch of unreliable sites (geni and so on) and copyvio links (youtube). In any case, per
WP:BLPCRIME and general "do no harm" principles, we shouldn't have articles on such minors who have become the subject of media and internet fun and did some stupid stuff, but who aren't actually
notable otherwise. And we certainly shouldn't have them with unverified claims about his current supposed jail sentence or criminal activities, as some of these "sources" claim. If anyone wants to G10 speedy it as an attack page instead of having a full AfD, be my guest.
Reason: Fails
our notability guideline. Sources are puff pieces or company statements. Claims in article text are hard to decipher, claim of having 17000 employees (for a fashion brand with 10 shops?) seems unlikely. Searching for other usable sources produced no good results.
Reason: One of those dreadful articles which have at first glance numerous decent sources, but which turn out to be all paid for or user-generated ones. Nothing about the actual company (like, I don't know, some customers, campaigns, ...), only hollow words. An example of the typical methods by which these sources are created and these articles produced: the 6th source is an "interview" with CIOLookIndia from January 2021
[10] which strangely uses the exact same wording as the first source, an "article" in the Mirror Review from December 2020
[11], e.g. the whole "Being in the persuasion business" paragraph, followed by the exact same complete "Consequently, as the clients" paragraph.
Reason: No evidence of
notability in the article or found online. Multiple search terms are possible, but the result are largely primary or unreliable sources (e.g.
like this).
Reason: After this was proposed for deletion for lack of
notability, more sources were added, but these seem to be a Twitter post, and then two sources (one a column) which don't even mention (let alone give significant attention to) this specific traffic light retrofit. Which only seems to reinforce the strong impression that this is some very minor aspect of the general protests, nothing more.
Reason: I had proposed this article for deletion with the reasoning "I can't find evidence of
notability in reliable, independent sources, and I can't find any evidence that e.g. the claim of "working with Tomorrowland" or with Jake Paul is based on reality. "The Prod was removed with the rather outlandish statement "Removed deletion proposal, facts stated here are true and can be verified through the website and LinkedIn of the subject in question. Certain other facts stated here are under a confidentiality agreement, the details of which may not be released to the public but headlines are allowable."So basically the article creator confirmed that the statements in the article are unverifiable, which makes this for our purposes an unacceptable article (if you remove all unverifiable stuff, you have the biography of a non-notable person).
Reason: Despite the lengthy introduction to this page, it is a subpage, which isn't allowed on enwiki. It should be changed to a template, or directly incorporated in the main article.
Reason: No evidence of any
notability could be found. The first sources lists very briefly a George Cuppage who was 16 in 1715, so unclear whether this is the same person. I couldn't find Cuppage in the second source, and in the third source he gets one line. Searching online produced nothing else at all. Searching even further gave some very brief entries for a George Cuppaidge, which seems to be the same person, but even then there isn't enough to meet our notability guidelines.
Reason: Uk businesswoman who seems to be completely unknown in the UK, even though some "articles" in foreign media give a different impression. You get e.g. things like
this, a glowing article about her at the occasion of her nomination for the "prestigious" CEO Care Professional Awards. Bizarrely, the existence of this prestigious award is not even mentioned anywhere,at all, but in this article
[12]. Which makes the award and the source meaningless. The same goes for things like "EAWA Philanthropist of the year".
Reason: Contrary to what the article claims, a "midfield quartet" is just the 4 players making up the midfield in e.g. a 4-4-2 or a 5-4-1 (can also be in other sports of course). Which is just a dictionary definition.
[13] No reason to create a novel definition for something rather mundane.
Reason: Per
WP:NOT. This probably belongs at some sister project (as I already raised on the talk page in 2009...), but which one? I don't know if Wiktionary hosts such lists. But Wikipedia is not the place for such grammatical lists.
Reason: This is a tough one. A list of admiralty charts may well be a good subject for an article, and a lot of work has gone into this one. However, there is nothing special about the 1967 situation, catalogues were produced each year it seems and the choice for the 1967 one is completely random. Simply moving this to
List of UK Admiralty Charts would be wrong though, as it is a very outdated snapshot only. While this is at AfD, perhaps draftifying would be the best solution, and there let people turn it into a general list instead of this specific one? No idea if someone would be interested in this work, but simply keeping it in the mainspace as is, isn't a good idea either.
Reason: Something iffy here. This important influencer has almost no Internet results (61 distinct Google hits
[14]??), and the sources... Well, the Stevenson University text from July 2020
[15] can be found exactly the same, but from another LinkedIn "influencer", from January 2020
[16]. Looking at the other sources: the first has a very short quote from her, the second doesn't even mention her but shows an image from her Linkedin page, which leaves us with only source three (a podcast) and four (an article from "Working Mother" which reads like a puff piece more than actual journalism). Her companies like Medsnake Media don't seem to be really notable either
[17]. Growth Academy is harder to search for, as that name is used by many different things, but it doesn't look good either
[18]. Basically, for an influencer, she has a large number of followers, but apparently very little actual impact, making this read more like an ad for a non notable person than an actual article on a notable influencer.
Reason:
WP:OR /
WP:SYNTH. Combining a group of conflicts with different origins and coalitions into one list as if people take sides in this "proxy conflict" and not e.g. fight against IS terrorism, or make money from delivering arms without care for which side they are supporting. Many of the entries here are unsourced or "allegedly" or "according to a charity" or similar, and don't necessarily give an accurate indication of the positions of the groups in the conflict. And with the complete lack of prose, this page also violates
WP:NOT.
Reason: While this biography is amply referenced, it looks as if none of the source are at the same time indepth and reliable. The source with the most content is probably
Honorstates, which is basically a wiki. The
oral history source is a primary source, and has little about the pilot anyway. The third important source is the
Stardust studios, again not a reliable source.
Reason: None of the sources in the article (original or current) mention the "Keken", and I can only find a few unreliable sources for the term. It seems to be just a different spelling for the Kaikan, hence my redirect to
Kingdom of Kaikan earlier. As this gets contested, I thought it best to bring this to AfD. If this is not the same as the Kaikan, then good sources need to be presented or it should be deleted.
Reason: Very minimal aspect of a specific warrior dance. Only source (two given sources are the same) is a MA thesis, not a
WP:RS (per
WP:SCHOLARSHIP). No other sources could be found (apart from the same author giving a summary of his thesis in "Ethnomusicology Review")
[21], no books discuss or mention this
[22]. I redirected it to
Kambon-waa, but this was objected against by the creator of both these articles. I have no objection to a "redirect" outcome for this AfD, I list if here per the
WP:BEFORE indication for controversial redirects.
Reason: Meets the too lax standards of
WP:NFOOTY technically, but clearly fails the more generally accepted
WP:GNG/
WP:BIO standards. Not a single reliable, independent source (so not associated with the University or the football league) has given any significant attention to this young player so far (i.e. anything beyong mentioning his name or including him in a statistics database). May well become notable in the future, but not yet.
Reason: Attempted hoax? This person was added to
List of Nigerian billionaires by net worth, but removed as vandalism
[23]. Meanwhile, the inclusion of this person in that Wikipedia list is used as evidence that he is wealthy in news articles
[24]: "Oil Money is ranked as No.3 among richest Nigerians in 2021 and has also featured prominently on Wikipedia’s Nigerian billionaires’ list for 2020 and 2021." Bizarrely, for someone supposed to be one of the richest Nigerians in 2020, there seem to be no news articles about him from before May 2021 or thereabouts. His "business career" is "Oil Money Records", described as a British record label: there are no traces of this in any British sources it seems, and I can't find any evidence of major hit records or somethin similar. Whether these news outlets were duped by this "billionaire", or are simply completely unreliable, is unclear, but this looks to be a series of big claims based on absolutely nothing, and not something we should repeat here.
Reason: We already have articles for
January 12 and so on. Do we want the same for other calendars (in this case, the Islamic calendar)? And if so, should it be restricted to "Islamic" events (births, deaths, ...) or should all events be recalculated to this calendar? My first reaction would be to delete this article, but this community discussion can decide this better (and better now, when only one such article has been created, than after more work has been done).
Reason: I can't find a single source which gives any significant attention to this TV channel, only some (few) database listings. Both the old name or the new name draw a blank. No news stories at all even mention this channel. Perhaps there is some list where this can be redirected to, otherwise deletion seems the best option.
Reason: The topic of this list doesn't seem to have been the topic of attention in
reliable sources as a group. If no one outside Wikipedia has been interested enough in pedimental sculptures in Canada to write at some length about it, then we shouldn't be the first to do so. Many of these aren't individually notable either (e.g.
this or
this or many others), making this a novel grouping of non notable features of notable buildings. We wouldn't (I hope) make similar list for e.g. "Buildings using the
Corinthian order in Canada" or "Domed buildings of Canada", there is no reason to treat these differently.
Reason: A "season" which consists of one game against a team from the same state (no, from the same county even), for which no result is known (but which is given as a 0-0 tie in the body and as a tie in the infobox?). No indication of any
notability.
Reason: There seem to be no reliable sources for "Kepaksian Sekala Brak Kuno"
[25], and very few sources in general
[26]. The article is also barely comprehensible. It seems to be part of a series of new similar articles by one or two(?) brand new editors,
User:The cinnamon and
User:Anaya Fayola Amijaya, including
Draft:Sekala Brak,
Kepaksian Sekala Brak and
Draft:Islam in Lampung (2): while these are not included in this AfD, they may help in deciding what best to do here (deleting, draftifying, redirecting, ...). But without better sources, I propose simple deletion as the best solution.
Reason: No evidence that she meets
WP:BIO. Most sources are not independent ones, and the others are either passing mentions or interviews with her (and others) but not about her (like
[27]). No better sources were found when looking online either.
Reason: Hoax? Completely unverifiable, not in two sources provided as far as I can tell. The "reference", a Serbian wiki article, is unsourced. Google gives extremely few results (Latin and Cyrillic searches done), none of them usable.
Reason: Serious BLP issues. I moved the article to draft to get it out of searches, but even so; the article starts with the "real name" of 5up, but this bit of information is unverifiable. Then we have things like "He was raised as a young child by his older brother" which is not in the source (the source states "5up has one older brother and was raised in Phoenix, Arizona."). Which casts doubt on other information in the article which isn't in the source either. Best to simply delete this as too much of a BLP violation.
Reason: No evidence of
notability. He has played two games in the Danish 3rd division
[28], has a world ranking from ca. #1500, and hasn't received the necessary attention from independent
WP:RS to have an article here (yet).
Reason: Lack of notability. Sources in article include one extremely passing mention (dailytrust), an unreliable site (answers.com, basically a wiki), and BLERF, a who's who of Nigeria, which boasts on their about page
[29] of "the biographical information of over one million distinguished Nigerians": this info is collected by people sending their CV to the site (e.g. at the bottom of Dambatta's page, "“Please send your updated CV to: info@blerf.org” – Editor"). There are no Google News sources
[30] and just 41 regular Google sources
[31] where
this article is the best I could find.
Reason: I redirected this to
Metcalfe Robinson, the first and only person ever to have this minor title, but this was objected against by the article creator,
User:Charles Matthews, for reasons they can best explain. Both the article at AfD and the target are very short, and 99% of the info in the baronets article was already present in the target anyway. There seems to be no good argument to have two separate articles here, and as the baronetcy is an aspect of the person (and not the other way around), redirecting the title to the person is the logical solution.
Reason: Fails
WP:GNG. No evidence of actual notability. The Seychelles are a minor cricket country, and playing for the national team doesn't seem to generate the necessary coverage to meet
WP:GNG. Listed as part of the team
[32] but no significant coverage, and other sources are only databases or lists, nothing really substantial about him
[33].
Reason: Total lack of
notability, no significant attention in
reliable, independent sources. The sources given are either not independent or significant (their own website, the UK government, the "charitycommission" or "christiansingovernment"), or unknown (what is "Contact"? Their own magazine, someone else's? Unverifiable as written). Looking for better sources gives nothing in Gbooks (logical for a recent organisation) or GNews (much more worrying, a notable organisation in the UK should have some GNews results surely), and very few other hits (
only 45!). Article also gives no idea about why the network would be a notable organisation.
Reason: No evidence of notability. Only passing mentions, apparently died young (21 years old?) and had little time to make an impact. Could be redirected to her father.
Reason: A meticulously, thoroughly researched article, but no indication of why she is
notable after all. It looks as if all references here are just passing mentions, and looking for other sources didn't present me with anything better. Her roles are either very minor, or in very minor productions. Perhaps I missed the few sources here which are really about her instead of just mentioning her: in that case, please indicate here which
reliable, independent sources give the necessary significant attention.
Reason: No actual evidence of
notability: sources are press releases, puff pieces, or sites of dubious reliability. Article has been salted at
Michael Dabhi, but that was a while ago and the current version has more recent sourcing.
Reason: For months, an editor has insisted that this must be a stand-alone article, despite the "list" consisting of just one person, the page having an incorrect title, and the topic (even if the list would later become an actual list of multiple people) being of very limited notability. Everything that needs to be said is at
Maharashtra_Legislative_Council#Deputy_Chairperson, this was redirected (despite the incorrect title) as a courtesy solution, but apparently this isn't acceptable. So, delete and salt then.
Reason: No evidence of
notability found. Redirect rejected by article creator: a redirect to
Mengly J. Quach Education (which seems to be of limited notability as well) or to
Mengly Jandy Quach seems to be warranted, but there isn't enough independent sourcing available here for a stand-alone article.
Reason: While there are some sources by him, or sources by his employer, and one source mentioning him, there are no
good sourcesabout him (in the article or online). Fails
WP:BIO.
Reason: Total lack of
notability, e.g. her role on "La suerte de Loli" was in one episode only, and received no attention. Of the 5 sources, only IMDb (which is user-generated and thus does nothing to establish notability) is about her, the other 4 don't even mention her(!). Looking for better sources produces nothing usable at all.
Reason: No evidence of
notability. ProD was removed because she won a gold medal at the European Games, however these were not the European Championships for Waterpolo, but a junior event (as described in our article: "The aquatic sports are only open to junior-level competitors"). Searching for news reports about her (Latin or Cyrillic) only gives passing mentions, not enough to establish notability.
Reason: No evidence of
notability in the article or as far as I could find online
[35][36]. Some passing mentions and some non-independent sources, but no significant independent attention for this loco shed.
Reason: No indication why this (and probably many similar ones) would be notable. The three awards were given to millions of people and (as in this case) vessels, the two sources are basically (good) fan sites, and looking for other sources gave nothing that indicated any notability.
[37]. This nomination is only for this page, as other similar ships may have some notability individually: but probably all of these need to be looked at.
Reason: No evidence of any
notability. The awards were handed out by the millions, the sources are (good) fan sites, and nothing better could be found online
[38]. ProD was removed because "too soon" (?), so an AfD it is.
Reason: Another one of these
non notable ships, sourced to fan sites and with "awards" which were given out by the millions. Nothing better could be found online
[39], so I nominated it for prod deletion, but for some reason this was reverted as "too soon", which is not really a helpful reason (the ship won't suddenly become notable in the next few days, and the article creator already moved on to other articles).
Reason: There doesn't seem to be the necessary notability to have individual articles for specific sports at these small, regional, junior games. I checked alpine skiing, dene, and table tennis, and it looks as if these have not been the subject of the necessary independent coverage, with even many gold medal winners not getting real attention.
Reason: Fails
WP:NOTNEWS. A tragic event, but no lasting coverage or enduring notability for this unusual but minor incident ("minor" for everyone but the directly involved, just like e.g. thousands of car crashes every day). Got some international attention when it happened due to the combination of "unusual" and "Abba", but such human interest articles come and go swiftly.
Reason: No reliable, independent indepth sources to establish that this player meets
WP:GNG. Sources are either statistics databases, educational institutions about their alumni, or very short mentions in the London Gazette. Actual independent sources giving some real attention to this cricket player seem to be missing, which means that while he meets the low standards of
WP:NCRIC (played two first class games for the University cricket team), he fails the standard which these cricket rules try to codify, i.e. actually meeting the
WP:GNG. Also no evidence of notability as an educator or as an officer.
Reason: No evidence that she received any significant coverage in non-database reliable sources. I found one newspaper article where one result is given (as "Mevr. Bollekens"), nothing else.
Reason: No evidence of
notability. Sources aren't independent (press releases, publisher or employer, ...), and looking for other sources only gives e.g. pieces where he is quoted
[42] (a quote taken directly from the press release it seems, compare with
this) or mentioned in passing
[43]. Some of the sources one can find are for a namesake, a painter and graphic artist. In any case, neither regular Google
[44] nor Google News
[45] provide any independent sources about the subject, so he fails
WP:GNG.
Reason: Renominating this one separately. Completely unsourced
WP:LISTCRUFT, not a notable aspect of the group of people (date of birth is important for individuals, and the prime ministers are notable as a group; but date of birth is not important as a group). Subsections like "born on the same date" are quite indicative of the "encyclopedic" level of this. Perhaps add a "PMs with the same starsign" grouping as well? The monarch, GG, or PM at the time of birth are not even important enough to be mentioned in someone's individual biography, but they are important enough to be subsections in this list? The year of birth is included in
List of prime ministers of New Zealand, people are free to male all calculations, lists, ... from this information: that doesn't mean that it belongs in an encyclopedia of course.
Reason: Only sources listed in the article are published by the same company as the one that made the game, so are not independent. Other reviews are claimed to exist, but nothing is known about their length, independence, reliability, ... Looking for sources beyond the highly specialized magazines gave no usable results
[46][47].
Reason: No evidence of notability. The awards are generic ones, handed out by the thousands, and were not awarded especially to this ship. That a military ship was used in military actions is not a claim to notability, nor that it was used by different countries (or else many thousands of military airplanes would be notable as well I suppose?). The sources are either not independent, or not reliable (like the mypaper.pchome.com blog, or the postenavalemilitaire forum), or not really indepth. Nothing remarkable about this and many hundreds similar ships.
Reason: The first two sources in the article are by the creator of this theory, and the third source
[48] doesn't seem to mention Aminoff at all. This definition seems to be only used in publications by Aminoff
[49]. Google Scholar reinforces the image that this definition has not been picked up by many others
[50]. The other articles around this editor (
Aminoff Suffering Syndrome and
Bechor Zvi Aminoff) need some care for puffery and so on as well, but these at least seem to have some notability.
Reason: No evidence of any notability. Deprodded on the basis of an unaccepted essay, but similar ships have already been deleted at AfD because there isn't the necessary sourcing available to actually meet the
WP:GNG. Awards are generic ones, not given for any specific reason to this ship individually: and sources are either not independent or not significant.
Reason: No evidence that this is a notable radio station. First source is a map, second source doesn't seem to mention the station, third one is a fanzine. Looking for better sources gave nothing in Google News and very little in general
[51], the best are some religious sources supporting the station, or a missionary doing voluntary work at the station. Nothing that meets
WP:GNG though.
Reason: No evidence of any actual
notability (meeting some very liberal, unaccepted essay isn't sufficient). Awards are meaningless as they were distributed by the thousands for "being there", nothing more. Sources are not independent or not reliable and indepth. A run of the mill ship which had nothing remarkable in its career. Military equipment being sold from one country to another happens literally all the time.
Reason: Run-of-the-mill ship, just like lots of military equipment used consecutively by a few countries, but nothing remarkable. The awards are generic ones, given for "being there", and the sources are not sufficient to meet the
WP:GNG. Some unaccepted military essay tries to claim that all commissioned ships are notable, but this is not an accepted (or acceptable) guideline.
Reason: Run-of-the-mill ship, just like lots of military equipment used consecutively by a few countries, but nothing remarkable. The awards are generic ones, given for "being there", and the sources are not sufficient to meet the
WP:GNG. Some unaccepted military essay tries to claim that all commissioned ships are notable, but this is not an accepted (or acceptable) guideline.
Reason: While he technically meets the "presumed" low notability threshold of
WP:NFOOTY, there is nothing further to be found online, it seems: no career, no birth or death information, no biographical background, nothing. Fails
WP:GNG quite badly.
Reason: Sources mention him, but aren't about him; they are about his company and the talent show organised by them. I thus redirected this page to the company
Kikac Music, but was reverted by the article creator. Suggest redirecting again.
Reason: No evidence of any
notability found. A redirect to
Fencing at the 1924 Summer Olympics – Women's foil was reverted, so an AfD can decide what to do. The only source we have is the very short bio at Olympedia
[52]. Looking for more information didn't reveal a single source. At the time Walker was active, women's fencing was hardly a popular sport, and it looks as if she got little to no attention. I'm happy to change my position if better sources are presented!
Fram (
talk) 15:17, 13 January 2022 (UTC)
Reason: No evidence of
notability found for this. Can perhaps be redirected to National Library of Finland if people think that is useful? Otherwise deletion seems best.
Reason: Has some claims to notability, but when one takes a closer look, this photographer seems to lack notability, with sources which seem to be produced by the photographer and not by actual journalists (e.g.
this one and
this one), which explains why they are largely absent from net results
[53] and completely absent from Google News
[54].
Reason:
WP:CFORK of
Hayden, Arizona, created because "The contents on the article: Hayden, Arizona was written by me and a certain user has continued to remove some of it. " (quoted from the talk page). To be more precise, the contents were removed repeatedly by two different editors, and instead of trying to discuss this at the talk page (or using dispute resolution), the creator decided to make this separate article to be able to show their pictures anyway. No reason to have a separate article for this, this belongs in the main article on Hayden, or doesn't belong on Wikipedia at all.
Reason: I proposed this article because "No evidence of
notability. The single source is an extremely inclusive list of people with very short, stenographic "biographies", and hardly an indication of notability (looking at other entries, I see a lot of "apothecary", "reserve lieutenant", "veterinary", "engineer", ...)." The Prod was removed with the addition of "more references and an entire document about his biography that should establish a form of notability". However, these sources are:*
A biography of his father, which just mentions Ivar as his son. Worse, the source for that document is ... Swedish Wikipedia. So an unreliable source which isn't about Ivar. *A
book which mentions Ivar on one line as a sub-lieutenant, with about 30 superiors in that regiment alone. As further reading is added a magazine from what looks to be a veterans association for a batallion, describing one of their former chefs. This is not an independent source but an organisation describing their own history, just like many company, club, ... member magazines do. All in all, there isn't enough here to establish notability.
Reason: No evidence of
notability found. I redirected to
Danish Figure Skating Championships(which she won by default as the only competitor), but article creator reverted. Article has no indepth sources, and searching online only reveals more databases and similar sources
[55], and no Google News hits.
Reason: Non notable member of a notable family: he died when he was less than 3 years old, and as his his father was dead by the time he was born, it isn't as if he was the inspiration for notable works either. Probably some of the other articles about family members need to be looked at as well (e.g.
Elizabeth Riddell Burns). Suggestions for the best redirect target are welcome.
Reason: Lacks the
notability required to have an article. While she meets the very lax indicators of
WP:NFOOTY by having played for a national team, NFOOTY / NSPORTS explicitly state that they only give a presumption of notability, and that in the end
WP:GNG must be met. The only non-database source whioh gives some attention to her is an interview by the Gibraltar FA, which isn't an independent source of course.
Reason: Hoax? I first draftified this to give the editor a chance to make clear what it is about, but they put it back with minimal improvements, and I still can't find out what they really try to describe here. There is very little evidence for any
Bombay Tribune, never mind one that is "market leaders in terms of circulation", even though it is only a supplement: "Bombay Tribune[1] is a free supplement of The Bombay Tribune".
Reason: Unsourced (tagged since 2011) gallery with no indication of
notability for the topic as a group (individual oars will be verifiable, but that isn't sufficient to have an article here). Only external link is a hobby website, not the kind of source that establishes notability either.
Reason: No evidence found of
notability, just some passing mentions in articles giving the names in a team. Doesn't seem to have received the necessary significant attention in
reliable sources.
Reason: No evidence that this is a notable list topic (individual entries may have gotten a mention), i.e. that the VFA or VFL wooden spoon is a topic that on its own has gotten significant attention from reliable independent sources.
Reason:
WP:BLPCRIME. I moved this to draft space to get it out of the mainspace until this is decided, and because at first glance it already contained blatantly incorrect information ("for the murder" instead of "for the attempted murder" is quite a huge difference). Person is not really well-known before this, and he is accused, not convicted, so per BLPCRIME we probably shouldn't have an article on him.
Reason: Seems to lack the necessary notability. Sources are a local radio station they cooperated with to stage an event, and the "California Herald" which doesn't seem like a very reliable source, more a place for amateur journalists to post or repost stuff. I couldn't find better sources online.
Reason:
WP:BLPCRIME. An article solely created because the person is alleged (not convicted) to have attempted to murder his son (not actually murder him, as the article claims).
Reason: Lacks
notability. I can find more about the "Covenant Reformed Presbyterian Church" which formed in Canada in the 1970s
[56] or about individual churches with this name, than about this small splinter group. Most sources are primary or not reliable (conservapedia!). I presume this is the same denomination as the one here,
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Covenant Reformed Presbyterian Church, but a new discussion after all this time won't hurt.
Reason: This unsourced "suburb" article seems from the few available sources online to simply be a holiday resort, and at the wrong title to boot (should be "Guadalcanal", not "Guadacanal").
Reason: Fails
WP:GNG. No evidence found of any notability, is just included in some databases. I checked Delpher.nl (large database of Dutch newspapers) both for Ulferd Bruseker and for Frits Bruseker, and found nothing that would add notability. Looking for Bruseker worstelen (Dutch for wrestling) gave some Brusekers in result lists (but no further information), but their initials were "M Bruseker", "W Bruseker", so apparently not about the one we have an article on. Other articles like
this again mentions him (as participating in the Olympic wrestling event), but again without any further information. Similar
here. The most extensive result I could find was a very short review of his Olympic 1st round defeat,
here. This article by the way contradicts our
Wrestling at the 1908 Summer Olympics – Men's Greco-Roman lightweight article, switching the results and opponents of Bruseker and his compatriot Van Moppes. I have no idea if our article is right, or if the review from the day is right. But our article is confirmed by
this (one line about Bruseker), so I guess the "best" article I found so far is not trustworthy... I haven't found any article that actually gives any further information about Bruseker, but I may have missed it. I had redirected the article to
Wrestling at the 1908 Summer Olympics – Men's Greco-Roman lightweight, which seems like the logical solution here, but was reverted.
Reason: This seems to be either a hoax or a bunch of very hard to verify
WP:OR with a few reliable bits thrown in to make it look believable. For example, the forefather "Fathadh mac Aonghus", is not to be found in Google Books and doesn't seem to appear in reliable sources in Google otherwise
[57]. "Cormac Ó Fathaigh" is said to be the first with the surname, but again all traces of such a person are missing
[58][59]. The episode with "Uilic de Burgo": equally unverifiable. The sources used in the article either don't support the article, or are copies of Wikipedia. Note that the name O Fathaigh obviously exists, and some information about it can be found from reliable sources, e.g.
here. But that doesn't excuse the existence of an article which seems 90% made up around these few facts.If this is indeed largely a hoax or unverifiable, then a number of other articles will need to be looked at as well (e.g.
Fathadh mac Aonghus and
Tadhg an tSleibhe Ó Fathaigh exist here since 2009, but are completely unverifiable).
Reason: While I can somewhat understand having redirects to wiktionary (as dicdefs are out of scope, but can be useful for jargon), why would we redirect for biographies? Either a person is notable, and should have an article here; or they aren't notable, but then we shouldn't outsource to a different site with different standards. This seems like a backdoor mechanism to have biographies of people included without having to care about our policies. It also obscures what would otherwise be redlinks iff the person is notable.
Reason:
WP:NOTNEWS. Typical "amusing" or "human interest" story which gets some attention for a very short while (in this case, some days in July 2019) but has no lasting notability.
Reason: Userfied in 2009 after the first AfD, and then moved back to mainspace without real improvements. Based on one mention in a 1843 source
[60] basically, which very shortly mentions a Fathadh, son of Aengus. Lacks
verifiability and
notability.
Reason:
Unverifiable. There are some references to people nicknamed "Tadhg an tSleibhe", though it is not clear what they have to do with the subject of this article. There doesn't seem to be any source for a "Tadhg an tSleibhe Ó Fathaigh". Sources used in the article, e.g.
the first one, have at first glance some connection to the general topic, but when looking more closely don't seem to mention our Tadhg at all. Suorce
2 has some Tadhgs, but not this one it seems. Source
3 is an unpublished manuscript, seemingly from the 20th century, and is not a reliable source. Source
4 doesn't concern itself with a Tadhg. The same goes for
Source 5. The book "The Surnames of Ireland" doesn't mention any Tadhg
[61]. And I haven't been able to find any sources (apart from Wikipedia mirrors and rip-offs) which mention "Tadhg an tSleibhe Ó Fathaigh". At best a non notable figure, or an article that belongs at a completely different title if this is about some notable person who is known by another name. But looking for other combinations doesn't yield anything either, e.g.
this.
Reason: Typical article which looks well-sourced at first, but which is rather problematic. The sources seem to be added randomly to sentences, e.g. the line about "Henry Harvin became first Educational Technology Company that provided cources on Agile and Bitcoin" is sourced to two links which don't mention this fact at all. All the sources, and most of what I can find online, are of the "5 companies which offer the best courses on subject X" type with texts clearly supplied by the company (and probably paid for inclusion in the "article" as well), not sources about the company written from a neutral or journalistic perspective. These kind of articles really are a plague and we should probably put a lot of these sources simply on the blacklist, but until then deleting them one by one is the way to go.
Reason: A "list" of one is not a list, but a "cutesy" way to highlight an achievement which is already included in many Olympic lists and other pages on enwiki.
Reason: I can't find any evidence of notability, and the second source in the article doesn't seem to mention him, which is a bit alarming. Perhaps others have more luck in finding good sources for doctor Sukumaran, all I could find were sources for a namesake who leads a workers union.
Reason: Not
notable, no sources available apart from the announcement already given in the article
[62]. Note that the other two sources in the article don't mention this film.
Reason: Turning directories and databases into prose doesn't make someone notable. This directory
[63] is the main source, the remainder is a cricket database and very short, official mentions in the London Gazette (a primary source basically, and nothing in depth). No other or better sources seem to be available for the subject. Fails
WP:GNG.
Reason: Delete.
WP:SSRT: "Please keep in mind that only topics with a less-than-encyclopedic scope that are commonly wikified words or that are repeatedly recreated should become soft redirects. We don't need a soft redirect for every possible word or phrase to be included in Wikipedia." Not every word combination found in urban dictionary and Wiktionary should become a soft redirect here: "party foul" isn't really commonly used on enwiki, and the meaning isn't so obscure that an explanation is needed either.
Reason: Looks to be a promo piece with "journalistic" sources of dubious reliability. The first source, USAWire
[64], looks to be a press release / PR piece, with the author working for a PR bureau
[65]. The second source, LAProgressive
[66] isn't any better. The author, "Seja Desai", doesn't seem to exist, and her picture
[67] is a cropped part of a generic "Asian beauty" image
[68] taken in Iran
[69]. The final source, Forbes
[70] is nearly identical to the first one, and has no author at all. Looking for better sources gave me only
this, yet another PRwire message. All in all, seems to be someone keen to promote themselves and savvy enough to find places which look at first legitimate but are actually just empty shells, rehashing PR messages. Fails
WP:N.
Reason: While I can somewhat understand having redirects to wiktionary (as dicdefs are out of scope, but can be useful for jargon), why would we redirect for biographies? Either a person is notable, and should have an article here; or they aren't notable, but then we shouldn't outsource to a different site with different standards. This seems like a backdoor mechanism to have biographies of people included without having to care about our policies. It also obscures what would otherwise be redlinks iff the person is notable.Also nominated for the same reason are all other similar pages:*
Hermann Heinrich Hacker*
John S. Dugdale*
Leif Aarvik*
Paul Aellen*
Roberto Pace*
David John Lawrence AgassizFram (
talk) 15:08, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
Reason: Not mentioned at target, and not in any way notable enough to be included there. In fact, his role there isn't even verifiable
[71], the Medium.com source in the original article (before it was turned into a redirect) is not a reliable source, and no official or reliable sources seem to confirm his role.
Reason: Very limited notability (a few reports of when his family donated a plaque to a museum) and rather strong but unsupported claims in this biography (one of the first European pioneers in Argentine photography? No, decades later than e.g.
Alexander Witcomb, and flashing with magnesium had been known even longer). Not one source in Google Books even mentions him as far as I can tell (e.g. the book "Photography in Argentina"
[72] doesn't mention him, even though it has attention for the actual pioneers like Panunzi and Witcomb. If enough sources are found to keep this, it needs a complete rewrite to make it neutral and factual: as it stands, it seems to fail
WP:GNG to me.
Reason: Fails
WP:GNG. Lack of significant coverage in independent sources (all I could find were databases or things like the facebook page of his club). The "national" team for this French "collectivity" with some 35,000 inhabitants is not FIFA-recognised. But in the end, the most important aspect is that there just isn't any real coverage of this person
[73][74]
Reason: Lacks
notability. There is the one interview from "grumpire", but otherwise there is very little to be found in general
[75], and absolutely nothing from Google News
[76]. Grumpire doesn't seem to be an especially noteworthy source either, more a blog (the Gold Ninja Video interview, from 26 January, is apparently the most recent post on the site
[77]).
Reason: Paid for article
[78]) where the three recent sources have all signs of being rehashed press releases / paid for "articles" as well, seeing that they all came within days of each other and all contained the same bizarre mistakes like "he moved to South Africa in early 2000s which had just gained independence"
[79] vs. "during the early 2000s he moved to South Africa which had just gained independence"
[80] vs. "the opportunities that existed in South Africa in 2000 after it had just attained its independence."
[81]. Very few actually independent sources about him seem to exist
[82].
Reason: Hasn't received any significant coverage, only mentioned in databases or in passing in results. Being allowed to play once because many actual pro players withdrew is not sufficient when the actual coverage is missing.
Reason:
WP:SSRT: "Please keep in mind that only topics with a less-than-encyclopedic scope that are commonly wikified words or that are repeatedly recreated should become soft redirects. We don't need a soft redirect for every possible word or phrase to be included in Wikipedia."
Reason: No evidence of
notability, a single review in a highly specialized magazine. Even the broader internet, which has plenty of sites for this kind of topic, has very little attention for this one, i.e. 22 Google hits
[83]. Nothing in Google Books.
Reason: Hoax? I can find no evidence of a company called "Smart Grade Company" or even just "Smart Grade" in Jamshedpur or Seoul, never mind one with a $1.5 billion revenue. Perhaps I'm missing all sources, perhaps I miss just a few sources and this is a remarkably low profile company to be this big...
Reason: A movie with "one" review at RottenTomatoes, and a "reception" from a wordpress page. The movie exists, but the best I could find were a few lines
here, other sources are more like
this one or
this one. Not enough to show
notability.
Reason: Has played for the national team, but this hasn't apparently generated any significant coverage at all. One of these cases were the "presumed" notability of
WP:NSPORTS seems to be too optimistic, and "actual", required
notability is missing.
Reason: Season article for a competition at the 12th (if I see it correctly) level of the English football pyramid. Information is woefully incomplete but basically correct (see
this primary source, but that doesn't mean that this is a
notable subject of course.
Reason: No evidence of any
notability, doesn't seem to have received any significant attention from independent sources. On a side note, I can imagine quite a few players now getting a chance to play in Russia but a total lack of attention for doing so (or worse for them, getting negative attention).
Reason: No evidence of
notability: apart perhaps from the
Georgian journal article (which is in itself a rather strange and gushing text), the others are just rehashed press releases (e.g. the
Interesting Engineering article copies whole bits straight from the Cnick Teslaring homepage), not actual independent, journalistic bits. Other sources one can find are of the same ilk (e.g. this
interview is just a free promo piece, not an actual interview or a sign of a newspaper or magazine having true interest in the company.
Reason: The electricity price constantly fluctuates (and isn't necessarily the same for a whole country either). A list of the price in countries at a random date is not a
notable subject, and a list which is restricted to just 34 countries isn't really optimal either.
Reason: Very unclear notability. This article seems to be based on research of primary sources, and a self-published book. I wasn't able to find better sources, but perhaps a different combination of search terms will give better results (I tried it with Hohenlimburg Broich probst Werden).
Reason: Unverifiable. I can find one reference which mentions a "chaise à bureau" from the Rococo, but without any indication that this is a specific type as described here. Unsourced for nearly 15 years as well, so perhaps time to put this to rest.
Reason: A nearly endless template of names which may or may not have the same origin as "Charles" (some do, some like
Carey (surname) apparently don't, some like
Lina have many origins and could thus carry many similar templates, some aren't even "real" names but only pseudonyms like
Karloff (name)). Disambiguation pages are meant to distinguish between people with the same or very similar names, so it makes sense that the disambig
Caryl has a see also for e.g.
Caryll and vice versa; but burying these in a massive list together with Giancarlo, Chip, Lotte and Sharlene will not help for this in any way.
Reason: More than 30 sources, but it seems as if there a no actual
reliable, independent, significant ones among them. A badly written piece from "Timebulletin" is the only thing on Google News trying to look like a real news article, but looks to be just a fake promo piece instead. The site is blacklisted on enwiki (hence no link here), which is indicative of its value for us.
Reason: Fails
WP:NORG. We now have more than 150 articles on Portland restaurants and bars, but not all of them seem to be really notable. This one fails the
WP:AUD (audience) test, as the sources are all local, and most of them not very indepth either (the 15 March 2022 "closing" article is the exception, it is local but is an actual article instead of a short, gushing promo mention like
this).
Reason: Extremely premature. Two teams who will play against each other in an official competition for the first time next month, that's it. Not a notable rivalry at the moment.
Reason: While Lambda Upsilon Lambda in itself is notable, there is no reason to have a list of all non-notable chapters of this group, we are not a directory. Fails
WP:LISTN.
Reason:
WP:NOTNEWS. Not every incident in this war needs a separate article, and this one so far is just a minor issue (it may be the start of something major, but then we can create an article once this is established). It's only reported on by Tass, not independently verified, and one or a few shells fired and 4 people injured is not really a lot when seen against the scale of this war.
Reason: No evidence of any
notability, only been written about in far-left minor publications (note: the Weekly Worker link
[85] does not address this group directly), but not in
reliable, independent sources. A fringe group with no political results or importance so far, and which has failed to get real attention since the split.
Reason: Not a notable release, only a review in a local magazine (x-press), and listing in databases. The whole Shades of Perth series lacks sourcing, and the third one seems to be even more obscure than the other two
[86].
Reason: This is a translation of the company name, but is not used outside of Wikipedia, and was created (as an article) by a disruptive, and since indef blocked editor.
Reason: We already have articles for
Amnon and for
Tamar (daughter of David), which deal almost exclusively with this story. Having a third article for the same subject seems like overkill. I redirected this to
Amnon, but on second thoughts a redirect to
Tamar (daughter of David) may be better. The article creator thinks it is better as a stand-alone article, so here we are.
Reason: Fails
WP:NORG. The sources are either local or trivial, e.g. "GSP has been voted the best pizza in Portland by fans of PBS" turns out to be a list where anyone can add an entry
[87]: "Submit your suggestions using the form at the bottom of the page and we’ll add it to the list." and thus has no value at all. The article in the Oregonian is a passing mention
[88]. Local articles like
this add very little, and
this epitomizes why local articles don't count towards notability for companies. Which leaves us with one article from OregonLive,
[89]. It hasn't made it into any books according to Google Books, it has very little impact in general,
49 GHits is absolute peanuts for a current North American subject, and GNews are the usual local things
[90], many already included in the article.
Reason: No evidence of
notability found, sources (external links) are not independent but organisations he works for or with. Perhaps better sources are available in Egyptian publications, but internationally, or in Germany where he now works, he seems to be hardly known. I can't find evidence of any "Dance de Lagos" in Portugal.
Reason: Short-lived school club which ended up not playing in a notable competition, and which may have had one later international player in their ranks, perhaps (though I couldn't verify this). Lacks
reliable, indepth sources about the club
Reason: Minor event from a new organization without an article. It got routine announcements and results in the specialized websites, but no actual indepth attention.
This is about the only source that gives anything beyond that, which is hardly sufficient to establish notability and maintain an article.
Reason: This seems like a very minor title, where it is hard to even be certain what the current name is (apparently, since 2016 it was the "Undisputed World Heavyweight Championship", but it looks to have reverted to the old one now?) or the current title holder (the article cites a 2019 source, but it seems as if it has been held by 2 other wrestlers since). Searching with the current title gives very few news hits
[91] and rather few general hits
[92] for a type of event which normally generates lots of nearly identical wrestling database and fansite hits. Looking for the shorter title doesn't really give much better results
[93][94].
Reason: Recently, a number of similar articles have been created, and I'm unclear whether they are a good idea. We already have categories for these, they are not a notable topic as a group, they are not a set index (as described at
Wikipedia:Set index articles), and we could have a nearly endless supply of such lists. For this specific example, the articles about Cameron Diaz are already easily found by:*The search bar*The Cameron Diaz article*The Cameron Diaz categoryDo we really need a fourth way to access these? I think we should delete this, but am open to being convinced otherwise.
Reason: It may be a transliteration issue or something else, but I can't find any sources for this Durgāradeshadipati Baba Kaliveer (also when looking separately, "Durgāradeshadipati" "Baba Kaliveer"). The online sources in the article are either unreliable (TheReaderApp) or don't mention this at all (
sacred texts.comvedabase.io, and the article as written is very confusing to find out what it is actually about (it reads like some religious story written here as truth), so even if verified would need a complete overhaul to become encyclopedic. But without verification we shouldn't have an article of course.
Reason:
WP:NOT the place for detailed statistics and little or no background. We have no sources which actually discuss this (small) group in depth (and the sources we do have in the article don't seem to work?). A redirect to
Demographics of Antigua and Barbuda might be a solution, even though that article doesn't mention the Syrian or Lebanese.
Reason: Hoax? The two sources are not correct (ISBN links to other books, title of first one as given don't exist). I can't find references which use "war theatre" with this meaning (as far as meaning can be found in this article). If it exists and is notable, it will need a thorough rewriting.
Reason: No evidence of notability. I can't access the obituary in his local paper, so I don't know if it is family-written or newspaper-written: but the other two sources are passing mentions, and nothing in the article indicates why he would be a notable person. Searching for more information mainly leads me to somewhat more notable namesakes (possibly family), including an Olympic rower, but I see nothing substantial about this person.
Reason:
WP:NOTGALLERY,
WP:NOTDIRECTORY. The vast majority of these have no source, no context, and aren't even important enough to be discussed in the article on the county itself. Thankfully the list is very incomplete, as the US has more than 3000 counties apparently.
Reason: No evidence of
notability in sources in article, one sentence in the description of papers, and a passing mention in a bio of his father. No better sources found online. Article gives little reason to believe that much more would be available.
Reason: I can't verify the lofty claims ("author of the concept of changing the world"?) or find evidence that he is notable, not with the article title and not with the Georgian version "ილია ხეროდინაშვილის" either.
Reason: Not
notable yet. Apart from the one local article in the St Louis American, there seems to be little to nothing substantial about her. The Rare Radar "interview"
[97] looks to be self-provided, Gnews gives nothing more
[98].
Reason: Lacks
notability. Reviews come from not independent
[99] or unreliable sources (a 2020 article on user-published "Medium.com" which discusses a 2022 book?
[100]). Nothing on Google News, barely anything on Google in general
[101].
Reason: 57 references, and yet it looks as if he isn't actually notable. No GNews hits about him (just posts by him)
[102], and some 58 regular GHits
[103] are both very low for a current English-language writer, filmmaker and entrepreneur. The sources in the article are in many cases self published, or generic databases, or of dubious independence. Something like
this doesn't seem to mention Rahman, or Fadew. Something like
this is a worthless source.
this is self published by Rahman.
This is of very dubious reliability and independence.
This is self written. In general, I have trouble here finding the few actual reliable, independent, indepth sources we require to accept biographies.
Reason: While there are sources about a Byzantine Reconquista (not a "Reconquisita" though), these mostly apply to the 10th or 11th century, and none seem to be about a post-1453 reconquista. The Nicol 2002 source doesn't use the term Reconquista, the Simon David Phillips source only mentions an "Iberian reconquista" once, but not the one treated in this article. While the article purports to be about battles from 1453-1492, the quote about the 15,000 to 50,000 Ottoman dead is about the 1522 siege of Rhodes against the Knights Hospitaller, who aren't even mentioned as belligerents in the infobox. So, a hoax or at best a completely misunderstood and mangled retelling of the Nicol source?
Reason: Largely unverifiable. I can't find good info on the iPOP award, he doesn't seem to be included in the first source (Be Art), and so on. His youtube parody exists
[104] but is not notable,
this is a blog and doesn't mention him (at least not his "beto" nickname, perhaps it is using his real name but no way to match this with any certainty): in either case, the iPOP website
[105] used as a source here gives no results for either that other name nor for Beto. And don't get me started on the royal heritage claims...
Reason: Very small, finite list (country as such no longer exists) with no sources showing that this is a topic of direct interest (information extracted from a general stamp catalogue), and with little interest for the biographies of the persons involved (royalty shown on stamps of country they rule, yawn).
Reason: No evidence of
notability. No reliable, independent, indepth sources are available (the Burnley sources in the article are passing mentions only, and looking for better sources gave no results
[106]). Something like
this is the best I could find, but it is neither substantive nor independent.
Reason: No evidence found of any notability. Barely anything for "Alex" Cox-Ashwood, a few more hits for "Alexandre" Cox-Ashwood, but nothing substantial from independent reliable sources, just databases.
Reason: I don't see a speedy deletion criterion that really fits here, but this article is related to
Qunut, but is just a (the?) text of this prayer, without background, and with an incorrect title (hence makes no sense to redirect it to Qunut either). The "BBC" source (homepage) is useless here, and the other source
[107] would be unacceptable as a reliable source anyway, but doesn't even mention Qunut, so is hardly any help.
Reason: As far as I understand it, there are no "parties" in the European Council. The Council is composed of the heads of state or government: while these usually belong to a party, they represent their country or at least the ruling coalition of their country, and not the various fractions in the European Parliament, of which they aren't members. This page (and the other similar ones) mix two things together, giving the impression that European Council decisions are made based on European Parliament fractions and on the party the head of government belongs to, which is incorrect.
Reason: We already have
History of homosexuality, there seems to be no reason to have a "history of gay men" (could be a redirect of course). It is very unclear what content is supposed to be included in the one article which doesn't also belong in the other, and we shouldn't have two articles on the same subject.
Reason: Normally I would tag this for speedy deletion as having no content, but it has existed like this since 2008. 2008! That has to be some kind of record, I hope.
Reason: Lack of
notability, article based on primary sources (and even then lots seem unverifiable). Redirect to
New Almaden#New Almaden Quicksilver Mining Museum is a possibility, even though the article title is a very unlikely search term (including the typo in the disambiguation).
Reason: After 13 years, we have "2" of the many people who were shown on stamps of Mauritius (one with a (??) after his name, very encyclopedic), no source (one external link), and no indication that this is in any way
notable. Keeping around such crappy articles serves no purpose at all, and redirecting it is no good either as there are no other articles with info on this subject.
Reason: Article makes claims to notability (zzinna awards wins, other awards) but none of these are verifiable, and looking for other sources produced nothing even remotely indicating any actual
notability.
Reason: Unsourced since its inception in 2004, a "list" of 2 items for a "country" which hardly existed, and which never created any stamps (they reused stamps from elsewhere with a print on it stating "Bushire under British Occupation"). No evidence that this is a notable subject.
Reason: Unsourced since 2004, woefully incomplete. Fails
WP:LISTN. It has no stamps of Vanuatu, despite the title (and the existence of plenty of stamps from Vanuatu depicting people) , and the list of the New Hebrides is badly incomplete or wrong (e.g. lacks the first stamps of Elisabeth II, but also stamps of Prince Philip, William Wales and William Hodges). No evidence that this is a notable subject, and being looked at on average once every five days
[108] shows a total lack of interest among our readers and our editors.
Reason: Fails
WP:LISTN, no evidence that this is a notable subject as a group. In addition, unsourced since its inception in 2004, stops for some reason in 1960, and is incomplete even for that period (e.g. missing from the 1950s are
Isabella I of Castile and
Dumarsais Estimé).
Reason: This is terrible. I have already nominated a number of these "lists of people on postage stamps" articles, including one that had been completely empty since 2008. I thought that was the worst, but I'm afraid that I was mistaken. Since its inception as an unsourced list in 2010, this page has "listed" one person, who appeared on a stamp in 1991. Too bad that the first stamp in Turkmenistan only appeared in ... 1992 (and the first person to appear on a Turkmen stamp was not the founder of Pakistan, duh). Even if this had been a factually correct list, it would fail
WP:LISTN as a topic which hasn't received significant attention as a group. As it stands, it is simply a monument to the utter ridiculousness of most of these lists and belies all "but readers want it" claims. Luckily only 24 people (or webscrapers or so) have seen this page in the last 90 days
[110].
Reason: Fails
WP:LISTN, not a notable list subject. Article unsourced since its creation in 2004 (and tagged as such since 2010), ends the list at a random year, and is incomplete even for those years. Due to the list ending abruptly and early, there is not a single entry for the actual country Antigua and Barbuda, only for the earlier separate ones. Extremely limited page views (1 visit every three days). Useless as it stands, and no sources are available to show that it is a notable subject anyway.
Reason: Fails
WP:LISTN, not a notable grouping. Unsourced since its creation in 2004, incomplete (both pre-independence and after), not of interest to readers (21 pageviews in 90 days).
Reason: See
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Vanessa Getty. Previous discussion was avoided by the article creator by turning it into a G7 deletion, but less than a week later they simply recreate the article (identical? I can't tell). Apparently this doesn't apply for a G4 speedy deletion, which seems like a shortcoming of the system. Anyway, I guess this means that the previous AfD should be reopened, so you may consider this a procedural AfD opening. Previous AfD nomination reason was "Promotional article on a Non notable socialite and philanthropist who lacks in-depth significant coverage in reliable sources thus fails GNG and fails
WP:ANYBIO also, the plethora of sources are a mirage to inundate the inexperienced new page reviewer. A before search turns up nothing concrete. They are model too but
WP:ENT isn’t met. "
Reason: Fails
WP:LISTN. Palau (pop. 18,000) has created in 40 years more than 4000 stamps (about the same as Great Britain did in 180 years), many of them with people. The current completely unsourced list only includes 3, completely at random (e.g. the 1983 set that featured Captain Wilson also showed three other named people, including Lee Boo who is here given for 1990). Nothing was added to the list since its creation in 2004, not even after someone else prod'ded it in 2009. Over the last 90 days, it was seen 13 times. Basically, no one cares to correct and improve it, and no one cares to read it.
Reason: This has some typical "impressive" sources which turn out to be problematic. Things like
this from the "Seattle Daily Observer" or
this from the "Denver Reporter" are pure promo pieces, for two "newspapers" without a presence on enwiki (bizarre if they were truly newspapers from these cities) and no indication why they, as local publications, would give this person so much glowing attention. Worse perhaps is
this from "Worldwineinfocenter", bringing an article that doesn't mention wine even once. But, wow, it is written by "Jennyfer Smith Senior Journalist
https://www.afp.com". Now, that is the website of
Agence France-Presse, a very reputable news source, so this would be a clear indication of importance. Strange though how the only references I can find for a Jennyfer Smith working for AFP (as a "senior journalist"), are all for articles about Jossifakis: looking back, the "Denver Reporter" article is also written by her! Whether he is notable or not (doubtful), the current article needs to be deleted as a promo piece (but not clear enough to just tag it as G11, some explanation was needed I think). And perhaps some of the sources so nicely presented should be blacklisted as they don't seem to be useful...
Reason: I have no idea at all what the actual purpose of this article is. A municipality of less than 10,000 inhabitants has a number of official documents available for inhabitants, just like most other communities in the world. Why it would be a good idea to have an article that informs us that Santa Margherita Ligure has an "Application for household allowance 2022", a "Request form 1 hour in Blue zone for residents only" or a "Specification for home composting" is unclear. If you need a formal reason, total lack of notability.
Reason: Fails
WP:LISTN. For some reason stops in 1969, and despite the claim of being complete until then, it misses e.g. Pierre and Marie Curie (1938) and Churchill, Lincoln and Kennedy (1965). Not improved since 2010, and was viewed by 9 people in the last 90 days, so not a topic of interest for our readers either.
Reason: Deleted a long time ago at
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michael Blakey (music producer), it is now recreated with new sources, but upon closer inspection it seems to be mostly nonsense, puffery, and other unverifiable stuff. He "has sold over 140 million albums" but is linked from not a single one on Wikipedia, and his Discogs page
[111] doesn't give the impression that this is true. He was a "Melody Maker Producer of the Year"? Repeated in vanity sources, but not in a single reliable source it seems, and unlikely considering his career as a producer. Should be deleted as a hoax, but isn't obvious enough to get a speedy without explanation I think.
Reason: I redirected this to
History of Liechtenstein, but was reverted. This list is nearly empty, and the few articles it points to are nearly empty as well (and could do with a discussion of their own). E.g. the first one,
2007 in Liechtenstein, just has a joke trivia entry. Perhaps the
Template:Years in Liechtenstein could be added at the bottom of the "History" article to help people who really want to access these "years" articles. But for most readers, arriving at this "list of years" article and then the underlying individual years will just be a disappointment instead of something helpful.
Reason: Fails
WP:LISTN. A seemingly random list, missing many entries (even the very first one, from 1902, Christian IX). Abandoned since its inception in 2010, with hardly anyone interested in it (25 views in 90 days). Sourced to a general catalogue and the homepage of a stamp dealer for some reason.
Reason: Fails
WP:LISTN. Unsourced and abandoned since its creation in 2003, tagged as such since 2010. Apparently Bulgaria has not put any people on postage stamps since the 1930s, if one was to believe this article. Not of any use to readers, and luckily they don't care to read it either (25 pageviews in the last 90 days excluding one very anomalous spike).
Reason: I redirected this to
1881–82 FA Cup, as all this club did was lose in a first round match in the FA Cup (playing the FA cup was no mark of distinction, all clubs could enter and many were supposed to play but never showed up anyway). No evidence that this is a notable organization, fails
WP:NORG, only has routine coverage.
Reason: No evidence of any
notability, just a name among many in some lists, and a standard entry in Lloyd's which doesn't indicate any notability. No actual
reliable, indepth sources about this ship apparently. Perhaps there is a good redirect target?
Reason: Fails
WP:LISTN. Largely abandoned since its creation in 2007, one source for one entry (not working any longer), not of interest to our readers (19 pageviews in the last 90 days), just like the vast majority of similar lists
Reason: Fails
WP:LISTN. Incomplete (no idea which years it supposedly covers, but e.g. 1980 stamps are missing), abandoned, unsourced since creation in 2015, and unread (18 pageviews in the last 90 days).
Reason: Fails
WP:LISTN. Very incomplete, abandoned, unsourced since creation in 2004, and mostly unread (some 30 pageviews in the last 90 days before the Proposed deletion).
Reason: Fails
WP:LISTN. Even the 1960s part, which looks filled, is very incomplete (e.g. the long series of Mexico 68 gold medal winners is lacking, and the many people on airmail stamps from the period). Largely abandoned since its creation in 2007, except some minor additions in 2013. Not of interest to our readers either, judging from the pageviews.
Reason: Fails
WP:LISTN. Unsourced (one source doesn't work and doesn't seem like a reliable source anyway), incomplete (e.g. has a stamp from 2001, but misses the Elias Abu Chabake stamp from the same year), and unloved (26 pageviews over the last 90 days).
Reason: Fails
WP:LISTN. Unsourced, very short list, which isn't even complete for the years it covers (e.g. Churchill 1966 or Princess Anne 1973 are missing). With 18 pageviews in the last 90 days, again one of these lists with no interest from either editors or readers.
Reason: Fails
WP:LISTN. Unsourced since 2003, abandoned since 2010, incomplete even for the years supposedly covered (e.g. 1937, Queen Elizabeth The Queen Mother).
Reason: Repeatedly recreated and draftified with different titles. Perhaps best to finish this once and for all through AfD then. Fails
WP:N; no evidence found that this is a notable person, just some passing mentions.
Reason: Fails
WP:LISTN. Also: abandoned and extremely incomplete (in case you wonder: the Cook Islands still produce stamps, and have put many people on their stamps since, er, 1949). A disservice to the few readers of this article.
Reason: No evidence that this small dam is a
notable subject. Just like roads, bridges, ... dams aren't automatically notable, and while many will be discussed in independent sources (as major constructions with a profound impact on the landscape), other ones like this (which basically create a pond, nothing more) will be largely ignored and fail
WP:N.
Reason: Fails
WP:LISTN. Also: sourced to a general stamp catalogue (not a source which gives attention to the specific topic of people), abandoned since 2011 (ends in 2005), hardly ever read (1 pageview every 4 days or so).
Reason: No evidence of actual
notability at the moment. Montserrat is an extremely small nation, and playing for their national team is the equivalent of playing for a team of the best 11 players from some village basically. There is no good sourcing available for Kirnon, just passing mentions (or the usual databases and primary sources of course). May obviously become notable later in his career.
Reason: Page has been merged to
Game of Thrones#Cultural influence, but redirect to their is objected against. I believe it makes more sense to discuss these names which are always discussed in the context of "they're popular because of GoT" either at the general Games of Thrones article, or at a (as yet not existant) spin-off article for the cultural influence of Games of Thrones (comparable to e.g.
Cultural influence of Star Trek). The same applies to the nearly identical
Khaleesi (given name).
Reason: Fails
WP:LISTN. Also: unsourced since creation in 2009, few additions done since then are haphazard (incomplete), and not of interest to readers (some 20 visits in the 90 days before the Prod).
Reason: Previously deleted in
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Oyinkansola Alabi. Sources here are dubious, seem to be promo pieces instead of true independent sources (often hard to tell whether the gushing prose and unverified claims of importance from the subject are independent but poor journalism, or just paid-for pieces). The Forbes one is written by Alabi, who is a member of their "business council", which sounds a lot more impressive than it is; it basically is a paid-for club of smallish CEOs who want more visibility and a nice title (it's "invitation only", but you can invite yourself it seems). The article seems to be copied from somewhere else, judging from the stray "ref" numbers throughout it, so may be a copyvio or recreation of a deleted article. There is very little to be found about her
[112][113].
Reason: All sources are either databases or primary sources, i.e. in this case sources by the organisers of the races or the sport, not independent sourcing. He may well become notable, but this seems a case of
WP:TOOSOON.
Reason: Was prod'ded with the rationale "No evidence found of notability (for the book as well as the author) per
WP:NBOOK,
WP:GNG, or
WP:ACADEMIC. " Article creator has been blocked for sockpuppetry, and many of their articles are up for deletion for a variety of reasons. Best to check this one as well.
Reason: Fails
WP:LISTN. Additionally, this article is since its creation in 2003 mainly unsourced (one stamp is sourced to a random webshop stamp dealer), ends in 1996 or thereabouts, and has mainly served as a time sink for minor cleanup over the years, without actual improvements or readers (before the Prod, it had about one pageview every 3 days...).
Reason: Unclear what she is actually notable for. Sources are not independent (local Catholic church diocese describing their origin) and hardly indepth. Findagrave is an unreliable source, her death notice in the newspaper
[114] indicates that the people then didn't think anything special of her either, with just a little bit more attention for her funeral
[115]. Could at most be a redirect to the article on the diocese if one line about her is added there; but just being the first to teach catholicism in one small (at the time) city (and then perhaps just to her own children, as said
here) is not much of a claim to fame.
Reason: No evidence of
notability for this never awarded medal. Two of the four sources don't even mention it
[116][117], and the others are a database
[118] and another short mention
[119] in sources of unclear reliability. A redirect to
Orders, decorations, and medals of Rhodesia may be an alternative to deletion.
Reason: No evidence that she is notable (i.e. meets the
WP:GNG and has actual independent reliable sources about her). Very few sources in general
[120], nothing in GNews. Perhaps known under another name back then?
Reason: I redirected this to
Mayor Max II for lack of
notability, but was reverted because somehow the "official" mayor max site establishes that notability. While "2" got probably enough attention to warrant an article, I don't see the same for "1" and a mention or short paragraph in the "2" article seems sufficient, so I again propose redirecting this.
Reason: No evidence of
notability found, only passing mentions or posts from related sources (like "Black and Red United"). Prod was removed because he "meets
WP:NFOOTBALL", but NFOOTBALL is no longer an accepted guideline, players need to show significant coverage, not just having played.
Reason: He died aged 2. Can be a redirect to his father or mother, but no reason to have a separate article for this
notability-lacking person whose only claim to fame is his family.
Reason: Unsourced article about an unremarkable game which didn't have lasting notability (just like all such games, there are of course match reports and other sources from the time it happened). Lacks
notability.
Reason: No evidence of notability. The first source, "Swagger", seems like a promo piece, when one considers that the novel that supposedly triggered that article is a self-published book which failed to get any attention
[121]. His companies as well have not had any impact
[122][123].
Reason: A lot of people die from external causes every year, and these deaths are often reported in local or regional newspapers, whether they are dog attacks, house fires, car accidents, tornadoes, ... It is not clear why the dog attacks in one country in one year would warrant a separate list. It's obviously not a rare occurrence. It's verifiable (though no indication if it is in any way complete), but that doesn't make it a
notable list topic.
Reason: Only sources are the same press release repeated multiple times, and it doesn't confirm any of the facts in the article. Perhaps he is notable and the article is just poorly written, but it looks as if there is no
notability yet, just some promotion.
Reason: No evidence found of any
notability, nothing in GNews and very little in Google in general, and sources in article are one source not about her but about the company, one source that doesn't seem to work, and one not independent source.
Reason: Fails
WP:LISTN. Also: unsourced since its creation in 2005, very incomplete (even for the years supposedly covered, e.g. 1981 Lady Di or 1989 Henri Dunant), and not of interest to readers (one visitor every few days).
Reason: Fails
WP:LISTN. Same issues as the many dozens of similar lists already deleted over the last months, but main issue is the lack of sources specifically about the list topic as a group (there are sources about specific stamp issues, and about Paraguayan stamps in general, but not sources discussing the topic of people on stamps of Paraguay in general). As usual, this list is largely abandoned and is just being edited as parts of general maintenance; the "year" links which follow each name go to Wikimedia Commons (in itself a poor choice which violated the
WP:MOS): but the target pages are deleted at Commons... (some even never existed, like
this one). The Vanity Fair source has nothing at all about a Paraguayan stamp, hardly surprising.
Reason: A description "pauline preterism" which isn't in use anywhere reliable, sourced to 2 self-published books (Liwanag and Hollett) and other primary or unreliable sources. Probably better not to merge or redirect this neologism /
WP:OR either.
Reason: Fails
WP:LISTN. Also same issues as most of these lists, many of them already deleted. Incomplete, largely abandoned since 2007, not of interest to readers.
Reason: Fails
WP:N. Has won many awards, none of them notable. Has written many books, none of them notable. Looking for sources gives me in GNews one press release, and one lengthy interview with "Total Prestige Magazine"
[127], which is a shady publication which seems to have a habit of giving excessively praiseful attention to otherwise completely unknown people. E.g. the cover of the issue before the Sullivan issue was for "Trevor Perkin", CEO of "HDM Coatings". Complete lack of all notability or "prestige"
[128], not the kind of CEO any actual, real luxury magazine would put on their cover or give a lengthy interview. This has all the hallmarks of a paid for publication to give people exposure and fake notability, not a genuine reliable source giving voluntary attention to a notable person. The 79 Google hits for Ayn Cates Sullivan
[129] are extremely low for a supposedly bestselling American fiction author with many books and awards. Looking for her original name doesn't help
[130]. She is a self-published author who has won some very minor awards (niche awards from organisations which give out many dozens of similar awards), which have not gotten any attention in the press.
Reason: Completely unverifiable. Sourced only to maps, where I can't find it anyway, and looking for info from actual sources only gives me a company called Abellio in Ellesmere, not a neighborhood. There is e.g. not a single source linking Abellio and Banbury Green
[131], but then again there is no source for a Banbury Green in Ellesmere Port as well
[132]. Given that the same author also was responsible for
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Loch Urigull, it may be time to think about sanctions if my misgivings about this Abellio turn out to be true. I don't t think it is a case of trolling or vandalism, just a
WP:CIR issue (see also
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Comunal Documents of Santa Margherita Ligure and the article behind it).
Reason: No evidence that the small Luxembourgian village of Contern actually has an English name, as claimed in that article and when creating this redirect.
Reason: Completely unverifiable that such a locality exists. It supposedly is the namesake of the "Monte delle Bocce", for which there is one, unreliable, source
[133], and which isn't mentioned in any book
[134]. Either such a locality doesn't exist, or it is extremely, extremely minor and thus very unlikely to be a useful search term anyway. The target article also has no further information on the locality.
Reason: No evidence that this is a hamlet,
this indicates it is a forest. Other sources are maps like
this or
this which don't support the hamlet claims either (and certainly in the second case wouldn't be a reliable source anyway).
This one at least has the name, but no indication that it is anything but a small forest.
This and
this unreliable source again does nothing to support the claims. Nothing better found online. And creator has a history of producing articles based on thin air (writing a whole article about a random name on a map or in a list).
Reason: No evidence of
notability. Seems to be part of an attempt to write a family history, where some members are notable, some borderline, and some like this one have no actual claim to notability. Perhaps an article on the Hardee family would be better, with this then as a redirect, but as a standalone article it just doesn't make the cut. Sources are primary or involved (written by family members), and looking for better sources gave no useful results.
Reason: No evidence that this song is in any way
notable. Most sources in the article are primary sources about the book, not about the song: only the first two sources are actually about the song, but the first one (evangeliums.net) is a database, and the second is the website of the songwriters' band. Looking for better sources produced very few results, none of them indicating actual notability.
[137][138][139][140]
Reason: No evidence of notability: while this short text has been included in some religious song books, it doesn't seem to have received any actual attention from reliable, independent sources. Sources in article are databases, or lists of contents: only source with some further text is the "Werkhilfe zum Singheft", which is more of an educational/technical guide on how to perform it. Trying to find actual sources about the song turns out to be fruitless. Nothing in GNews
[141] or GBooks
[142] (the one source is by Schlegel so doesn't count), and the 25 regular hits
[143] produce nothing useful not already in the article. A redirect to Helmut Schlegel may be a good alternative for deletion.
Reason: No evidence found of any
notability. This is not the older, more notable organization "Catholic Church of Singapore", nor any of the other ones (Anglican, Pentecostal, Charismatic) which are also called "Church of Singapore". Sources in article are all primary, and I couldn't find other ones (but this may be due to the confusion in names), e.g. using the Chinese name in GNews gave hits
[144], but these turn out to be for the Catholic Church of Singapore
[145][146].
Reason: No evidence found that he was in any way notable. The company, perhaps, in which case this could be a redirect. No good sources for Francis Orville Libby, I can't even find him or the company in the first source given
[147], the second source is a passing mention
[148], third source is a passing mention again
[149]. No better sources found online (GBooks and Google).
Reason: Fails
WP:N /
WP:V? For starters, is it Southcott, Southcote, or Southcot? The
first source mentions a "captain Southcot", in passing, without first name or dates or any further information, so isn't useful here. The
second source doesn't seem to include anyone named Southcot (in any variation). I have not been able to find a source that verifies the existence of Southcot(e)(t) Island. Finally, the third source, not linked in the article but available online
[150], has a chapter on the Southcote family, but doesn't mention a Thomas (not on page 399, not in the index). Looking for other sources gives e.g.
this about the baronetcy, which doesn't mention Thomas or his role in the creation of it.
This is the only thing which perhaps verifies the bare existence of this Thomas, but he is said here to have died in 1639.
Reason: No evidence of notability, only independent source, Vavel.com, is an unreliable source where basically anyone can write articles (in this case, a student), and is not sufficient to establish notability anyway. I could find some passing mentions, but nothing substantial from an independent, reliable source.
Reason: I could find no evidence of this player meeting our
notability guidelines. The sources in the article are either primary (from his club, and a page from a sports agent) or unreliable (a blog), and looking for better sources online gave no results. Perhaps there are better sources from Singapore (where he won the title), but I was unable to find these. The remainder of his clubs were all at lower levels of their countries league system.
Reason: No evidence found that he is notable. Nothing in GNews, very few libraries hold copies of his work. GBooks has his works but nothing substantial about jim in other books. He has written a lot, but has received very little attention for it
[151].
Reason: Typical "well-sourced" puff piece filled with "journalism" provided by the subject or his company. Sources in the article include
Global Kashmir.net (which have the honesty to label the text an advertisement), and the exact same text from e.g.
Times of Malwa or
Bollywoodmascot or
Voice of Hindu. Other sources like
APN News are equally unreliable.
Reason: So, Thursday night hockey is showing hockey games ... on a Thursday! As opposed to showing hockey games on another day. And this "notable" distinction is supported with sources like
this (mentions Thursday once) or
this (doesn't even mention Thursday) or
this (again, no mention of Thursday), or
this (you guessed it). Oh, and
this, again not even mentioning Thursday.
Reason: No evidence found of any
notability. Sources seem to be added randomly, e.g. "In 2018, 3sixtyfactory project was joined by Adam Finch." is sourced to
this from 2011 which mentions nothing about any of this, and "In 2022, 3sixtyfactory merged with Autopix as one company. Autopix offers free training in technology and innovation, to people facing financial hardship in the Philippines." is sourced to
this book from 2013 which again has no information on autopix or 3sixtyfactory or Bakke, never mind about what happened in the Philippines in 2022 obviously. While I can't access the 2022 version of the book used as source 2, the
2013 version again doesn't mention either the prof or his software. Looking for better sources only produced primary sources.
Reason: No evidence found of
notability. They have contributed one song to a soundtrack, but no reliable independent source seems to have written about them, just passing mentions, unreliable sources, databases... We don't even have an article for the soundtrack as a whole, so a redirect target doesn't seem to be available.
Reason: Fails
WP:LISTN. Additionally, unsourced since its creation in 2004, ends for some reason in 1974, less than 1 pageview per day so not of great interest to our readers also. Same issues as with the many dozens of similar articles already deleted.
Reason: No evidence found of
WP:Notability. Many sources in article, but vast majority are not independent (sites of the sport organisations, most of them passing mentions anyway), and the others are a blog, and passing mentions in race results. No substantial coverage in reliable, independent sources could be found.
Reason: Album is not notable, and claims in it are unverifiable (I couldn't e.g. find a trace of the album or the singles at Billboard, and the claim that "Gang Gand" peaked at 125 in the Billboard Global 200, when that song has received next to no attention at all
[152], is highly unlikely.
Reason: No evidence of
notability. Sources are either not independent, or don't mention the school at all (e.g.
this one or
this one, which is about the Nitte University, not this school. Found no other indication that this is a notable school.
Reason: There is a thing called "gravity chess", as explained in
this article. However, the game described in this article (and in the images) is not that version, but some new version which doesn't have anyreliable sources to support it. If an article for the "real" gravity chess should exist, then
WP:TNT comes into play; better to start from scratch than to start from an article which from the very start was about the "wrong" version.
Reason: No evidence found of any
notability for this site. Sources are either affiliated with the site and their partners, or not about the site. No better sources found with an online search.
Reason: No evidence of any notability. Very few passing mentions in GNews
[153], nothing useful in generic Google
[154], no attention for his career so far.
Reason: The CNet article is substantial, but the remainder are very passing mentions and Gnews didn't give any better results. Doesn't seem notable, perhaps can be redirected somewhere, but unclear what (if anything) would be a useful target.
Reason: Short version: it doesn't have one. Saba is an island with less than 2,000 inhabitants, and doesn't even have one actual full size soccer pitch. They aren't a member of any soccer organization. They don't have a local competition. But from time to time, the, well, village team played matches against a neighbouring small island (population just over 3,000 people). Lacks
notability or even real existence (it isn't even a "nation" so the term "national team" is rather loosely applied here).
Reason: Violates
Wikipedia:Wikidata#Appropriate usage in articles, "Wikidata should not be linked to within the body of the article except in the manner of hidden comment(s) as to mentioning the Q-number." This list is nothing but a series of Wikidata links, not meaningfully editable here, and resulting in meaningless refs like "GEOnet Names Server, Wikidata Q1194038". A move to draft to give the article creator the chance to turn it into an acceptable list was reverted. Substituting the individual rows gives no useful results at first sight either.
Reason: What's the point of a list of 1? Including statistics (well, the 1 person is top and bottom of the list), and an extra list of the living examples (still the same 1 person). Was redirected, but apparently this was not acceptable either. I don't care if it gets redirected (somewhat unlikely search term) or deleted, but as a separate article it is completely meaningless.
Reason: No actual evidence of
notability for the Australian company MAP Biotech. I couldn't find good independent sources about them (searching for "MAP Biotech" or for "MAP" "Bloch-Jorgensen").
Reason: Total lack of notability (or is it known under a different name?). I couldn't find better sources, and of the sources currently in the article, source 2, 3, 4 and 6 don't even mention the house. 1 and 5 is the same source used twice, and I can't find a reference to the house in it either (without a page number it's hard to be sure).
Reason: A list of rather random, mainly non-notable examples of common events. While, according to the lead, about 2,000 people each year die of lightning, 7 of the 10 first entries don't even have that impact and just have some injuries. Inclusion criteria for this list don't seem to exist, and even restricting it to strikes resulting in deaths would create a very long list. The most recent entry, "A lightning bolt hit an elderly man causing heart arrythmia." is rather typical of the whole, where probably only the second entry (Congo, 26 deaths) could truly be a notable event beyond the
WP:NOTNEWS cycle. Basically a list of trivial news stories with one common (in both meanings) element.
Reason: I have my doubts about many of these "surnames by culture" categories (and most entries in them), but let's start by this one. The two entries are sourced to
this, which is a wiki, not a reliable source.
East Prussia existed roughly from 1773 to 1945, there is no evidence that these surnames are from there or then (most surnames are older than that). The cat is a member of the cat
Category:Old-Prussian language, but that language became extinct in the early 18th century, or 50 years or so before East Prussia was founded. Basically, it is an unreliably sourced mess (just like most cats in this tree).
Reason: No idea what the intention was here, but
Typhoon Vongfong (old) should be moved back to
Typhoon Vongfong, and what is now at
Typhoon Vongfong either deleted or merged if people want to have the history for some reason.
Reason: Delete. Per
Wikipedia:Soft redirects, "Soft redirects to non-English language editions of Wikipedia should be avoided because they are generally unhelpful to English-language readers. "
Reason: No evidence of
notability, i.e. no independent, reliable sources giving significant attention to her. Nothing substantial in Google News
[156] (two hits from her club, so not independent, and 3 truly passing mentions (name in list). The
77 Google hits gave no better results, the only thing I could find was this local story
[157], the remainder are wiki-based sites, stats, and other similar stuff which doesn't give any notability.
Reason: Lacks
notability (note that playing for a national team, especially one as minor as this, doesn't give "automatic" notability: indepth sources are needed, and are missing here completely: nothing in GNews, barely anything otherwise).
Reason: Biography of a
WP:BLP who hasn't been convicted but is only about supposed criminal activities. Not unsourced, so not a speedy candidate, but no chance of making this BLP-compliant.
Reason: No evidence found for any
notability, even in a Lichtensteiner newspaper she gets one passing mention only
[158], other Google hits
[159] are also statistics and passing mentions only.
Reason: Normally our "timelines" work as a chronological link to articles dealing with the subjects of the timeline. This though is a list of primary sources, a rather specialized bibliography, and isn't a notable subject on its own nor a navigational tool to articles about the individual entries. Fails
WP:N and
WP:NOT.
Reason: No evidence of
notability. Prod removed because there are other similar lists, which doesn't address the actual issue of course (but may indicate that some of these other lists need looking at as well). Sourced to commercial DVD seller sites, and looking for something better for at random season 13 gives
nothing useful.
Reason: Thanks to the stupid
WP:DRAFTOBJECT rule, seriously problematic articles can only be draftified once, and then need an AfD or some lame problem tags. First award, fake. The UK parliament doesn't give this award, some obscure private organisation does. Second award, probably fake, no actual evidence for this and unlikely that NASA would give awards for being a "reformer of Indian culture". Third Award, some "Federation of Indian Association" would have named him "Hindu of the Year". This claim is repeated on many pages
[160]. Strangely, this award seems not to have been given to anyone else, ever
[161]AfD is not cleanup, but how untrustworthy and dubious does an article have to be before draftifying or
WP:TNT is the only solution?
Reason: Basically a
WP:DICDEF with an added
WP:NOTGALLERY. Would be better as a redirect to
Fork#Types_of_fork, but this has been reverted so needs discussion here.
Reason: Lacks all
notability so far. Sources are not independent, looking for better sources only produces pr pieces, articles reads more like a sales pitch for the cryptocurrency "tokens".
Reason: Premature to have a separate list of statistics for this team which has played all of 14 games so far. Fails
WP:NOTSTATS, is completely unsourced, and lacks
notability.
Reason: I redirected this one to the season article, but was reverted. The sources for it are all primary, the actual article title yields zero hits, and even turning it into two terms only gives a press release
[162]. An immense amount of statistics (an endless series of "Records established" for a first game ever), and all of this for the final game of a 4-team competition.
Reason: I don't think it is a good idea to have two articles about the same region, one for each country which claims the territory. Have one article which describes the situation, in this case
Kherson Oblast and
Zaporizhzhia Oblast, instead of two.
WP:FORK issues. Also nominated for the same reasons:
Zaporozhye Oblast (Russia)
Reason: This is, as far as I can tell, the regular
Pokémon Journeys: The Series series, but for India it is shown on a youtube channel? No idea why this needs a separate article, and the disambiguator makes it an unlikely search term so a redirect seems like a bad idea as well. We don't create separate articles for every language a TV series is dubbed in.
Reason:
WP:INDISCRIMINATE grouping. Diamonds get stolen, but that they are also Golconda diamonds is not really relevant (no one sets out to specifically steal Golconda diamonds and not other ones, do they?).
Reason:
WP:INDISCRIMINATE. A list of minor to very minor, very common events. Lists of major tornado outbreaks, with deaths or massive damage, are a good topic for lists. But there is no reason why this collection of minimal events would be any more notable than a list of car crashes, house fires, ... See e.g.
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lightning strikes of 2022 for a similar list of recorded but minor events being deleted recently.
Reason: No evidence of any
notability, just primary sources, passing mentions, or databases (which aren't significant coverage). Nothing in the article indicates why this would be a notable ship either.
Reason: No evidence of any notability. The sources currently in the article are some sportsfan database
[163], a match report that mentions a McCartney (this one)
[164], some name mentions on a personal website of a Livingston fan
[165], and finally a reliable source, the Glasgow Evening Times, which, er, doesn't even mention McCartney
[166]. Looking for better sources than this sorry bunch didn't yield anything useful.
Reason: I can't seem to find any evidence for a concept like the 1876 women's tennis tour. I don't doubt that these two tournaments existed, but there seems to be nothing that links them; no common organisation, no general classification, nothing. And they don't seem to be grouped as such by later sources either. If true, then this article should either be deleted (as Wikipedia should not be creating such artificial groupings, e.g. the "womens amateur tour" from the first line of the lead section seems to be a new invention from this article as well), or completely reformed and moved to
1876 in women's tennis or something similar. E.g.
this source used in the article supports the underlying existence of the 2 tournaments, but not a "Tennis Tour" or "Amateur Tour".
Reason: No evidence of any notability. They played 5 games in 2015, nothing before or since, and the "current squad" is the team from then. Sources are either databases or not independent (organisers, football association, ...).
Reason: "May have been", "little is known", "it is not clear", "apparently", "it will require original research": not clear why this was ever created, but shouldn't be kept any longer. Lacks all
notability, in case it wasn't clear.
Reason: No evidence of
notability, with a history which is scraped together from disparate sources and seems to be rather dubious: sailing from Liverpool on 25 March 1798, and arriving in Kingston in May 1799 after buying slaves in Gabon? What, they stayed a year in Africa waiting for slaves? In any case, whether one believes this or not, there is no evidence of
notability for this ship.
Reason: No notability for this future speech, and a much too generic title. Please don't create articles for things which might become notable but are far from certain to be really important (we have very few "speech of" articles, and no obvious precedent that British PM acceptance speeches are obviously notable subjects).
Reason: We have a name of a ship. That's it. We don't know if it ever sailed, and if so what happened to it. No idea why this was created. If there was an A7 speedy deletion criterion for ships, this would be gone as having no claim to importance or notability whatsoever.
Reason: Unclear why we need two lists of books in a minor language written with one or the other system of orthography. We wouldn't allow lists of all books written in other languages, even though individual books are easily referenced of course: but the group is not a notable subject. Also nominated:
List of Silesian-language books in Steuer's orthography
Reason: No evidence of notability, main article for this championship is at AfD as well and an individual year has even less significance. You can see from the pictures at
this non independent source how many spectators there were for this minor event.
Reason: There don't seem to be any significant independent secondary sources about him. The 16 sources in the current article include primary sources (census and the like), sources which don't mention Higdon (like
TSHA, the book on photographer Glass
[167] or
the Kansas Historical Society. Looking for further sources provided no useful results either.
Reason: Hoax. Both sources don't mention Andiga, there are no sources for "Andiga the Great", "Andiga Vata" or 'Vata Andiga", no sources for Andiga + Mikaya, the sources for Andiga + Lujule are not about this, Andiga + Keliko or Andiga + Kaliko give no results, ... For some reason the speedy hoax tag was removed from this article, but I see no reason to believe that an actual Andiga the Great is mentioned anywhere.
Reason: No evidence of any notability for this team which hasn't played a single game so far, and is of very minor importance once it starts playing anyway. Population of Gibraltar = 34,000, this is basically a youth team for a large town. Gibraltar has just 5 women's senior soccer teams, and no U19 competition for women. May be worth a paragraph in the senior team article perhaps, once they start playing regularly.
Reason: Doesn't seem to be notable, only gets a few passing mentions as the victim of anti-aircraft artillery. The Prabook entry is more substantial, but that's a wiki, not a
reliable source.
Reason: In the recent past, I have nominated such "lists" with just one entry. Apparently, it could be worse. This "list of" consists on no one. "The deputy chief minister of Puducherry is not created since it's become state of India." Why create this "list"???
Reason: There is no consensus that lists etc. need to be alphabetized, and not e.g. ordered chronologically or otherwise. Having a project to do something which doesn't have consensus and may easily lead to pointless edit warring and so on seems like a bad idea. E.g. one of the guidelines listed here is
Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Lists of works, which starts with "Items should normally be listed in chronological order of production, earliest first."
Reason:
WP:SYNTH /
WP:INDISCRIMINATE. Just like other people, nobility migrates as well, to many countries, including the US (though not especially so). A random selection of some examples (including an ambassador, hardly a relevant inclusion) doesn't an article make.
Reason: No one seems to call this "US immigration to the United States", ever? We shouldn't be creating disambiguations for titles or concepts not described as such anywhere else.
Reason: After 11 years, this should be either sourced and if necessary updated, or deleted. As it stands, most editors will not have the possibility to even try to verify this, we don't know if what we have here is correct, or was correct in 2011, or was wrong all the time. Considering that the original author was blocked for socking in 2012, and the sock blocked for making unsourced problematic edits, just AGF'ing this article any longer is not wise.
Reason: No evidence found for a "Parasadi Estate". The source given states "made their clan centre at Parasadi", nothing more. Similar claim
here. There are no sources of you combine "Parasadi" with "Kunal Prasad" (given in the infobox as the location of it)
[169]. As it stands, the article is
unverifiable.
Reason: No evidence of
notability. It is unclear whether the article wants to be about the current line + situation (which the infobox is about) or the old station building (which is located in the same village but quite distant from the new one apparently). Sources added after the prod include a postcard
[170], a source which doesn't mention the station
[171], a source which has one line about the old station
[172], and a blog, Most of the article is generic "history" repeated in countless similar Greek station articles.
Reason: Complete lack of
notability. Only reference is a self-published book (on lulu.com) written by the creator of this article. And even in that book the info on Soffe wouldn't be sufficient to establish notability. The external link is a forum with again minimal info on Soffe. Google doesn't return anything useful either.
Reason: An unused concept which lead one user to create this page and 26 massive subpages (many of them +100K) listing countless editors for, well, no reason at all really. Trying to create their own version of 6 degrees to Kevin Bacon /
Erdős number apparently (even with the shortcut
WP:ERDOS), but with a completely meaningless metric (having edited the same page as Jimbo Wales, on a site where everyone can edit any page they want with very few exceptions). Not maintained, not useful.This nom is also for all the subpages, I guess there is little point in tagging them all though? Same sole editor for all of them it seems.
Reason: No reliable, indepth sources about this ship. All we have are primary sources, databases, and extremely passing mentions (the three references given pay no significant attention to the Liver but just include it in long lists or tables).
Reason: I merged and redirected a number of nearly identical articles on ranks in the Sri Lanka Navy to
Sri Lanka Navy ranks and insignia. These were reverted as "unreasonable and unconstructive", so we have this discussion. My proposal is to reinstate the redirects and readd the merged content, as the separate articles are very short, very similar stubs where the readers are better served with one comprehensive article without too much repetition. Also nominated for redirection are*
Commodore (Sri Lanka)*
Rear admiral (Sri Lanka)*
Vice admiral (Sri Lanka)*
Admiral (Sri Lanka)*
Admiral of the Fleet (Sri Lanka)
Reason: No evidence of notability. The only independent source in the article,
[173], doesn't even mention the team. Looking for better sources didn't yield good results.
Reason:
WP:NOTDIRECTORY, a cross-categorization of two largely independent characteristics, in a list which gives very little info on their education anyway.
Reason: No evidence of any actual
notability: sources are all databases or primary sources, and Google News only returns press releases, no actual news reports about him.
Reason:
WP:OR mixed list of commercial games, worldwide games, sports, ... which happen to also be played in the US (just like 100s of other games). No idea why some games from the sources were included and some excluded, just reinforces the randomness of the list.
Reason: I removed the mention at the target as the magazine is completely lacking in notability. This also means that this new redirect is not included in the target and should be deleted as well.
Reason: There doesn't seem to be some crisis that started in 2020, even the one source discusses ongoing issues, not some new crisis (e.g. "Since early 2019 the combined impact of all these factors has been to turn the Eastern Mediterranean crisis into a perfect storm. " shows that the crisis predates 2019, not that it started in 2020). Greece-Turkey tensions are ever ongoing, and the Cyprus situation goes back decades as well.
Reason: This template is incompatible with Visual Editor. Things like adding or moving rows to a table can't be done in lists which use this template. Comparing
List of learned societies in Australia (which uses this template) to
List of learned societies in Italy (which doesn't) shows the different behaviour when you e.g. try to add a column between the other columns, or try to add a row between the existing ones, or try to move a row up or down or a column left or right. These issues were brought up last month during
Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)#Wikidata lists. Until they can be solved, the template should either be deleted or disallowed in mainspace. (Note: I seriously dislike Visual Editor and don't use it, but this doesn't mean that we should introduce templates which make editing a lot harder for those of us who do use VE).
Reason:
WP:NOT the place for pages full of statistics. While such tables for the most common elements may be acceptable, having it for every material out there seems like serious overkill, something better suited for another Wikisite perhaps?
Reason: There don't seem to be any significant sources about this actor apart from this local article
[174], just passing mentions. Fails
our notability guideline.
Reason: "United States of Central Asia" seems to be a concept invented by the article creator to write about various efforts and events wrt to the former Central Asian republics of the Soviet Union, and cooperation between them. While such an article may be interesting, it shouldn't be written from a POV of a non-existent "united states" moniker. E.g. the lead, "United States of Central Asia was the part of Central Asia administered by the Soviet Union between 1918 and 1991, when the Central Asian republics declared independence." gives the impression that this is something real, either during the Soviet Union or afterwards, which is clearly false. I'm not sure whether it is best deleted as a POV
WP:COATRACK, or instead retitled and rewritten, but it can't stay as it is.
Reason: No indication why this would be a
notable subject. Sourced to maps and an unreliable source, doesn't seem to have the subject (as a group) of significant, independent attention. It doesn't look as if any other source ever paid attention to the quadrant routes of Lackawanna County
[175][176]
Reason: 28 references, wow! Only one of them actually seems to be about this record though, the first one, which is their homepage. Not surprising, as this release has received no attention at all[177].
Reason: No evidence or indication of why this would be a notable ship. Note that Inikori, the only substantial non-database source, is not about this ship but a general one.
Reason: These two categories (
Category:Adult comics) and
Category:Children's comics) seem to be rather arbitrary, many comics are intended for both or intended for one and read by the other. In Europe at least, nearly all the comics listed here as for children are read widely by adults, and at least some of the "adult" comics like
De Kiekeboes are read very frequently by young children, while most in this category are ready by adolescents. Vice versa, things like
Calvin and Hobbes are listed as children's comics, but are probably more popular among adults. Some like Asterix are already included in both, making it rather poor defining characteristics.
Reason: A
WP:OR grouping of mainly unreliable sources (Youtube, the "Retro Pizza Zone" on tapatalk, a Google Drive spreadsheet(!)) and primary sources (showbizzpizza.com). No evidence that these retrofits are actually a notable topic.
Reason:
WP:NOTMANUAL and fails
WP:N, no indepth sources covering this command. If there is a good list where this can be redirected to, that's a possibility as well; it currently isn't included in
List of Unix commands, but including it there and redirecting is fine by me.
Reason: Misleading redirect. While Calais has mayors now, the "Mayor of the Calais Staple" was not a mayor in this sense, nor an actual mayor of the city of Calais, but a kind of leader/judge of the merchants only. People looking for info on the mayor of Calais should not be redirected to a somewhat similarly named 15th century role (of very limited and mainly ceremonial importance anyway).
Reason: No sources at all even mention "Organoargon chemistry". Nothing on Google Scholar or Google Books, or regular Google. Not surprising, even "organoargon" is hardly in use as a term. Not a
notable field of chemistry.
Reason: No evidence of any
notability, sources are passing mentions (literally, just being named in a list of other such novelty teams) and one primary source. No better sources found online.
Reason: Hoax? Completely unverifiable, both at "Bezuindenhout" (a name which doesn't exist) and "Bezuidenhout". The lone source is from 1912, so predates the works it supposedly references, and doesn't contain Bezui(n)denhout anyway. No other source could be found which even mentions this artist.
Reason: Not a notable pageant, none of the three sources in the article mention Nicaragua, and the current holder gets
hardly any Google hits, most from blogs, facebook, ...
Reason: Article about the use of the Sundanese language in Depok, with an infobox claiming that it is a separate language somehow. No evidence that it actually is a separate language, and no evidence that it is a
notable subject. There seems to have been some attention to the use of standard Sundanese in school (the section of "Sundanese as local content" seems to deal with this, although the "local content" link leads to a page which doesn't use the term), but none to Depok Sundanese as a language.
Reason: While the first source mentions the traces of old civilizations found at Gunung Karang, I can find no evidence of any source (certainly not reliable ones) discussing an actual Gunung Karang civilization. There also is no indication that the prehistoric Pahoman menhirs have any relation to a "Hindu-style royal heritage site".
Reason: No evidence of notability. There is one article in Hype magazine, which is shortened without attribution in another source used
[178], and
the US journal which self-describes as "We bring you the best Premium WordPress Themes that perfect for news, magazine, personal blog, etc." and clearly isn't a reliable source. I haven't found any better sources online, and his feat isn't so remarkable that one could expect such sources to exist (there are dozens of people who surpass his achievement). Fails
WP:BIO.
Reason: Long list of detailed event descriptions for a reality tv show season, without any independent sources to justify this level of detail. I redirected to
Survivor BG#Season 5 which has the major facts about this season, but was reverted, so per
WP:AFD the discussion is now here. The proposal is to redirect this, not to delete it.
Reason: Not a notable list subject. The flags have nothing in common (the countries do of course), the "official" union flags have no notability nor any evidence that they are official.
Reason: There don't seem to be any
reliable sources about this George of Luxembourg, and even if he would be verifiable, he hardly did anything noteworthy. The source given is a master's thesis, which is normally not accepted as a reliable source. Even then, it names a Jiri, no last name, and doesn't mention the inheritance. He just existed, if we are to believe this source, but isn't
notable.
Reason: Not a
notable club. No sources actually discuss the football club, all we have is one full match report and passing mentions in an overview of some matches. No better sources found elsewhere.
Reason: Very minor tournament by a new organisation of "unaffiliated" "country" football teams, comparable to CONIFA but much smaller so far. The event got no attention, the documentary got no attention either.
Reason: Not a draft, but a list by FloridaArmy "for the community" apparently. Either belongs in their userspace (where I moved it but they don't want it), in projectspace if people besides FloridaArmy see a use for it, or off-wiki if it is only for FloridaArmy.
Reason: No evidence of any
notability. First reference is a self-published book by the article creator, second are some statistics. No better sources found in GBooks or regular Google
[179].
Reason: Unreferenced would-be gallery (the most recent "reference" is from 2019, for a 2021 list). Unclear why we need lists for each year, when they are mostly identical anyway and don't even indicate what changed.
WP:LISTCRUFT. Other years may need to go as well, but let's start with one and see what happens.
Reason: "Sources" are mostly PR pieces masquerading as articles (e.g. the Digital Journal piece). From reading the article and the sources, one would think that Stina Battle is a popular upcoming artist. Bizarrely, there are no Google News results for her
[180], and just 22(!) Google hits
[181], which is absolutely nothing for a US contemporary artist.
Reason: No evidence found of actual
notability, sources are primary or passing mentions. Being the largest vessel of a short-lived company, carrying some passengers of little notability, and basically doing what trade ships do (including, as was very common in these years, colliding with another ship), all amount to not much in the end.
Reason: No independent sources about this non notable artist. The sources given are the typical promo pieces / press releases looking like "real" articles at first glance. No actual, reliable, music magazine or mainstream journalist seems to have given any attention to this artist yet.
Reason: Mainly
WP:OR for a topic which has received little or no attention as a group. The "no"s are unreferenced and often incorrect (De Croo speaks German, Macron speaks some German) and in many cases a simple yes/no is insufficient (people may be able to read or understand a language, but not comfortable or fluent enough to speak it publicly).
Reason: A well-intentioned effort, but the war isn't fought on a year-by-year basis, and we already have a series of timelines giving the chronological overview; the current one is
Timeline of the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine: phase 4, and a new one will be created when necessary.
Reason: I proposed this article for deletion with the reason "The only article about Murad Jah says nothing about his princely role or his family. And in articles about the family, he is mentioned just once. He isn't notable, and hasn't received attention as the heir to a long-abolished state.". Since then, two articles about the succession were added as sources:
[182] and
[183]. Neither of them even mentions Murad Jah, making the case for deletion only stronger.
Reason: No indication that this is a notable song. Not a real single (promo-only), most sources are passing mentions, unreliable, or links to copyright violating footage on Youtube. My redirect to the album was reverted.
Reason: No evidence that this shortlived ship is in any way
notable. Ships being wrecked was extremely common at the time, and nothing else seems to indicate a ship that warranted or warrants extra attention.
Reason: No evidence found of
notability, the Washington Post obituary is in the local section of obituarues, together with a local elementary school teacher, police officer, .... Other sources aren't independent (his college, his employers, his family, ...).
Reason: Unnecessary
WP:NOTDICDEF. Perhaps quite telling that the links to other types of stations (through station, branch-off station) also don't link to articles about that type of station, but to vaguely related articles which don't really explain these terms anyway. Anyway, not really a necessary or enlightening article, basically (also according to the source used in the artice
[184]) intermediate stations are all stations between end stations. Well, yeah, that's quite obvious.
Reason: Article created by ChatGTP or similar tool, with the typical issues: at first glance, it perhaps seems like a well-fleshed out article, but on closer look, it is a very dubious mix of unrelated tidbits and misinterpreted (or copyright-violated) sources. For example, the complete last paragraph of the lead has nothing to do with Iraq but is about the US. The lead line "The goal of the American invasion of Iraq in 2003 was to end Saddam Hussein's [1]dictatorial rule and eliminate weapons of mass destruction (WMD)" is way too close to "U.S. forces invaded Iraq vowing to destroy Iraqi weapons of mass destruction (WMD) and end the dictatorial rule of Saddam Hussein."
[185] and ignores the "oops, no WMD" issue. "Increasing the progressiveness of payroll taxes, eliminating regressive exemptions, and strengthening tax and customs administration are just a few of the ways Iraq's economic policies aim to diversify government revenue." No, this is a close paraphrase of
[186], a preliminary summary of an IMF report with recommendations, not an actual representation of "Iraq's economic policies". This line is followed by "Iraq's economy has been stabilized and reformatted by the Coalition Provisional Authority in accordance with market principles." Well, yes, in 2004, directly after the invasion. It has nothing to do with the previous statement or 2023. Don't get me started at the completely disjointed next sentence... The next section, "the effects of the Federal Reserve's tightening monetary policy on US inflation in 2022" has nothing to do with this article. Further: "Additionally, open-source intelligence methods like basic and advanced Internet search techniques can assist in comprehending the current circumstance and anticipating developments in the foreseeable future": sourced to
this 2012 pdf, relevance here: zero. Why the section "the potential economic influence of Iraq in 2023" restarts nearly identical midway through is not clear, it repeats the same nonsense in different words. Overall, it is a typical example of the goodlooking rubbish AI produces, and we should get rid of it.
Reason: Is there such a thing? There are countries in and around the Alps, and these countries have culture of course, but is there anything which joins the culture of, say, Monaco and Slovenia and sets it apart from non-Alps countries? This nom is also for the three sub-categories of the "in the Alps" variety:*
Category:Buddhism in the Alps (a non-defining combination of two distinct characteristics if ever I saw one)*
Category:Christianity in the Alps*
Category:Religion in the Alps
Reason: This redirect target (and the other two) has no information at all about the subject (South Florida isn't even mentioned, and while Los Angeles is mentioned, it is not in relation to Israel). Sending readers to articles which contain no info on the topic is not helpful. Also nominated are *
Israeli immigration to New York*
Israeli immigration to Los Angeles
Reason: An "official" document by the Illuminati? Not really, no, some unknown has self-published this, and it has received very little attention, so isn't
notable. The only somewhat interesting source seems to be
this, which gives us no information at all about the writer, publisher, ... but just some, I don't know, clickbait? No actual journalism going on here anyway. No reliable sources seem to have given this book any attention and I can't blame them.
Reason: This was prodded last year for "Fails
WP:NSEASONS. Also per
WP:NOTDATABASE.", but deprodded without explanation or improvements. The article is in a sorry state since its creation in 2011, created by a long-blocked sockpuppeteer, sourced to a generic page for the league (so basically unsourced), for a second division team without anything tremarkable in this season. Even if we would want an article for this club season, very little is lost by getting rid of this version.
Reason: No evidence of
notability for this list of results for a minor competition with unremarkable results. For example, searching for the winner of the 10.000m, Lahcen Essoussi gives a tiny handful of hits, the best being a non-independent source of the Monegasque Athletics Federation confirming his medals
[187] but nothing further about him
[188]. If even the winner of an event (plus another medal) is so completely lacking in coverage, then it seems unlikely that this received much coverage beyond routine results reports.
Reason: I redirected three articles (
Woolton (1774 ship),
Woolton (1786 ship) and
Woolton (1804 ship)) to this article, and
User:Martin of Sheffield then merged them. However, neither of the three is notable, and while the second one replaced the lost first one, there seems to be no link with the third one. If the individual ships aren't notable, having a "list" which is just a sequence of three articles isn't any better. There are no sources about "ships called Woolton", it's not a topic of interest as such. Such a list where at least one ship is notable and has its own article may perhaps be useful, but if none of them warrant an article, then a group of articles masquerading as a list is equally unwarranted.
Reason: Redirect to
Louisa (ship) was reverted, and article creator prefers AfD discussion over simple redirection. Lacks
notability, sources are primary, databases, or passing mentions. The few lines in "History of the Liverpool Privateers" by Williams are the most substantial source we have, which isn't sufficient to support a stand-alone article. Behrendt has nothing about Louisa, and Inikori is a very passing mention. It's just one of the thousands of slave ships in the slave ship database.
Reason: Article was redirected to
Catherine (ship), but this was reverted and article creator prefers AfD discussion instead. No evidence of
notability, sources are primary or databases and article is a lot of
WP:OR parsing of confusing elements in the primary sources. No indication in article or sources that this ship was any more notable than the many thousand similar ones in the slave ship database. Inikori has no info on this ship, Richardson
[189] is the only secondary source with some further information, but it is rather minimal anyway and not sufficient to support a stand-alone article.
Reason: Unclear how the "epidemiology of IKBKAP in the US" is related to "IKBKAP#Familial_Dysautonomia", which is not even IKBKAP itself but in a section "Related conditions", and more importantly has no info about the US specifically.
Reason: No indication of any
notability found. Even what looked to be an independent source turns out to be written by the original promotor of this day
[190].
Reason: At the moment, this is a random selection of the thousands upon thousands of short live-action films which already have an article (e.g.
Category:American silent short films has more than 2,800 entries, most of them live-action). But even with this endless supply of entries, this list still contains many redlinks anyway. Seems like an overly broad topic for a list, either needs splitting in many sublists or deletion as unworkable.
Reason: No evidence of any
notability, a very short entry on
Behind the Voice Actors (kind of an IMDb for voice actors: while reliable, it doesn't add to notability, per
WP/RSP) and otherwise only passing mentions: it looks as if no reliable sources have given significant attention to her.
Reason: This is basically a repeat of the official statements from the Chinese government, not an article based on
reliable, independent sources. I don't think a timeline for this region can be made based on such sources though, as the Chinese government tends to be rather controlling. But it is better not to have an article, than to function as the mouthpiece of a government.
Reason: Player played one game in second division, and all other games way down the league pyramid. Coverage is almost exclusively passing mentions in match reports, with a handful of short local sports articles giving some attention (things like
this and
this, but nothing really substantial (e.g. covering his career or giving some background) or supra-local.
Reason: Per
WP:SSRT, "We don't need a soft redirect for every possible word or phrase to be included in Wikipedia." This term is barely used anyway
[192], and nowhere on enwiki.
Reason: Per the discussion at
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Timeline of the COVID-19 pandemic in Zhejiang (2020). AfD reason there was "This is basically a repeat of the official statements from the Chinese government, not an article based on reliable, independent sources. I don't think a timeline for this region can be made based on such sources though, as the Chinese government tends to be rather controlling. But it is better not to have an article, than to function as the mouthpiece of a government."
Reason: No evidence found of any
notability. He is quoted in a press release
[193], the second source is a Linkedin page, and nothing better was found online
[194], nothing in Gnews, an extremely passing mention
here and a publication
here.
Reason:
WP:SSRT: "Please keep in mind that only topics with a less-than-encyclopedic scope that are commonly wikified words or that are repeatedly recreated should become soft redirects. We don't need a soft redirect for every possible word or phrase to be included in Wikipedia."
Reason: Disputed redirect. Sources are a Geocities / Oocities blog and Linkedin, and no better sources found (database entries like
this or
this). Not a notable car, but a redirect to
List of Reynard Motorsport cars seemed a good solution.
Reason: This was draftified months ago because "Incomplete, unsourced, of dubious notability as a list topic", but now moved back to mainspace without improvements.
Reason: No evidence of any notability, and claims in the article don't match the passing mentions ("The bank played a key role in the history of Banking in India" sourced to a list which includes this bank as "stillborn"?) or don't convey any notability (being the 18th something is hardly special).
Reason:
WP:NOTNEWS, short-lived faits-divers without lasting notability.
WP:PSEUDO also applies: " If the event itself is not notable enough for an article, and the person was noted only in connection with it, it's very likely that there is no reason to cover that person at all."
Reason:
WP:SSRT: "Please keep in mind that only topics with a less-than-encyclopedic scope that are commonly wikified words or that are repeatedly recreated should become soft redirects. We don't need a soft redirect for every possible word or phrase to be included in Wikipedia."An encyclopedic article about tourism in Capri would be possible, with its history, economic impact, ... Linking instead to a tourist guide, only because it is a sister project, is not in line with our policies or aims. And combining a redirect with a "see also" section is just weird.
Reason: I redirected this to
2021–22 UEFA Youth League, but was reverted. This is just the culmination of the tournament, not a match that in itself is terribly notable (every week, there are soccer matches which get a lot more attention). Coverage in the main article for the event is sufficient for this youth match.
Reason: While this may look like a "real" event at major championships, this basically were the qualifications for something called "Dynamic New Athletics", with further rounds run but somehow not included (e.g. Smelyk won the final in 10.44, and Nascimento won his semi-final in 10.26). These weren't the Olympic Championships but an overall country-vs-country event where the individual distances or events were of only minor importance.
Reason: Can someone please be done to blacklist all these sources. This is a typical example of a company which seems to have gotten glowing reviews from "reliable" sources in the weeks after it was launched, but which strangely hasn't received any attention otherwise. It isn't normal that you would get 9 or so lengthy reviews in newspapers, but only 39 Google hits in total
[196], most of them either autocreated or from the same sources. A typical puff promo piece, and in this case quite easily recognisable, but it still is annoying that we allow these sources instead of just blacklisting them all.
Reason: No evidence found of
notability. Hardly any attention has been given to this
[197], unlike truly notable Linux distributions. Perhaps a redirect, though I don't know where (
List of Linux distributions only has distributions with an article, it seems).
Reason: I couldn't establish
notability for this ephemeral computer, neither from a search with the English name nor with the Russian name, so I redirected it to
1801 series CPU where it is mentioned. As this was reverted, AfD it is.
Reason: I redirected this 7 minute film to
Oswald the Lucky Rabbit filmography#1931, but was reverted. Nothing but an extremely excessive plot summary, not enough evidence of
notability found to warrant a stand-alone article.
Reason: A list of twitter posts, with a few other primary sources thrown in. The floods may be notable in some cases, but the "flash flood emergencies" aren't.
Reason: No evidence found of
notability, source in article isn't independent. Only source in Google News is Varsity, which is a University newspaper. This year's activities don't seem to receive any attention from
WP:RS outside the university. Perhaps older years need to be deleted as well if they have the same issues, this AfD though is only for the 2023 edition.
Reason: Impressive article, but upon checking there is very little to be found about him. The main source,
this article, reads like a press release and is labeled a "filed contribution". There are no sources at all in Google News and very few in Google in general (searched both with "Joe" and with" Joseph").
This is the only thing I find on Google Scholar, and it hasn't been cited yet by anyone apparently, so
WP:NPROF isn't met.
Reason: Brand-new club at the lowest level of Scottish football, not notable (just some very local coverage, just like nearly every organisation, club, ... in a village will have). Looking for "Sammy Taggart" (the coach) plus "Eglinton" gives all of 8 Google hits
[198], looking for "Eglinton FC" gives 31 hits
[199] (identical results for FC or F.C.). Perhaps a redirect to
Kilwinning#Football, and a short addition there, could be a solution?
Reason: No evidence that this is a notable list topic. While it is verifiable, there are very few sources who pay attention to which stadiums have hosted which centuries, normally the interest is in which player/team made centuries, not where.
Reason: Isn't this rather close to a
WP:NOTHOWTO page? It just describes what happens, where to find things, what keys to use... Not what sets this apart, what is its history, how it was received, ... Basically, it is a "plot summary", a manual, instead of an encyclopedic article. No idea if the latter is feasible here, but even then
WP:TNT would be better than trying to turn this into an acceptable article I think.
Reason:
WP:SSRT: "Please keep in mind that only topics with a less-than-encyclopedic scope that are commonly wikified words or that are repeatedly recreated should become soft redirects. We don't need a soft redirect for every possible word or phrase to be included in Wikipedia." A redirect for the plural of an informal version of an insult. No idea why this would belong on Wikipedia
Reason: While the individual entries are of course
notable, the list topic as a whole seems to lack
notability (
WP:LISTN) and is mainly covered by statistical databases only. It isn't an exceptionally rare occurence anyway (74 test centuries in 45 tests): the centuries will individually be covered in match reports and the like, but the group of these centuries by ground is apparently not really of interest. Many similar pages have already been deleted at AfD.
Reason: All sources are primary, except for one very passing mention. No better sources were found online. Doesn't seem to be notable yet, just very productive.Also nominated is
Cam Lasky discography.
Reason: I moved this to draft, but was reverted, and we are apparently supposed to then take it to AfD instead of draftifying again (even though AfD is not cleanup). Anyway, I moved it to draft as it is a rather hagiographic piece about a person where the sources show a different picture (though it is not always easy to tell which Ugandan sources are reliable and which may be a government mouth piece, as Uganda isn't the most democratic and free society). Things like
this or
this or
this. It should be moved to draft to first make this a
WP:NPOV BLP instead of this one-sided version, and only then be allowed in the mainspace.
Reason: No evidence of
notability. Sources in article are database or not independent, and sources online aren't much better. The best seems to be
this (found by the editor who removed the prod, thanks), but it is an article about the club, where players are interviewed about it. At the moment, this is a third-division player without the necessary sourcing about her to warrant an article.
Reason: While the individual entries are of course
notable, the list topic as a whole seems to lack
notability (
WP:LISTN) and is mainly covered by statistical databases only. It isn't an exceptionally rare occurence anyway (41 test centuries in 23 tests): the centuries will individually be covered in match reports and the like, but the group of these centuries by ground is apparently not really of interest. Many similar pages have already been deleted at AfD, the latest was
here which also lists earlier similar AfDs.
Reason: Userpage for editor who last edited in 2011, created by unrelated newish (and rather problematic) editor, with images uploaded by yet other people.
Reason: No evidence found of
notability, only statistical pages and match reports. Not to be confused with the Pakistani cricket player
Asif Iqbal, who is clearly notable, or the UAE cricketer
Asif Iqbal (Emirati cricketer). All I could find were passing mentions
[200].
Reason: Lots of sources, but most of them are closely connected to the subject or are otherwise unreliable or passing mentions. Don't be fooled by the links to the Cannes Film Festival and the Venice Film Festival (both major ones obviously), the actual "festivals" meant are the Cannes World Film Festival (no importance at all) and the Venice Short Film Festival (ditto). There are also some weird things, like this Cherish Alexander, born in 1982, claiming to be the same as the "Cherish Alexander" who won "Our Little Miss" in 1982
[201]. Oh, and despite being brand new, her about page on her website (page called "Journey" there
[202]) ends with a link to this Wikipedia page, giving a rather strong impression that this page was created by or on behalf of the artist. In any case, they aren't notable
[203] and haven't been picked up by independent news sources.
Reason: Not an article, fails
WP:NOTSTATS. I first thought it was perhaps intended as a template and moved it to draft to give the editor a chance to correct this, but it was moved back to mainspace unchanged.
Reason: Looks like a lot of puffery and few if any real journalistic articles. To start with the end, he has won the "Prix de la plume étendue", which according to the source
[204] is the biggest literary prize in Niger, given each year to the best literary work in Niger. Strangely, his book is a non-fiction law book (hardly a literary work), and the award is
completely unknown and not given to anyone else, ever, it seems. Despite the many references, seemingly independent reviews of his bestselling book and all discussing the large impact and popularity he already has, it seems that
not much interest exists in him otherwise, giving me at least the impression that these interviews and reviews are paid for or otherwise unreliable and not giving any actual notability.
Reason: Largely unverifiable. We seem to have one source
[205] which mentions him in one sentence as the son of a "king" (one of the many, many kings at that time). No reliable sources that he had any descendants, never mind the ones mentioned. If kept, it should be moved to a much better title than this hybrid thing, but I believe it should either be deleted or at best redirected to e.g.
List of kings of Síol Anmchadha (strange, how among all the Madudhan/Madadhan there, there suddenly is this one Mac Uallachain who seems to be unmentioned in more recent books).
Reason: No evidence for this hoax /
WP:OR piece. See the talk page and
User talk:Fram#Speedy Deletion nomination of The Houlihans of Garrycastle. for analysis of the sources and why this isn't a
WP:V subject. Based on some loose mentions and a trail of breadcrumbs across sources of varying reliability, a whole story is fabricated. No reliable source which actually discusses the Houlihans, Lords of Garrycastle, seems to exist. Something like "Corcran O'Ullaghan, last Lord of Garrycastle (died in the Battle of Aughrim)" is based on thin air. The Barons of Garrycastle were the MacCochlans.
Reason: Not sure about this one. It seems to go against
WP:NPOV to have a Wikiproject invitation written from the perspective of a religious figure. I mean, would we be comfortable with an invite which says "Jesus needs you" or something similar? Wikipedia needs you, the project needs you, sure, but not this.
Reason: A weird hybrid kind of
WP:COATRACK article with basically just one sentence about the history of the telephone in the US (the AT&T issue), and nothing about the role of the telephone in the history of the US (which is what the title awkwardly suggests). The one source is from 1988, but is used to make claims about the "current" situation of women and phones, which is for such rapidly evolving topics (both the use of telephones, and the role of men and women in society) not acceptable.
WP:TNT if people believe this title could host an acceptable article, or simply delete if even the title is not really worth keeping (or at most as a redirect).
Reason:
WP:SSRT: "Please keep in mind that only topics with a less-than-encyclopedic scope that are commonly wikified words or that are repeatedly recreated should become soft redirects. We don't need a soft redirect for every possible word or phrase to be included in Wikipedia."
Reason: Neither of the two sources mentions Andorra. I had moved this to draft, but user moved it straight back. No evidence of any notability for this national team of a very minor sport in a very small country.
Reason: A "massacre" with three wounded people. Redirect created by same editor who used "genocide" as a redirect for some mass shootings, nominated as well.
Reason: Not a defining characteristic, just a list of
WP:TRIVIA (often not even mentioned at the vehicle article itself, and otherwise usually just in passing, not as a major element), fails
WP:NLIST.
Reason: A typical pumped up film article, winning tons of awards from "film festivals" which no one ever heard of or visits (but which have grand names like the Europe Film Festival" or the "Cannes Film Awards"), "interviews" with standard questions (i.e. no actual interviewer), and in this case one newspaper (HLN) which fell for the "wow, many awards" fake news and wrote an actual article. So, non-notable film without the necessary multiple good sources to establish
notability.
Reason: Non-notable album, part of a promo-ring of articles about the band (
AfD), a movie created by the band producer (
AfD), and three other albums by the same band (all long since redirected), all by same editor (with no other interests). Only sources are extremely local coverage (
this is from the section "in the neighborhood / Hoboken", this newspaper has next to its general coverage also coverage per municipality or like here sub-municipality) because one of the singles raised money for a good cause. It's a British band, released in the Netherlands and worldwide, but got no attention beyond the village of the producer. Note that the album has no 5-star rating from Allmusic, it has one glowing "user" review who gave it 5 stars, which is meaningless.
Reason: This is a never used hybric of the English Gothic and the French Classique.
Gothique Classique is correct (also a redirect),
Classic Gothic as well, but this is a very unlikely search term
Reason: Article deleted after
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ifeanyi David Nduka. Now recreated because he has played a game, but still has no independent sources about him, which is the requirement (having played a game is no longer considered sufficient and has been removed from
WP:NSPORTS quite a while ago).
Reason: That something is a notable topic, doesn't mean that we need a list of examples of that something. One province (equivalent to a US county) in Belgium alone had 24 of them by late 2022
[206], there are many more in Belgium, the Netherlands, Austria (multiple cities have more than one of them), ...
Reason: No indication found that this is a notable season. No sources in the last month for "wiffle ball" MLW
[207], for Wiffle + Wildcats
[208], and so on (tried it with a few players as well). Very few general sources for even the clubs (see e.g. this search
[209]). I have also nominated, for the same reason, the previous season:*
2022 MLW Wiffle Ball season
Reason: The list seems to be highly misleading, in that it doesn't just list actual imports, but also transports: e.g. Belgium is high on the list because its ports are a place of entry for e.g. Swedish or Japanese cars which are then moved on towards other countries (with some fraction remaining in Belgium). Note how the value for Belgium on the other list,
List of countries by car exports, is nearly identical, and much higher than the value of the actual car production in Belgium. Countries like Belgium (and Canada for that matter) have much more car exports than e.g. Italy or France? Lists sourced only to a Wordpress site, so if we want this,
WP:TNT would apply. Also nominated is List of countries by car exports.
Reason: Non notable song which "won" awards from "film festivals" which churn out countless awards for whoever pays, but don't have actual screenings, notability, importance, ... Part of a walled garden of articles promoting a musical and the people around it, which should all get some scrutiny: but this one seems to be the worst when it comes to notability (the others were already deleted in the past though,
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/George Chiang). ProD was removed with the addition of sources, but as these were the website of the singer and the Apple music store
[210], they didn't help to solve the problem.
Reason: Proposed bank which never actually operated (contrary to the claims in the article, which seems largely based on uninformed speculation based on the date and name). I can find no evidence for the following claims in the article; (infobox) the type, industry, date and name of foundation, date defunct, number of locations, products; (article) "winding down of its operations", "was notable", "largely served customers of...", nationality and background of staff, final years (!), and legacy (a "key role in the history of banking in India"???). In reality, we have one source which gives a bit of attention to the bank
[211], and the remainder are simple name drops or listings in tables, nothing significant; all these make it clear that the bank was never operational, it collected money to start operations and returned the money when it couldn't start in the end, and thus was never operational. I have no idea where the "facts" in this article have been taken from.
Reason:
WP:OR. There was one, very obscure short film "The Mini-Killers". The claims about the series of 4 and the tank station use can apparently only be found at a youtube video (in itself probably a copyvio of the copyright owners of the movie) from a channel with 135 subscribers, with as far as I can tell a total lack of
reliability. Removing these claims would leave a very short stub about a short film which received hardly any attention. A redirect to Diana Rigg may be a good
WP:ATD.
Reason: No evidence of
notability for this one-off tournament. Prod removed without improvements and with arguments which don't really address the lack of indepth sourcing. Sources are passing mentions or routine coverage only.
Reason: Youth player, false claim of winning the Israeli title when he wasn't in the first team this season, sources are databases. Draftified, but moved back by creator without addressing the issues and with false claims of "Perform requested move, see talk page".
Reason: These results have not received significant attention from reliable independent sources, which is hardly surprising as they didn't result in any wins or even came close. The article creator posted a number of sources on the talk page, but the only one to even mention results was
this local source, though only briefly, about one candidate who got five votes. Fails
WP:NLIST.
Reason: Some hype articles from obscure sites (the kind of sites like LA Weekly which seem at first glance legitimate, but seem to be mostly populated by badly rewritten press releases), no actual good sources for this, despite being called the new Amazon or Alibaba... 81 actual Google hits
[212] is a rather clear sign that this is so far more a nothingburger than anything else, and a website
[213] which starts with "ACCEPTING FULL REGISTRATION FALL 2022PRE REGISTRATION IS OPEN NOW FOR APP FIRST ACCESSClick on the icon below" and doesn't have any further information doesn't really give much confidence either.
Reason: Lacks notability. The one review is a site where you can pay to get your book reviewed, and nothing better can be found online among the 23 Google Hits
[214] and zero Google News hits. Already repeatedly created and moved to draft, time to put an end to this.
Reason: Fails
WP:NLIST. Considering that blast furnaces have existed for centuries all across the world, this seems like a completely random choice with no clear inclusion criteria for these individually not notable furnaces. Was there anything special about e.g. the 1905-1907 period in the US that it deserves a separate section?
Reason: Similar to
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of international cricket centuries at the Wankhede Stadium and other such AfDs, fails
WP:NLIST. A fairly common event (80 tests, 187 centuries, that's more than 2 per test: I have trouble thinking of another sport where we would create lists of things which were this common), which explains why it isn't really the subject of significant attention (individual centuries get noted, but the vast vast majority of sources, and the only ones that really seem to care about the list subject as a whole, are statistical databases only). Note that the "further reading" book "100 Not Out: A Century of Cricket on the Adelaide Oval" is not about this topic, but about 100 years of cricket at the ground.
Reason: Contested redirect. I redirected this to
1885–86 Millwall Rovers F.C. season, as this ground was only used for that season, and most of the article is about the season and not about the utterly unremarkable ground, "a piece of wasteland, which was roughly marked out as a football pitch", anyway. Whatever needs to be said about the ground can easily be included in the season article.
Reason: Part of a larger hoax / self-promotion? While the surname "De Marchena" exists, most of the info in this article seems very dubious, and the same editor (and others) have been pushing De Marchena's and Van Marchena's left and right, without much if any evidence. For this article, I can find no evidence that either of the notable members either existed (Francisco de Marchena) or was called "Van Marchena" (
Georg Altner is listed with the surname Van Marchena in the infobox, after an IP added this in late 2022
[217]). There is also involvement of
User:Freddydemarchena, who added spurious De Marchena's to an article in April 2022
[218] (still present in current article),
Draft:Freddy De Marchena (was in mainspace, created by same editor as this surname article, who also edited the Georg Altner article). The page
Marisol (actress) also used to list unverifiable De Marchena's. All in all, something very fishy, and best to just get rid of this page completely.
Reason: "Name" + "job description". A recipe for a few million redirects, if someone wants to boost their edit count. "Joe Biden rules the USA", "Novak Djokovic plays tennis", ...
Reason: Nickname for
RMS Aquitania. Content fork redirected there by 3 different editors (including me), but article creator keeps restoring their page. Time to put an end to this and make a clear statement that this should remain a redirect.
Reason: Way too long redirect repeating one sentence from the target article (and not really the best sentence to start with, with the "hypotheses / possible / not yet well known or understood" triple repetition)
Reason: Well yes, they do. Probably not even restricted to American actors, and hardly the only thing they do in filmmaking. Utterly random, unlikely redirect sentence
Reason: Probably, although it isn't even discussed in the target article, and isn't specific to US directors anyway (neither rehearsing nor the target article). All in all a rather random redirect sentence
Reason: Spam sources, we really need to blacklist some of these. 17 year old Nigerian "internet entrepreneur" who is famous enough to be featured in Bangladesh
[219] with his company "Sam Marketer", which according to their own website "Sam Marketer provides top-notch digital marketing services, including Wikipedia article creation"
[220] where they also claim to have worked for Real Madrid! No evidence of this can be found, of course. Typical use of "articles" in "newspapers" where you just pay to get a profile online, making it look as if you are really successful. Nothing reliable could be found to establish that they have received any independent attention.
Reason: Lacks all actual notability, sources are press releases, paid-for articles, passing mentions, not independent, sale listings, ...
This may look like an independent good source, but it is the "magazine" from Elysian, a luxury brand which organised the very show they are reporting on, so not an independent source after all.
Reason:
WP:SSRT: "Please keep in mind that only topics with a less-than-encyclopedic scope that are commonly wikified words or that are repeatedly recreated should become soft redirects. We don't need a soft redirect for every possible word or phrase to be included in Wikipedia." No idea why this vulgar slang would need to exist as a bluelink on Wikipedia, is this really the kind of thing people would expect to exist?
Reason: No idea why A7 was rejected and redirecting done instead, considering that this 13-year-old minor is extremely non-notable, being just a name in one or two databases, and getting 3 Google hits in total
[221]. Finke is not mentioned at the redirect target, and there is no reason at the moment why they should be. A very poor decision to create this redirect instead of just deleting this. Speedy deletion would be best, but tagging it as such when an admin just rejected my A7 tag would probably be unwise?
Reason: A list of ghost movies, in most cases with little or no actual link to
Spiritism, just about the same (much older) topics which also formed the basis for Spiritism.
WP:OR/
WP:COATRACK, apparently translated from Portuguese.
Reason: Basically, a list of friendly matches between neighbouring very small islands (Bonaire has some 20000 inhabitants), not between nations but between parts of the same nation. No evidence of notability.
Reason: As far as I can judge, most sources aren't about the influence bishops had. For example,
this source only mentions bishops once, about a letter condemning sexual abuse, and doesn't seem to mention "literature" or "literary" at all, but is still used as a reference for their "influence on literary themes". Perhaps an article on
Catholic influence on Eastern European literature can be written, but when both the title and the contents need to be checked and rewritten completely, it makes little sense to keep this article instead of just starting from scratch.
Reason: Until very recently, people who migrated to New Zealand were all in the same tree
Category:Immigrants to New Zealand and its many subcats.
User:Johnpacklambert has created this new cat for the 19th c. migrants, and is depopulating the many subcats of the original global cat by removing people who moved to New Zealand in the 19th c, e.g.
here,
here and
here. The end result of this new division is thus that we have less informative categories on the articles, and less people in the correct New Zealand cat, all for the sake of some pedantry. This should be undone.
Reason: Way premature. Name of competition, teams, ... are all not known yet. Should again be redirected to
Asian Football Confederation#Clubs with one or two lines there about this.
Reason: No independent sources, lacks notability. The sources are either from organisations she works for, or an article she wrote. Looking for better sources only produced a short list of similar sources, and some passing mentions. Nothing in Google News. Her function of "deputy leader" is an internal job in the party, not a position in a parliament.
Reason: Seems to be some weird invention, I can't find any actual old or new name of the target district which looks similar to this (making this a plausible typo or such).
Reason: I can't find any actual discussions of her and her work, nor any evidence for the repeated claims that her "voice captivated audiences and earned her a place among the prominent singers of her time.". The other claim, that she "made notable appearances in two films", is not supported by the (unreliable) source IMDb, which gives one uncredited(!) role as a vocalist, and one role as a "singer on the stage". Looking for better sources give ultr-short entries like
here or purely passing mentions. She may be notable (though I haven't found the evidence for this), but then this should be based on reliable sources and accurately reflect these sources, not some unreliable sources and some claims not even supported by those.
Reason: A car crash without special intentions or an extreme number of casualties? No reason to believe that this would ever pass
WP:NOTNEWS and will get
WP:SUSTAINED coverage.
Reason: Lower level cyclist, no evidence of notability, sources are databases or primary, or a press release about his major win (Tour of Romania, a race for national teams consisting of amateurs and pros from minor teams) with very little information about him. Actual articles about Sabalin seem to be missing or scarce.
Reason: Delete, per
WP:SSRT: "Please keep in mind that only topics with a less-than-encyclopedic scope that are commonly wikified words or that are repeatedly recreated should become soft redirects. We don't need a soft redirect for every possible word or phrase to be included in Wikipedia."
Reason: Delete, per
WP:SSRT: "Please keep in mind that only topics with a less-than-encyclopedic scope that are commonly wikified words or that are repeatedly recreated should become soft redirects. We don't need a soft redirect for every possible word or phrase to be included in Wikipedia."
Reason:
WP:BLP1E,
WP:BLPCRIME. Non-notable person who now had some coverage because of allegations. Coverage before this event was sparse, and wouldn't have warranted an article. To create one now because of allegations goes against
WP:BLPCRIME.
Reason:
Yousong was a disambiguation page which I just turned into a redirect to
Jiandi. But there was no actual disambiguation of "Jiandi" at the Yousong page anyway.
Reason: Lacks all
notability, only independent source I found was a blog, not a
WP:RS. No Google News sources or other similar sources to show that this has received significant attention, and extremely few regular sources
[222].
Reason: A very short-lived title where neither the baronetcy nor the sole baronet seem to have done anything noteworthy, they just existed, and are noted as such in a few very exhaustive lists of British nobility. 90% of the article is not about the baronet or the baronetcy, but about their extended family. Perhaps a redirect to a list of 17th c. baronetcies or some such would be the best here, and if no good target is found then deletion.
Reason: I wasn't able to find reliable, independent, indepth sources about him (so not databases, organisators, ...), just routine match coverage. Lacks notability.
Reason: Do we really need an article for every somewhat salacious/scandalous incident which gets some media attention for a few days?
WP:NOTNEWS/
WP:CRIME intersection.
Reason: While the sugar industry of Saint Mary may well be a notable subject, this page is a very sprawling, exhaustive bit-by-bit history of some estates, and learns us very little about the actual sugar industry.
WP:TNT seems better than trying to remove 90% and rewriting the remainder into a coherent, clear article. I don't think we need things like "1945: The Syndicate Estates decided to let Arthur Hallpike rent a coconut grove on the property in order to promote the growth of coconuts for pig feed.", or the series of irrelevant non-sequiturs "2004: "Our "National Fruit," the Antigua Black Pineapple, is depicted on our coat of arms. It has dark yellow meat that is very sweet and flavorful. The area known as the "Pineapple Belt" runs from Redhill to Bethesda and has volcanic soil all the way to Cades Bay. Pineapples are cultivated from suckers, which mature in 15 to 18 months and continue to bear fruit for around three years. Ten acres are currently farmed at the Government Station.[4] 2005: At Urlings, there is a lovely old manse that is still abandoned and deteriorating. In the past five years, the bell in the picture has been taken (plunderer). The Museum has access to Rev. Reid's family's diaries, which describe his time serving St. Mary's Parish in the Old Road neighborhood in 1859. Antigua's tallest peak, Bogey Peak, which was renamed Mt. Obama shortly after President Obama of the United States was elected, is 1319 feet high." Every entry has such things paraphrased from the source without much care, like "1778 — died in London. Robert Christian's son died in Antigua in 1776. It is thought that he arrived in London from Antigua in the year 1777, and by the year 1778, he was residing in Southampton-street, Strand, in the city of Westminster, where he died. His sister Margaret was married to William Gunthorpe of Antigua, and he had a brother named John who died there long before 1777."
Reason: A club of some 25 hobbyists without any actual achievements, and without notability from independent sources (the "Antarctic Sun" is the internal newspaper of the US Antarctic program, and this club is just an informal group on one of their bases). As the Antarctic Sun article says, there also is the "first and only" bikers club in Antarctica (though there are no bikes), and so on. As long as it doesn't get this kind of attention from reliable independent sources, it doesn't belong here, but all I can find are blogs, reports from someone from another yachting club, Facebook, Linkedin, ...
Reason: Perhaps others see it differently, but I get the impression that the sources about this actor/businessperson aren't actually independent reliable sources, but press releases / self-penned hagiographies pretending to be real articles. Take e.g. the first source
[223], from the Times of India (or something similar), used to source his awards and nominations. All very high praise, but it seems to be impossible to find out for which series or films he actually did receive these awards for? His IMDb entry (given as an external link) is empty...
Reason: Repeatedly rejected at
WP:AFC for lack of
notability, repeatedly created in mainspace. Time to decide once and for all whether this can stay or not. Article as it stands doesn't even make clear what it is about, and sources are promo pieces.
Reason: Unclear why a season for a local youth league would be a
notable subject when the league itself doesn't even have an article and the best sources that may be expected are local bits of routine coverage. Fails
our notability guideline. Current sources aren't independent.
Reason: The "1976 World Championships" only had one event, and all competitors and results are listed there. This article can easily be redirected to
1976 World Championships in Athletics without any loss of information, and the separate "country at this event" articles are hardly notable subjects for this event. I
redirecte it while keeping the categories, but was reverted, so AfD can decide the best course of action.
Reason: I tried to warn about this "deforestation in Nigeria" project at
WP:ANI recently, at
Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive1137#Another Nigerian project dropping poor articles here, and well, this is what you get. The suggested solution at AI was mass draftification, but per
WP:NOTHOWTO, I don't see how this would be served by draftification or how encouraging further creation of such articles would benefit enwiki. Note how most sources in the article are not about Nigeria at all anyway.
Reason: I redirected this to the article about his father, as it is completely unclear why he should have a separate article, having done nothing of note in his life apparently? He is mentioned in biographies of others or of his family, just like family members often get short mentions in biographies of others, but that's about it, a background "character".
Reason: Per
WP:SSRT, most words shouldn't get a redirect to Wiktionary. This one is in my view particularly unhelpful, it leaves one with just as much questions and as little information as before reading the entry. I redirected it to
Lumpenproletariat instead, but was reverted.
Reason: This doesn't seem to have received significant attention from independent (non-masonic) sources. Could be a redirect to
Scottish_Rite#Degree structure, but doesn't have the
notability for a separate article.
Reason: Either
not notable or needs a rename. For example, the ESPN source
[224] doesn't even mention Bob Short, while the first source, Defector
[225] doesn't mention a "curse". Looking for better sources gave only 6 Google Hits in total
[226] (!), which for such a high profile sport in the US is ridiculously low.
Reason: Fails
WP:SUSTAINED. They liberated themselves, and were apprehended again, as reported at the time in the newspapers. If this hasn't received significant attention afterwards, it shouldn't be treated any differently than how we treat the many crimes or human interest stories which get some attention in the newspapers nowadays, but which we don't consider suitable for an article here. I couldn't find anything in Google Books, and the article offers no other indication that this is a case which has been discussed afterwards and is more than just a short burst of (mostly identical) news reports. Creator indicates that they "can't find this in any quality secondary sources" but preferred an AfD over Prod to get more eyes on it.
Reason: By far the longest article on enwiki, an endless list of every minor scrap of paper with this script. Either needs very severe pruning to include e.g. only notable manuscripts, or complete scrapping as unwieldy, excessively detailed,
WP:INDISCRIMINATE.
Reason: I redirected this to
List of cities in the United States by elevation as a borderline A10 speedy: the first 80 entries on the list here, are also included in the target list in the top 100. Just adding 20 entries here to the bottom, by doing some
WP:SYNTH from primary sources, hoping that none were missed, does not create a viable second article.
Reason: No evidence of any notability, the two sources have identical text, which is logical as they are a press release, not an actual article by a journalist. The site has not been the subject of much attention in general (only
10 Ghits?, some more as Ejesgist apparently).
Reason: A random intersection of two characteristics which isn't the subject of study or indepth sources. Exoplanets are "named" after their stars, and the stars may have Bayer designations (which basically means that they are in some of the oldest catalogues). But there is nothing special about this group of exoplanets which would make them a separate subject of study or interest in reliable sources.
Reason: I find no evidence that "Leach." (with the full stop) is used a taxonomic abbreviation for Leach (as it isn't an abbreviation of his name), seems like a mistake?
Reason: Per
WP:NOTSTATS and the similar deletions at AFD (e.g.
here,
here or the many deletions
here). Subject has not received significant attention, only from statistical databases or for individual entries but not as a group.
Reason: No evidence of
notability found, the one source with biographical info is an amateur website, and I can't find any reliable source which gives significant attention to this Edward Pocock(e).
Reason: Not the same person, Debenham Senior lived 1404-1481. I already removed the incorrect hatnote from
Gilbert Debenham (the "junior")
[227], the redirect should go as well.
Reason: Why? Apparently these were created for sorting reasons, but it is not clear when you would ever need to sort a disambiguation page (except perhaps in categories, but there you can add a sortkey to the category). There are a lot of these, this RfD is just for the one, the others can then be done in a next RfD if this one ends in delete. Oh, and in any case these surely aren't "printworthy" redirects? By the way,
Wrong Road (disambiguation), The also exists, for the same reason...
Reason: Perhaps this deserves to be speedy deleted as a G10 attack page, but in any case, a neologism raised by someone in an op-ed, and hardly used in that sense since then, doesn't deserve an article, no matter how you feel about the truth or lack of it behind it.
Reason: Basically a hoax based around some very flimsy factual details: there is some mention in one or two sources about Mahoma Mofari, alias Pere Cirera, who was burned because of homosexuality. There is apparently though zero evidence that he is known as "Peter the Sinner", that he is venerated anywhere by anyone, or that he has anything to do with the international day against homophobia.
Reason: A street which is verifiable, and mentioned as the location of other things, but which hasn't received significant attention (the street names articles are very passing mentions). Notability is not inherited, a street doesn't get notable because some building on it gets some attention, or an activity happens in a building on the street.
Reason: Complete lack of notability, created by editor who invented this and seems to be only interested in self-promotion. Best source for this is Linkedin
[228], most of the few other hits for this are unrelated. Article doesn't technically meet any of the speedy criteria, so AfD it is.
Reason: Seems all very dubious, both the business plan and the "independent" sources which look like press releases or paid-for articles. The only Google News source
[229] is a press release, I find no articles about Hibox plus the names of the founder, the COO or the director. The revenue (for a brand-new company) and number of employees are unverifiable, despite the source attached to it. The headquarters are here said to be in Noida, India, but the sources claim headquarters in London, UK... It all doesn't add up, I don't know if it is a scam or just promotion but in any case doesn't belong on Wikipedia (yet).
Reason: There are more than 1000 such fellows at the moment, not really a small number.
[230] (a possibly incomplete list, according to that page). May be better suited for a category for the fellows, but as a list it seems rather impractical and not distinctive or selective enough as an award.
Reason: There are about 150,000 Unicode characters. This one is apparently used in a language spoken by some 200 people, and isn't even mentioned in the article on that language. Sources are all primary (from Unicode). No evidence of any notability. No objection to a redirect to
Iwaidja language if people feel it should be mentioned there, but otherwise I see no reason to keep this.
Reason: Largely unverifiable, the sole reference doesn't support most of the claims, and there is already a draft for this which can be expanded if it could be an article after all (but then which is written from a
WP:NPOV, not this very one-sided account).
WP:TNT if this is notable, permanent deletion if not.
Reason: Nothing connects this fever specifically to the US, and the four sources at the target are about Israel
[231][232], Turkey
[233], or general (the "Handbook of Pediatric Surgery").
Reason: I can't find any sources for the "Pennsylvania Rite", the first source for this brand-new article gives a 404 error
[234] and nothing on that site seems to actually support the claims made here. The "Ancient York Rite" seems to be claimed by Rhode Island
[235][236] or to be a more general American thing (masonry splits seem to be only matched by communist party splits, in that there are countless minute fractions all claiming to be the only true ones). But in any case there is as far as I can tell no evidence for a so-called Pennsylvania Rite
[237][238][239][240].
Reason: Random intersection of characteristics. There is nothing that makes this grouping notable or connected, the "5 largest cities" in one state are small villages in another (e.g. 5th largest in Alaska has less than 10,000 inhabitants), and there is nothing special compared to the 6th, 7th, ...
Reason: I redirected this to
Last will and testament of Adolf Hitler, but was reverted by the article creator because (like they said on my user talk page) "The Position still held power and was extremely important within Germany". In reality, the position was nominally held by one person, had no influence whatsoever, and more importantly as a consequence isn't
notable enough to warrant a separate page.
Reason: This article has been draftified multiple times, and moved back to the mainspace without real improvements but with a slightly different title, multiple times now. The main issue is that the sources are all press releases, none of them are independent, and the main editor seems to have a serious
WP:COI and the article is far from neutral (e.g. the unsourced "pivotal moment" section). Whether the company is actually notable is hard to tell due to the proliferation of paid-for "articles" in even many of the best Indian news sources, but in that case a
WP:TNT scenario would be best, where a neutral editor creates the page based on independent sources.
Reason: "Minor planets" are rocks of often less than a kilometre in diametre, of which there is a nearly endless supply, almost none of them (of these higher numbered, smaller ones) in any way notable. We can continue creating pages for them, but why? It's a
WP:NOTSTATS violation, a reposting of database entries. I don't know where the cutoff should be (first 100,000? first 500,000?), but we can start by discussing if this one (and by definition future even higher numbered ones) should exist or not.
Reason: So, two of these thousand have a name, neither of the two is a notable "minor planet" (both are space rocks of 1km or less in diameter), neither of the two has a name which has gotten any attention (as sometimes happens when a celebrity gets a rock named after them). Note that, while there are 8 references, none of them are about these two. Basically, space trivia.
Reason:
WP:SSRT: "Please keep in mind that only topics with a less-than-encyclopedic scope that are commonly wikified words or that are repeatedly recreated should become soft redirects. We don't need a soft redirect for every possible word or phrase to be included in Wikipedia."
Reason: Very unclear topic or notability. Draftifying to give the creator a chance to correct this had no result. Basically, we have an infobox and background section about a different event, we have one source which when one actually checks it out doesn't even mention the event, and another source not about this attack at all. So this is an unsourced and due to the lack of concrete info for me unverifiable article. If it can be verified, shown to be notable, and cleaned, fine (that's why I draftified it), but if not it needs to be deleted.
Reason: Looks to be either completely non-notable or worse, a hoax. None of the five sources even mentions the organisation (despite one being a press release), and this includes e.g. this
Reuters source which has nothing even remotely mentioning this organisation. Searching with the original Korean name gives a whopping
9 results, most of them Wikis or their Facebook page. Looking for "World Talent Exchange and Sharing Organization" isn't any better.I came across this article when looking at what's going on with (the name of)
Park Ho-eon/
Peter Park, who is listed as a Chairperson of this organisation. Perhaps, if this organisation is really as shady or non-existent as it seems to be, a closer look at everything else related to Park needs to be done, preferably by people who can read Korean and can judge whether the sources and claims are legit or not. But this AfD is only for the "World Talent" etcetera.
Reason: Fails
WP:NBIO, no reliable independent sources which give significant attention to him. Sources in article are not independent (e.g.
this one and/or don't mention him (e.g.
this or
this).
Reason: No evidence that this is actually
notable, should again be redirected to
List of Wikipedias. The Chinese Wikipedia article, where this new version is based on, doesn't list reliable, independent sources either.
Reason: No evidence that this is actually
notable, should again be redirected to
List of Wikipedias. The Chinese Wikipedia article, where this new version is based on, doesn't list reliable, independent sources either.
Reason: Despite the glowing praise in this article, this film seems to have received no attention from
reliable sources at all, with no reviews at all on Rotten Tomatoes, no hits on Google News or Google Books, and the only review given here comes from a WordPress site...
Reason: Speedy deletion as a recently created, implausible redirect was denied. Unlikely search term, and the pre-redirect contents don't seem to have been used to merge anything, so no need to retain them.
Reason: Having these cross-namespace redirects is a bad enough relic, but creating a disambiguation page for 5 such redirects which all point to the same page anyway, with a name (MOS:VARS) which is as far as I know not in use anywhere, only helps to clutter the search bar.
Reason: After the recent
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hibox, an existing draft was amended and moved to mainspace. The sources still look like the same kind of press releases masquerading as business reporting ("Throughout the day, the students, facing financial challenges, radiated happiness as they received mystery boxes containing a wealth of educational resources"), there still is apparently not a single news source even mentioning the founder Le Van Hai, which one would expect from a neutral source about the company. It still has the same kind of sources which contradict the basic facts in the article as well, e.g. the first source
[241] claims it isn't an Indian company but a London-based one which was active elsewhere before it started in India. All in all, very fishy (articlewise and businesswise), much hype and not a lot of substance, almost as if it is some pyramid scheme or scam.
Reason: Not sure what is happening here, some obscure unicode character hack? Seems like a bad idea to create redirects from similar-looking but basically unused character combinations, but perhaps I'm missing something here?
Reason: Not sure what is happening here, some obscure unicode character hack? Seems like a bad idea to create redirects from similar-looking but basically unused character combinations, but perhaps I'm missing something here? Note, we have a page
Pedo which is not the same as this redirect, and which is not nominated for deletion. Note also that the same editor also created the below "gay" redirect...
Reason: These two articles needs checking to see whether they are verifiable in reliable sources or not (in which case they need deletion), or just need to be moved to the right title. The Chawar or Chanwar Dynasty seems to be based solely on the works of Raj Kumar, who discusses a "Chamar" dynasty. There are no books about a Chawar Dynasty
[242] and one mention of a Chanwar Dynasty
[243], but there is one author who has extensively written about a Chamar Dynasty
[244]. But one would expect many more sources about a dynasty that apparently ruled "the western part of India and surrounding areas" for 600 years. The articles have some sources which seem to have nothing to do with the subject at all, e.g.
Raja Chanwarsen uses this book
[245] as a reference? There are no book sources (in Latin script) about a king "Raja Chawarsen"
[246], nor for Raja Chamarsen or Raja Chanwarsen. Perhaps some other spelling will give results?
Reason: Unlikely search term for the mainspace. While existing old redirects from MOS pseudo-namespace are usually left alone, creating new ones for rarely-used terms (as here, "VARS") should best be avoided.
Reason: A partial list of non notable roads as a subset of a non-notable topic (county routes in Nassau County). These are already listed in
List of county routes in Nassau County, New York, having subpages detailing the exact route of the 140 metre long C77 and so on is rather excessive.
Reason: No evidence found of any
notability, the sources given are passing mentions or not independent, and no sources seem to have given indepth attention to this hymn.
Reason: Either completely non notable, or a hoax (in which case the creator of this autobiography needs to be blocked). The only page really supporting the claims is
this, but it looks as if you just have to pay and declare that you are a justice of the peace to get listed there. Other arguments in favour of the "hoax" theory are the other hard to believe claims in the article (this 16 year old is a Colonel and "justice Buckley holds multiple Honorary Doctorates from various institutions."), and the fact that previously, the same editor tried to claim that they were a Cardinal
[250]). If people agree that this is a hoax, please speedy delete the page and block the creator.
Reason: The only substantial source is
this, a family history website of unclear reliability. Other sources at best make a passing mention of some skirmishes in Kazerun and other places, without info on the role of Josef Pousette (not Puosette) or any of the other details found in that one source.The whole "first battle" section, being the most important of the encounters, is sourced to
this, which doesn't mention this battle. Perhaps someone can find some better sources to verify the information here, but otherwise we shouldn't have an article on this.
Reason: A 'list' of 1 redlinked ship of unknown size or importance, sourced to a website where the full entry reads "AGGERSHUS, cavalry pram (1786-1801)". Unlikely that "ship decommissionings in 1801" is a notable topic on its own, so far we have served the readers this extremely unsatisfactory page for 4 years, time to put an end to it.
Reason: Previously deleted at
Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Albania, now recreated as a redirect to
Portal:Europe, which has now and most of the time no info on Albania. I don't think it makes sense to send readers of Albania-articles to a portal which doesn't have info on the country.
Reason: Deleted after
Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Romani people, now recreated first as an unhelpful redirect, then as an unhelpful portal which justs repeats the main info on Romani people, which people can find much better at the article.
Reason: The only independent sourcing are a few sources mentioning the win of Botha (and of the four sources in the article, one is a Wordpress blog about Mandela day, and one is the Italian Athletics Federation, not an independent source but responsible for sending athletes to the championships), no actual coverage of the event as a whole, no
WP:SUSTAINED coverage either.
Reason: Delete. They live mostly in Europe / Turkey, having moved out of India around 1000 CE. Sending people who want to see a Romani people portal to a portal about India is not helpful or very logical.
Reason: Does it make sense to have a "disambiguation" for a marketing term used by countless countries, regions, and cities? Apart from the four places named at the current page, the term is used for or by Singapore, Thailand, Malaysia, Myanmar, Labuan, Yunnan, Laos, Bangkok, Vietnam, Assam, Taiwan, The Philippines, Guwahati, Hong Kong, Tripura, Mizoram, Binh Duong Province, Indonesia...
Reason: Sourced only to Google searches and unreliable sources (wikis and so on), this list is basically
WP:OR. I have repeatedly draftified this to give the creator (and others) the chance to correct this, to no avail.
Reason: Very unclear why we would have Wiktionary redirects for non-Latin characters (or non-English words for that matter). Seems like a highly unlikely search term on enwiki.
Reason: A painstakingly detailed article on an utterly non-notable club, which operated for one season in a low-level competition only. No
WP:SUSTAINED coverage, just match reports, padded with lots of speculation, information about the cruising club (but not the rugby club), and so on.
Reason: Companies provide their own certification, yes, many more than the ones listed here in fact.
WP:NOTDIRECTORY, basically a business directory including only one type of business and excluding others because of what recruiters supposedly want.
Reason: Not a notable rivalry, as evidenced by the used
source as well,which concludes "Simply put, to have competed against your "rival" in the playoffs just four times in 35-plus years is pretty weak."
Reason: Largely unverifiable. I can't find references to "Jassi Khan Siddozai", "Sidhnuti"
[251], Sudhanoti combined with 1407
[252]...The same applies to other creations by same editor or around same topics, e.g. in
First Government of Sidhnuti Azad Kashmir on October 4,1947, I checked the first two and the last sources, and neither mentions Sidhnuti or Sudhanoti.
Reason: Autobiography of producer who so far lacks
notability, one local source
[255] reproduces aggrandizing claims like "working with Grammy winners" even though the artist in case,
The Last Artful, Dodgr, hasn't won a Grammy yet as far as I can tell.
Reason: Lacks
notability as a separate topic (and no obvious redirect target), unsourced and abandoned article. Prod was removed because "Being featured on postage stamps is a pretty huge honor for any topic, as such the topic asserts notability," but while the fact that Asterix postage stamps have been made shows the (undisputed) notability of Asterix, the indicated lack of notability is for the topic of this list, "Asterix on postage stamps" as a whole.
Reason: I'm already discussing two similar articles by the same creator at
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sudhanoti, it would be nice if some people could take a look there as well. Here, we have something called apparently the "Sikh Soudan Wars", or the "Sikh Sudhan Wars", or the "Sikh Sidhnuti War". The section for the "First Sikh Sudhan War" has one source
[256] which doesn't mention Sudhan, Soudhan, or Sidhnuti. The Second War, about "Pindi Kahota, the main gate of Sudhnuti" being bombarded and so on, is sourced to
[257], which doesn't mention Kahota, and
this, which also doesn't mention Kahota. In fact, there are apparently no sources at all for Ranjit Singh taking an army of 40000 to Pindi Kahota
[258][259] nor for the same with "Pindi Kahuta", which I suppose is what was meant. Basically, what we need is two or so good sources actually naming and discussing the "Sikh Sudhan Wars" as such. Without this, this is some fabrication at worst, or at best reframing some actual events into a new narrative.
Reason: No reason to have a separate list from
Parishes and dependencies of Antigua and Barbuda, where these seven are listed as well. These "capitals", apart from the real capital Saint John, are very small villages and don't seem to get special attention as a group apart from their role in the parishes, which is treated at the other article. I redirected it but was reverted. The minimal extra information here can easily be merged into the other article if necessary and sourced, and if the sources then work (many of the ethnicity pdfs don't load in either the original or the archived form, and I don't see where e.g. the "foreign born" percentages come from, the census document only gives these figures per parish)
Reason: Largely a
WP:OR/
WP:SYNTH reconstruction based on very old primary sources, about battles and sieges we don't have articles on, which were part of a 3 year campaign we don't have an article on, which was part of an 11 year war we don't have an article on.
Reason: No evidence of
notability (a blog and a non-independent source) for this incident, which ended well and seems to have had no major consequences otherwise. A redirect to
List of Mayday episodes#Season 21 (2021) may be the best solution.
Reason: The three sources (which seem to use the same text anyway) only briefly mention the telephone as part of one exhibition, no indication that it is actually a notable work of art.
Reason: I first nominated this article for
WP:PROD deletion with the following rationale:"None of the three sources confirm the claims in this article, one states that the board is "thinking of launching their BPL" and only confirms that they will do a competition for school girls
[260], one talks about an existing three-team tournament, and just states "If we can't start the women's franchise league in the next two seasons of BPL, we will try to do it in the third season."
[261], while the final source, from yesterday, is the only one somewhat concrete about these plans, but only says "he possible time of the first season is December this year or January next year." and has no info on the format or the number of teams.
[262]I don't know if the article as written is mostly speculation (which has no place on enwiki then) or based on another source than the ones given (even though the one from yesterday should be up to date), but as it stands the article is not acceptable."Since then, the article has been ref-bombed but nothing has improved. For example, at the moment the "schedule" section, "Although the day of the tournament is not fully fixed so far, it is expected that, this year may begin late or February to March 2025.", is referenced by
[263] which has nothing at all about those dates, and is about school cricket for girls...
Reason: Random quote created as kind of a soft redirect to Wikiquote. I see no reason to have links for non-notable sentences to outside sources (whether in the WMF universe or not): either they are notable enough to be mentioned in an article here and can then be redirected internally, or we shouldn't have them at all
Reason: This seems to be a (hidden) category in mainspace which is of interest to the library / Brigham Young University, but has no importance for Wikipedia and its maintenance. It (and its subcategories) include things like
His Girl Friday, where the only connection to the Library seems to be in the "Further reading" section, which has a ""Collection on His Girl Friday, 1940". BYU Library Special Collections."
[264], consisting of "two lobby card digital prints and two one-sheet poster reproductions", i.e. nothing original or special. Or
Charity bazaar, where the cat was added in 2021
[265] without any obvious relation to the article. Same for
Ida, Countess von Hahn-Hahn, no idea why the category is there, no idea what "maintenance" any Wikipedia editor is supposed to do with this category. One can also find it at e.g.
Conservation and restoration of books, manuscripts, documents, and ephemera, where probably the library has some info, just like hundreds of other similar libraries. Why this one is especially selected to have a maintenance category is unclear. No idea as well why
Lloyd Alexander and his
The Black Cauldron (novel) and
The Book of Three are in this category.Perhaps it can become a Wikiproject and be tagged on relevant talk pages, considering that the category is part of
Category:Articles by WikiProject which is a container of talk page categories, not a mainspace category. Better still probably is a task force of the
Wikipedia:WikiProject Latter Day Saint movement, as the vast majority of articles in the maintenance category are related to the Mormons. This seems to the be the original intention as well, as it says "This category contains pages that Rachel Helps (BYU) and her student editors have worked on as part of their work for the Harold B. Lee Library.", which is for all similar projects (e.g. WikiEdu) done at the article talk pages (where it usually serves no purpose at all and just clutters the page, but that's a different discussion).
Reason: No evidence of
notability found, sources in article are primary, other sources are routine or passing. Article is one of a group of quid-pro-quo promo pieces between the Field Naturalist Clubs in Victoria, Australia and Wikimedia Australia, created by one and moved back out of draft (against the COI/PAID guidelines) by a paid member of the other.
Reason: There are way too many video game consoles for one single list, that's why these are already split across
Lists of video game consoles, to which I redirected this (despite the poor capitalisation which may warrant outright deletion). See e.g.
List of first generation home video game consoles for the massive number of consoles in that generation alone.
Reason: No evidence of any
notability for this recent, small and apparently otherwise unremarakable (or at least not commented on by
reliable independent sources) church.
Reason: There are thousands upon thousands of roundabouts in the world (as the article states, 430 in Washington state alone), no idea why we would want to list them all. What's next, list of level crossings? Fails
WP:NLIST.
Reason: No evidence of
WP:Notability, sources in article are not independent, I couldn't find better non-routine ones, just announcements and rehashed press releases.
Reason: No evidence of
notability, one local article in Liechtenstein, otherwise either passing mentions (e.g. the Faroese articles just state that their team beat Liechtenstein, it doesn't give any actual attention to the Liechtenstein team), databases, or non-independent sources (organizers and the like).
Reason: No evidence of notability, no indepth references about the team, apparently unknown whether they even played a full season, and claims about becoming the Dayton Jets unsourced and unverifiable
[266].
Reason: The only reliable source for this fishing ship / unarmed transport ship is a massive 10-book encyclopedia of all German warships no matter how small or insignificant. The other source, netmarine.net, is more of a large hobby site / semi wiki than anything else ("Si vous souhaitez compléter ces pages par des récits, illustrations ou autres documents, écrivez nous.").
Reason: No independent reliable sources about the player (just passing mentions), just clubs and tournament organisers. Nothing useful on Google News. Fails
WP:BIO
Reason: Not every bit of LOTR minutiae needs to be recorded here, fails
WP:LISTN as a subject that hasn't received significant attention as a group, No idea why "Elrond's library", a French shop, is in the lead singled out as a source for this either.
Reason: No indication that this is a
notable film (well, a 31 second static shot). Apparently not only have we no idea who actually made it (just the producre), but we also don't know what is being shown according to
this. Perhaps some list for this and many similar non-notable shorts may be feasible, but at the moment I don't see a good redirect target. Perhaps
William Kennedy Dickson filmography, which gives an idea of the number of such ultrashort films that were made (and is clearly incomplete, as e.g. this very one isn't on that list).
Reason: No evidence of
notability for this 2 minute film, just included in some websites but without significant attention (e.g.
this or
this). No obvious redirect target found, if there is one then redirecting is of course acceptable.
Reason: No evidence of
notability from reliable sources, the available sources are the publications of a lively hobby club. The station was relatively shortlived and nothing remarkable happened during these years. The main source, by Jeff Morris, has not received any attention at all
[267] and is basically, as far as can be determined, a self-published booklet or brochure
[268]
Reason:
WP:NOTMEMORIAL, that Poles have been killed (and their number) can be mentioned on a general page about the role of Poland in the event, but a list of the individuals that died is no more warranted than lists of people who died in airplane crashes (or e.g. WWII).
Reason: No evidence of
notability found, source is database only, Prod removed with statement that he received a yellow card for Kaunas which is not really adressing the issue at hand. A search didn't immediately provide better sources, but perhaps with different search terms better results can be had. Article in any case needs thorough cleanup, stating that he "plays" for a club which folded in 2012 is slightly outdated at best.
Reason: No evidence of
notability found. Tournament has no article, match results are missing for many games, sources are databases, location is a small village.
Reason: No evidence of any
notability for this concept. None of the three sources are reliable or (worse) even mention "non-monotonic dice", which is understandable because there are no sources for the concept "non-monotonic dice"[270]. The concept of non-transitive dice, which is mentioned by the references, is already covered in
Intransitive dice, so it's not as if this article discusses an uncovered topic by the wrong name.
Reason: I moved this page to draftspace with the reason "No evidence of notability in sources in article, are there better sources (independent sources which discuss him in depth?)". It was moved back to mainspace with the addition of a primary source from his team Livingston, but there still seem to be no good
reliable independent sources with significant attention for this player
[271], just passing mentions in match reports.
Reason: Considering that the first bullet point refers to a page about legal punishment, not extrajudicial, and the second bullet point refers to a page which doesn't even mention Lebanon, I don't think this disambiguation serves any real purpose.
Reason: Seems like a non-event where the vast majority of the page is about things before and after which are largely unrelated to the skirmish. A misunderstanding, some shots, no casualties, that's it. A very minor episode in the
Vega Expedition, not even mentioned there until you added the "see also" for it.
Reason: I can't find evidence of
notability, the only indepth source is
this, published by Scouting.nl, i.e. the organisation she worked for (not an independent source). The other sources are primary sources or passing mentions.
Reason: Afd created at the request of
User:Dencoolast33. Presumably for lack of
notability (local political organisation which once won one seat) and lack of sources (tagged as unsourced since 2009), but it would be best if they explained their reasoning here. (note: the addition of deletion sorting categories like "Sweden" or "Politics" doesn't seem to work in Twinkle at the moment, hence no delsort added).
Fram (
talk) 07:35, 14 June 2024 (UTC)
Reason:
WP:BIO1E, didn't receive any significant attention before his death, and didn't play a truly major role in the event he is remembered for. Should be redirected to
2024 Nuseirat rescue operation, but this was opposed by the article creator, so it's up to AfD to decide.
Reason: There doesn't seem to be anything that makes this grouping of tornadoes special, that they are also (among other means) observed by mobile radar is not a defining characteristic, and is in many cases sourced to the most basic sources (twitter/X, primary sources like NOAA). An article on
Mobile radar observation of tornadoes seems to be a better idea, perhaps this can be moved and the list trimmed to the most notable instances only? But specifically as a list grouping this seems like a never-ending list of a non-defining characteristic of the tornadoes, which get observed by many methods.
Reason: Historical nonsense moved disruptively to mainspace by a paid contributor first, and then by an editor who should know better, who was informed about the scientific nonsense, and moved it into the mainspace without even tagging it. Highly irresponsible. Should be moved back to draftspace and completely checked and rewritten to be based on actual science.