Home • Search • Translate
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< December 07 December 09 >

Purge server cache

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

The result was speedy delete. Salting will follow this deletion. Missvain ( talk) 20:58, 11 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Verdis

Verdis (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Previously deleted 14 months ago ( Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Free Republic of Verdis), this micronation seems to have shrunk from 109 to 75 citizens in the meantime, while still not having accrued anything like sufficient coverage. (I don't know what the previous iteration looked like, so I'm not going to CSD G4) Sources consist of "governmental" material (4/10), press releases (3/10), a promo blurb, and the same RTL write-up twice. That's not getting anywhere near WP:GNG. -- Elmidae ( talk · contribs) 23:29, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Where has it gone down to 75 citizens? Official Verdis source says reached over 1,000. https://www.verdisgov.org/about — Preceding unsigned comment added by 180.150.36.255 ( talk) 23:48, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
It's in that doubled-up RTL source, however I see that that is from 2019, so probably out of date. -- Elmidae ( talk · contribs) 00:40, 9 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Elmidae ( talk · contribs) 23:29, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. Elmidae ( talk · contribs) 23:29, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 06:49, 16 December 2020 (UTC) reply

List of recordings made at PatchWerk Recording Studios

List of recordings made at PatchWerk Recording Studios (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This is WP:RAWDATA; Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. Wikipedia is not a directory of every album or song that has been recorded at any particular studio. There is no evidence that recording at this particular studio is a hugely notable distinction in the field of music that would warrant such an article. Many albums and songs have been recorded here. Some of them are notable. Some of them less so. It clearly isn't that much of an exclusive club. This list does not meet any purpose listed at WP:LISTPURP.

See also the discussion for List of artists who have recorded at PatchWerk Recording Studios. Spiderone 20:44, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 20:45, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 20:45, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Georgia (U.S. state)-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 20:45, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Eddie891 Talk Work 22:16, 15 December 2020 (UTC) reply

James L. Hall II

James L. Hall II (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Hello! On behalf of the company Salty and Mr. Hall, and as part of my work at Beutler Ink, I've nominated this pseudo-biography about a low-profile individual for deletion, per WP:BLP1E. I've completed a thorough review of available sourcing and determined that Mr. Hall is not eligible for a Wikipedia article at this time, per Wikipedia's guidelines on notability for people. Of the 12 citations in the current article, 9 point to Mr. Hall's official site, which fails reliable sourcing and cannot be used to establish notability under the basic criteria for people, and has been inactive since 2017. References #2 and #5 are primary sources as well, and #2 does not mention the subject. Reference #11 is the only citation that qualifies for inclusion. However, it does not qualify as significant coverage. None of the sources cited provide the type of in-depth coverage required for establishing notability, and the article's main focus is an allegation about something for which he was later cleared.

I performed searches for Mr. Hall on Google, Google News (and archive), and Google Books, using a variety of names he may be referenced with including "James L. Hall II", "James L. Hall", "James Hall", and "Jim Hall". All of these yielded very few or no results associated with James L. Hall II, so I continued to search by adding his various business associations. The only coverage I'm seeing specifically about the subject is this Deseret News article about the initial fraud accusation, which is already referenced above, and this follow-up piece from the same outlet after Mr. Hall was cleared of the charges. Neither source provides adequate biographical detail, whether considered on their own merits or in conjunction, to produce an article that would meet Wikipedia's standards. The fact that coverage of the case remained local further indicates that this subject should not have an article, per Wikipedia's policy on subjects notable only for one event. Other mentions of the subject found through searches are from primary sources that cannot be used to establish notability.

There's not enough coverage to flesh out a biography with details about his early life, education, career, personal life, etc. Coverage of Mr. Hall appears to be minimal, and entirely centered around a single event that was not widely covered. Per pseudo-biographies: "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." I should also note, the article seems to have been created by a single purpose account back in 2011. I understand that my conflict-of-interest in bringing this article forward for deletion may cause skepticism, particularly because it involves a page with reference to a lawsuit. However, given the lack of reliable sources about the subject, Wikipedia's policy for people who are not public figures, and are accused of a crime, and previously cited policies, I cannot find any reason to keep this article.

I appreciate editors taking the time to review this deletion request. Inkian Jason ( talk) 20:37, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 20:39, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Spartaz Humbug! 07:26, 16 December 2020 (UTC) reply

List of recordings made at Abbey Road Studios

List of recordings made at Abbey Road Studios (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Stemming from this discussion, this is WP:RAWDATA; Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. Wikipedia is not a directory of every album or song that has been recorded at any particular studio. There is no evidence that recording at this particular studio is a hugely notable distinction in the field of music that would warrant such an article. Many albums and songs have been recorded here. Some of them are notable. Some of them less so. It clearly isn't that much of an exclusive club. This list does not meet any purpose listed at WP:LISTPURP. Spiderone 20:34, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 20:35, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 20:35, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 20:35, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
I have encountered this argument before. WP:NOTDUP says that a list should not be nominated for deletion simply because the topic is also represented by a category. That argument was not made in this nomination, which contends that the list article is deficient due to the cited rules for list articles. The above vote is almost entirely about the existence of the category, which is not being disputed. The argument that an unsatisfactory list article should be kept, because there is a also a category about the same thing, is unconvincing and also veers into bureaucratic thinking. --- DOOMSDAYER520 ( TALK| CONTRIBS) 21:53, 9 December 2020 (UTC) reply
To the contrary, I view it as holistic thinking. It doesn't make sense that we'd delete a list as "unsatisfactory" when it's organized around the same concept that we categorize the same listed albums by, particularly when it's part of a larger system of categorizing them. That also implies a broader consensus for this way of classifying albums, at least until a broader CFD establishes otherwise. An AFD that targets one list without regard to how this type of content as a whole is organized strikes me as bureaucratic instead; this forum is simply not a good one for making such decisions that affect lots of articles, because AFDs are binary in outcome and tend to be myopic in what is considered. postdlf ( talk) 23:30, 9 December 2020 (UTC) reply
I appreciate your level-headed response and will simply agree to disagree. But I am also compelled to point out that there is a pretty large body of guidelines for list articles, many of which were cited by the nominator here with good reason. It appears that all those guidelines for the quality of list articles become pointless under this "holistic" approach toward listing and categorizing things. --- DOOMSDAYER520 ( TALK| CONTRIBS) 14:33, 10 December 2020 (UTC) reply
I also think this list is defensible without recourse to the category system, as per Technopat below. I may not have gone out of my way to contribute to it, but I certainly see no compelling reason to delete indexes of articles on notable albums by their shared recording locations, especially when that studio is itself notable. There is no requirement that lists be limited to "hugely notable distinctions", "exclusive clubs" or "exclusive honors". postdlf ( talk) 20:43, 11 December 2020 (UTC) reply
  • Keep. As creator of the list back in 2007, I specifically stated then that it was aimed at relieving "the main article page [...] of what is, in some cases, just PR hype for various artists who happen to have recorded there." This was the version of "Abbey Road" at that time. The fact that the current version, many years later, is very similar to that same PR-use of Wikipedia that I tried to pre-empt is but a sad reflection and suggests that more effort needs to be put into ensuring Wp articles are encyclopaedic rather than simply eliminating these here pesky lists (which, in themselves, are pretty harmless and certainly more “objective” and, therefore, less subject to PR-related creativity than many "encyclopaedic" articles).
    As for this specific AfD, I’m afraid I have to disagree with the nominator’s final statement that the list does not meet any of the three purposes listed at WP:LISTPURP:

    “Information: The list may be a valuable information source. This is particularly the case for a structured list. Examples would include lists organized chronologically, grouped by theme, or annotated lists.” Comment: The list is structured chronologically.
    “Navigation: Lists which contain internally linked terms (i.e., wikilinks) serve, in aggregate, as natural tables of contents and indexes of Wikipedia… If users have some general idea of what they are looking for but do not know the specific terminology, they could browse the lists of basic topics and more comprehensive lists of topics, which in turn lead to most if not all of Wikipedia's lists, which in turn lead to related articles…”. Comment: “... which in turn lead to… which in turn lead to related articles...”
    “Development: Some lists are useful for Wikipedia development purposes. The lists of related topics give an indication of the state of Wikipedia, the articles that have been written, and the articles that have yet to be written. However, as Wikipedia is optimized for readers over editors,…”. Comment: This list is “optimized for readers…”

    My understanding, as per my comments above, is that this list fully complies with each of the purposes. If I’m mistaken, please explain why this “list does not meet any purpose listed at WP:LISTPURP”.
    Likewise, the nominator’s statement that “Wikipedia is not a directory of every album or song that has been recorded at any particular studio”; that’s evident. But the idea is that the list is made up of those recordings considered sufficiently notable to have a dedicated article at Wikipedia, which I consider a rule of thumb observed for many, if not most lists.
    Regarding the statement that it is an “indiscriminate collection of info”, as the title very clearly states: this list is very specific (which means “not indiscriminate”). Any possible “indiscriminate” use that may stem from the fact that it is obviously open to future incorporations and/or items lacking. A “criticism” or, rather, fact easily applicable to just about any article at Wp, not to mention many of the lists here. The phrase “nothing is written in stone”, one of the great advantages to the whole Wikipedia “experience”, springs so easily to mind here.
    As for the statement “there seems to be a misperception about how recording at Abbey Road Studios is some sort of exclusive honor”, where is any “exclusive honor” implied or stated in this list? If a recording is considered notable enough to be included here at Wikipedia, why should it not be included in a list? I really find it hard to be more factual/objective than providing a simple list, in this case, chronological, for simplicity.
    I could continue answering more of the objections to keeping this list, but I fear I’ve used up more than my fair share of the space here, so will sign off here. Regards, -- Technopat ( talk) 20:30, 10 December 2020 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep. Geschichte ( talk) 21:43, 15 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Josef Aschbacher

Josef Aschbacher (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No evidence of passing WP:GNG or WP:ANYBIO. The references do not show significant coverage in independent and "reliable" sources. The content is written in a promotional manner and is not of any encyclopedic value. Teemu.cod ( talk) 19:35, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Shellwood ( talk) 19:47, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Astronomy-related deletion discussions. Shellwood ( talk) 19:47, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Austria-related deletion discussions. Shellwood ( talk) 19:47, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Geschichte ( talk) 21:45, 15 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Navneet Malik (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

famous for winning one contest only? no sustained notability either. -- RZuo ( talk) 18:42, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. RZuo ( talk) 18:42, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. RZuo ( talk) 18:42, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fashion-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 18:51, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was merge to List of World War II flying aces. Merge target subject to editorial judgement Spartaz Humbug! 12:30, 16 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Ernst Scheufele

Ernst Scheufele (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Minor aviation biography which fails WP:GNG. The article has been practically untouched since 2016. Although there are sources to attest to ES's existence, he has received no "significant coverage". — Brigade Piron ( talk) 18:25, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. — Brigade Piron ( talk) 18:25, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. — Brigade Piron ( talk) 18:25, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions. — Brigade Piron ( talk) 18:25, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Spartaz Humbug! 12:05, 16 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Bitmari

Bitmari (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NCORP. Melmann 17:45, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Finance-related deletion discussions. Melmann 17:45, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Melmann 17:45, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Zimbabwe-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 18:06, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Fenix down ( talk) 23:01, 15 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Lee Min-hu

AfDs for this article:
Lee Min-hu (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Does not pass WP:GNG or WP:ANYBIO. He gets some coverage for a controversial decision that he made in a game between Thailand and Malaysia [3] [4] [5] [6]. If you search for long enough, you will find some offensive blog posts about him. Still, it's not enough for him to warrant an article here. I have searched "イ・ミンフ" and "李 泯厚", as these are the only other versions of his name that I can find, and these searches amounted to nothing. Spiderone 17:30, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 17:37, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 17:37, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of South Korea-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 17:37, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone 17:39, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Geschichte ( talk) 21:48, 15 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Ketcham Travis House

Ketcham Travis House (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Does not meet WP:GNG or WP:NBUILD. Appears to be written by someone with a COI. Article written around the time the owner was trying to get it listed on the NRHP. Nothing in the article about the house is sourced, except for one Bloomington newspaper article. The rest of the sources are about background info on the original owner/builder John Ketcham (Indiana) and were probably copied from that article. Searching finds mostly WP mirrors. MB 17:23, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions. MB 17:23, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. MB 17:23, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Indiana-related deletion discussions. MB 17:23, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
  • Deleter per nom, article written by a single topic editor with the same surname as the owner, seemingly with the wrong intentions. There's no suggestion why the house could be notable, apart from the one 1985 newspaper article. Sionk ( talk) 20:29, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
  • Delete - I agree that this fails GNG and NBUILD Spiderone 18:44, 10 December 2020 (UTC) reply
  • Delete per WP:MILL. I'm a fan of old historic houses and this one is just not notable. In fact, in Monroe County, Indiana, there are "many early two-story brick houses," at least five of which are notable enough for mention, but not this one. [1]
  1. ^ Cromine, Alice (1979). Restored Towns and Historic Districts of America. E.P. Dutton. p. 164. ISBN  0876902875.
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Spartaz Humbug! 12:33, 16 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Tyrone Evans Clark

Tyrone Evans Clark (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

more sock spam about a non-notable (perhaps too soon) creative professional who lacks coverage in actual independent reliable sources. About half are black hat SEO (like VoyageLA), interviews which lack any oversight or independence and passing mentions, if at all. Praxidicae ( talk) 17:11, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 17:12, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Illinois-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 17:12, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 17:13, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
  • Keep  I did a google search and found many other sources. In addition, his movie list is incomplete and I will try to update and improve this page.  He meets WP:GNG notability by having significant news coverage and several roles in well known TV networks, such as E! Entertainment, Lifetime, etc. Also some of his text sounds promotional and unreferenced, but I will also try to revise. I also discovered that he is a singer with albums on Amazon. Already added that he is a singer. Peter303x ( talk) 02:23, 10 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Can you list the reliable sources you've found? Having roles and albums doesn't mean he is notable. -  Mnnlaxer |  talk |  stalk 18:46, 13 December 2020 (UTC) reply
  • Keep Hi! I really saw several seasons of Women of Wrestling and I was a fan of Tyrone, better known as Papua New Guinea Warrior, I was browsing wikipedia and I really find this, that man continues to act and is even a dancer, I added his participation on the Women of Wrestling page from Wikipedia even. This article is an orphan, as no other articles link to it. He has a lot ahead of him! Thank you. Tomyy27 ( talk) 04:49, 11 December 2020 (UTC)Tomyy27 Tomyy27 ( talk) 04:49, 11 December 2020 (UTC) reply
    Blocked for UPE. MER-C 19:10, 11 December 2020 (UTC) reply
  • Delete appear to have played some minor roles in major productions (vice versa), no evidence of satisfying WP:MUSICBIO and lack significant coverage in reliable sources. GSS  💬 07:10, 11 December 2020 (UTC) reply
  • Delete Google News search has no reliable sources. Closest thing to a reliable source in the article is two local TV station references. Only problem is the content is the exact same "interview" by a PR firm. -  Mnnlaxer |  talk |  stalk 19:05, 13 December 2020 (UTC) reply
  • Keep, IMDB lists "21 wins and 8 nominations", given most of them are non-major awards, but still. We have some articles like this Regina Palian (which I am nominating for deletion), so Mr. Clark meets WP:GNG, maybe trimming/improving the article will help. Thanks, Kolma8 ( talk) 10:40, 16 December 2020 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Geschichte ( talk) 21:51, 15 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Zentner, California

Zentner, California (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Topos show what looks like a small railroad spur. Not finding much on Google Books or newspapers.com besides last names and mentions of the Levy-Zentner company. No evidence this passes WP:GEOLAND or WP:GNG. Hog Farm Bacon 17:09, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. Hog Farm Bacon 17:09, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. Hog Farm Bacon 17:09, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Speedy delete Mass-producer carelessly misrepresented the source: Durham says "locality, 3.5 east-northeast of McFarland along Southern Pacific Railroad", not that it is a community, as is obvious on the maps. Reywas92 Talk 23:47, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Geschichte ( talk) 21:49, 15 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Leon Manigbas Elementary School

Leon Manigbas Elementary School (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable primary school. Onel5969 TT me 16:55, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. Onel5969 TT me 16:55, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Philippines-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 17:05, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 17:05, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 06:21, 16 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Acebedo, California

Acebedo, California (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Topos show a single building, which aerials (and GMaps) show to be a ranch, not a settlement. Mangoe ( talk) 16:32, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. Shellwood ( talk) 16:34, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. Shellwood ( talk) 16:34, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. WP:TOOSOON Missvain ( talk) 15:49, 16 December 2020 (UTC) reply

DJEFF

DJEFF (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This article has already been tagged for numerous writing problems, and the person who created it took the time to find a lot of "sources". The problem is that most of them are faulty. Many are event announcements in which the DJ is listed briefly as being present, some are about his larger music scene in which he is again listed briefly (or not at all), some are about people he collaborated with, and several are typical self-created listings at directory sites and streaming services. He seems to be a pretty good self promoter but I can find no significant and reliable coverage that is specifically about him in order to qualify for musical notability. --- DOOMSDAYER520 ( TALK| CONTRIBS) 15:58, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. --- DOOMSDAYER520 ( TALK| CONTRIBS) 15:58, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Portugal-related deletion discussions. --- DOOMSDAYER520 ( TALK| CONTRIBS) 15:58, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Reply - See requirement #8 at WP:NMUSICIAN, about major awards. The sources you found are brief social media announcements probably reprinted from press releases, so they are not reliable sources. Meanwhile, I don't think Angola Music Awards is a major ceremony because it seems not to get any media notice beyond its own website and social media. --- DOOMSDAYER520 ( TALK| CONTRIBS) 21:04, 9 December 2020 (UTC) reply
  • Delete — Name dropping here and there, few vague announcements, and literally nothing more. In no way is notability per GNG, BASIC, ENT or MUSICBIO satisfied. This is just a blatant promotional article for a non notable individual at the moment. I wish him goodluck in his career but at the moment, he isn't notable. Celestina007 ( talk) 23:36, 9 December 2020 (UTC) reply
  • Comment after more verification , ANGOLA MUSIC AWARDS is a Major Awards it passes requirement #8 at WP:NMUSICIAN , [3] [4] Samat lib ( talk) 19:10, 10 December 2020 (UTC) reply
  • Comment Best Afro-House/Dance – "Mwangolé" Djeff Afrozila .. winner 2014 Samat lib ( talk) 19:10, 10 December 2020 (UTC) reply
  • strong keep Notability found , it passaes WP:NMUSICIAN but the article need to be fix , is too promotional , base on our Notable Wikipedia , ANGOLA MUSIC AWARDS is the only Major Awards [5] that exist in Angola ... there is NO orther , as long as ANGOLA MUSIC AWARDS , is NOTABLE and relevant  ; he passes Requirement #8 at WP:NMUSICIAN wish says that the person could be notable if they won a major award. and every independent country has is own Major music Awards - if this awards is not recognised , then what else when it comes to music Entertainment in Angola , there is NO orther major Award [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] Samat lib ( talk) 09:55, 12 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Reply - Requirement #8 at WP:NMUSICIAN says that the person could be notable if they won a major award. Therefore we must determine if the Angola Music Awards are a major and notable ceremony. This awards ceremony has no significant media coverage of its own, not even in Angola's media, and is only visible in its own social media sites or other minor chatter. The sources listed above are more of the same, as are most of the sources used at the ceremony's WP article. When DJEFF won that award, there was no reliable media coverage of his victory, the award itself, or he himself. Therefore it's not a major award under the cited requirement. --- DOOMSDAYER520 ( TALK| CONTRIBS) 15:30, 11 December 2020 (UTC) reply
  • Comment base on our Notable Wikipedia , ANGOLA MUSIC AWARDS is the only Major Awards [11] that exist in Angola ... there is NO orther , as long as ANGOLA MUSIC AWARDS , is NOTABLE and relevant  ; he passes Requirement #8 at WP:NMUSICIAN wish says that the person could be notable if they won a major award. Samat lib ( talk) 09:55, 12 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Reply every independent country has is own Major music Awards - if this awards is not recognised , then what else when it comes to music Entertainment in Angola , there is NO orther major Award [12] [13] [14] [15] [16]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Missvain ( talk) 15:50, 16 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Guernsey, California

Guernsey, California (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Given that this is a dairying region, it seems as likely it was named for the cow. But at any rate, topos show this to be another rail spot, largely ignored for some decades until J. D. Heiskell dropped a big mill at the site. Some topos show a similarly large building, presumably a warehouse. What they don't show is a town: the area is farmland, and while there was a post office here for a while, that doesn't make a settlement. Mangoe ( talk) 15:56, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. Shellwood ( talk) 16:09, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. Shellwood ( talk) 16:09, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Speedy delete Mass-producer carelessly misrepresented the source: Durham says "locality [p.1493: "A place that has past or present cultural associations."], 9 miles north-northwest of Corcoran along Atchison, Topeka, and Santa Fe Railroad...The name is for James Guernsey, who owned land at the place." not that it is a notable community, as is obvious on the maps. Reywas92 Talk 23:50, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Geschichte ( talk) 21:53, 15 December 2020 (UTC) reply

List of artists who have participated in the Casals Festival

List of artists who have participated in the Casals Festival (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

For the exact same reasons as at List of artists who have recorded at PatchWerk Recording Studios and List of artists who have performed at the Colston Hall; this is WP:RAWDATA; Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. Wikipedia is not a directory of every band or singer that has played at any particular festival. There is no evidence that playing at this festival is a hugely notable distinction in the field of music that would warrant such an article. Many artists have played here. Some of them are notable. Some of them less so. It clearly isn't that much of an exclusive club. This list does not meet any purpose listed at WP:LISTPURP and as User:Doomsdayer520 said on a previous AfD, this is grouping people together for a reason that is not notable.

In my opinion, for a list like this to be worthy of inclusion, it would need to be something truly notable and exclusive like winning a Nobel Prize or an Academy Award; something in that sort of tier. Otherwise, we just end up with a ludicrously broad list of musicians with only a trivial connection. Spiderone 15:35, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists of people-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 15:35, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 15:35, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Puerto Rico-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 15:35, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Missvain ( talk) 15:51, 16 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Madrassah Tahfeezul Quran

Madrassah Tahfeezul Quran (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No hits on Google except wiki-type sites that probably mirrored the info from WP. The name brings up a lot of false positives (I think it means something like, "prayer practice"). I browsed Guyanese/Caribbean Islamic org websites (like CIOG or GITGY) for school listings, and also nothing. It could be a non-notable program within a school/mosque, but I couldn't find any clues for possible redirects. The "peacock pose" deleted from an early version makes me think if it DID exist that it's done and gone before they could even make a proper social media account.

I don't have easy access to the academic pay-sites, nor Arabic skills to see if it's of specific interest to the Muslim world- I'm happy to fix it up if there's anything, but I think this 10 year old orphan article with zero refs doesn't have much going for it. Estheim ( talk) 15:07, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions. Shellwood ( talk) 15:12, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. Shellwood ( talk) 15:12, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Islam-related deletion discussions. Shellwood ( talk) 15:12, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of South America-related deletion discussions. Shellwood ( talk) 15:13, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. North America 1000 07:00, 16 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Gwen Alford

Gwen Alford (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Can't find enough in-depth coverage to show they pass WP:GNG, and doesn't pass WP:NAUTHOR. Onel5969 TT me 14:02, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Onel5969 TT me 14:02, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Nigeria-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 14:03, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 14:03, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Fenix down ( talk) 14:35, 15 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Graham O'Keeffe

Graham O'Keeffe (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:GNG and WP:NFOOTBALL. I searched his name in connection with the three clubs that he played for; there is no evidence that he played elsewhere as per this. Every single piece of coverage was trivial [7] [8] [9]. There is a rugby league player of the same name but he is clearly a different person. A search on ProQuest revealed more trivial mentions but nothing more. Spiderone 12:15, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 12:16, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 12:16, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ireland-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 12:16, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone 12:18, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Fenix down ( talk) 14:35, 15 December 2020 (UTC) reply

List of expatriate Afghan football clubs

List of expatriate Afghan football clubs (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

A list with no evidence of notability. There is no evidence that this group of clubs has been discussed at length by reliable sources. This list has no navigational purpose as it has only one notable entry. The listing of external links to the club websites also makes this a borderline case of WP:NOTDIRECTORY. As per WP:IINFO, Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. Spiderone 11:18, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 11:18, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 11:18, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Afghanistan-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 11:18, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ethnic groups-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 11:18, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone 11:23, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Missvain ( talk) 15:52, 16 December 2020 (UTC) reply

List of artists who have recorded at Abbey Road Studios

List of artists who have recorded at Abbey Road Studios (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

For the exact same reasons as at List of artists who have recorded at PatchWerk Recording Studios and List of artists who have performed at the Colston Hall; this is WP:RAWDATA; Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. Wikipedia is not a directory of every band or singer that has recorded at any particular studio. There is no evidence that recording at this particular studio is a hugely notable distinction in the field of music that would warrant such an article. Many artists have recorded here. Some of them are notable. Some of them less so. It clearly isn't that much of an exclusive club. This list does not meet any purpose listed at WP:LISTPURP and as User:Doomsdayer520 said on a previous AfD, this is grouping people together for a reason that is not notable. Spiderone 11:06, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists of people-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 11:07, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 11:07, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 11:07, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
@ Username6892: because this AfD is already under way and because the topics are (only slightly) different, I thought it would be best to nominate it for AfD separately, it can be found here. Thanks. Spiderone 20:42, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep. Missvain ( talk) 17:40, 16 December 2020 (UTC) reply

William M. John

William M. John (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails GNG, WP:AUTHOR - The person is regarded as an important figure or is widely cited by peers or successors. The person is known for originating a significant new concept, theory, or technique. The person has created or played a major role in co-creating a significant or well-known work or collective body of work. In addition, such work must have been the primary subject of an independent and notable work (for example, a book, film, or television series, but usually not a single episode of a television series) or of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews. The person's work (or works) has: (a) become a significant monument, (b) been a substantial part of a significant exhibition, (c) won significant critical attention, or (d) been represented within the permanent collections of several notable galleries or museums. Alexandermcnabb ( talk) 10:18, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Alexandermcnabb ( talk) 10:18, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Colorado-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 10:23, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
  • Keep: I expanded the article to include 3 more reliable sources. Notably, John was an early winner of the prestigious O. Henry Award, was an early member of the Colorado Authors' League, and established a scholarship foundation that continues to this day. I linked to the NYT once on John's article, but he's mentioned at least two other times. 1. 2. Likely, these should be included in the article as well, but I'm unsure of how to incorporate them given that their content is behind a paywall. Likewise, his novel Seven Women gets mentioned in multiple sources, such as this journal and this newspaper. I'm not entirely certain of the best way to incorporate these things, but they undoubtably help establish notability. When factoring in the four sources I mentioned here, the three sources I recently added, and the three sources I originally featured, that's a total of 10 credible sources mentioning Mr. John. ThrillShow ( talk) 14:32, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
    • Followup to my earlier comment: I've continued expanding the entry for John. The newspaper article I linked above (which is now crossed out) probably isn't super relevant. However, I've found numerous other reliable sources along the way. I've now included 5 published reviews of his work. Thanks to your input, I believe the article now meets Wikipedia's General notability guideline. ThrillShow ( talk) 00:09, 9 December 2020 (UTC) reply
  • Keep per WP:NAUTHOR#4. Seven Women is a notable book (at least four reviews out there, per ThrillShow's great work) and he won the O. Henry Award in 1930. AleatoryPonderings ( ???) ( !!!) 18:57, 15 December 2020 (UTC) reply
  • Keep, above editors have said it all, o'henry (joint) winner tips John into wikinotableness. Coolabahapple ( talk) 06:37, 16 December 2020 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Missvain ( talk) 15:53, 16 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Manteo Cemetery

Manteo Cemetery (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This is a cemetery. There are no refs and a google search doesn't return anything that makes me think it is worthy of inclusion. The article makes no claim of notability, nobody there was famous and nothing noteworthy happened. The website for this local municipal cemetery also seems to say nothing noteworthy happened there. Link to official website Desertarun ( talk) 10:02, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of North Carolina-related deletion discussions. Engr. Smitty Werben 10:13, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. Engr. Smitty Werben 10:13, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Geschichte ( talk) 09:37, 15 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Seventh-day Adventist Matriculation Higher Secondary School, Vellore

Seventh-day Adventist Matriculation Higher Secondary School, Vellore (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No evidence of notability: sources in article are not about the school (and most aren't independent), and I couldn't find good other sources beyond some routine coverage. Fram ( talk) 08:24, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. Fram ( talk) 08:24, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Fram ( talk) 08:24, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. Engr. Smitty Werben 09:22, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
I think there is a problem with the notability requirements for schools. I've seen notability tags removed purely on the basis of the subject being a secondary school; I've seen the opposite argument, that schools aren't inherently notable and need to satisfy WP:GNG and/or WP:ORG. My reading of WP:NSCHOOL is that the latter is true, but the situation is far from clear, and the guidelines aren't being applied or enforced consistently. -- DoubleGrazing ( talk) 17:15, 11 December 2020 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was speedy keep. Impru has a number of related example AFD and more can be found here. The one upcoming election in a country does not violate crystal and can contain sourced information about what is known. (non-admin closure) Reywas92 Talk 20:52, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Next New Zealand general election

Next New Zealand general election (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Mostly WP:CRYSTAL . Page is about a undefined and unspecific future event - The detail in the article does not relate to that event - no one knows what that detail will be until it happens closer to its due date in three years time. An article will be created for the next election but it will be specific and have detail and references appropriate for the specific event not the current mishmash copied from somewhere. Andrewgprout ( talk) 08:01, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. Engr. Smitty Werben 08:22, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. Engr. Smitty Werben 08:22, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New Zealand-related deletion discussions. Engr. Smitty Werben 08:23, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
  • Keep Speedy keep. It's customary practice in Wikipedia to create articles for next elections whenever there is information available for them, and in this case there is (i.e. opinion polling). The article passes WP:CRYSTAL, because of it being a notable event that is almost certain to take place (unless you crystal-ball yourself another unlikely, cataclismic event that prevents the election from being held at all); because all of the information sourced within the article being verifiable; and because no attempt is being made at predicting or presuming the future. It would be like arguing that 2024 United States presidential election goes against CRYSTAL because of it being four years away in time, despite it being explicitly shown as one example of what WP:CRYSTAL is not. There is even a specific naming convention explicitly regulating such articles: For future elections of uncertain date, use a form similar to Next Irish general election.
Also note that this is not the first case of a "next" election article being proposed for AfD: past precedent shows that these are typically kept because of the aforementioned reasons: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10. It should (and likely will) end up the same way here. Impru20 talk 09:58, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
  • Delete or rather wait until the election is being discussed and create a spcific dated page at that point namedl 2023 New Zealand general election. If this was notible now there would be reliable sources discussing it there isn't at least not within the current article. The article currently lists parties and individuals and it is purely crystal ball gazing to assume this detail has anything to do with the next election. The event is currenly unplanned with no date so does not pass WP:CRYSTAL. Andrewgprout ( talk) 12:49, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
    • You are the nominator. You can't post a separate delete !vote, since it's assumed your nomination counts as such. Plus, you have not even cared to refute any of the evidence that I (or Number 57 for that matter) presented against your case, nor seem to provide a clear reasoning as to why this article constitutes CRYSTAL other than "the event is currently unplanned" or that it is "not dated", which shows a misconception on how CRYSTAL actually works (the policy explicitly states that Individual scheduled or expected future events should be included only if the event is notable and almost certain to take place. Dates are not definite until the event actually takes place. It means that you can create articles on foreseeable future events that are notable and almost certain to take place. It's not an entitlement to delete an article on a future event just because the exact date is not yet determined. Please care to read the policy before building an argument out of that).
Alternatively, you hint at us somehow needing to wait until 2023 for this article to be created, entirely ruling out the perfectly legal possibility of a snap election taking place at some point earlier on. Overall, it's your nomination the one that seems based on speculation, assumptions and crystal-balled material.
As per the above and considering the exposed arguments, I'm changing my !vote to "speedy keep" under WP:SKCRIT#3. Impru20 talk 13:30, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Geschichte ( talk) 09:36, 15 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Fred Mackintosh

AfDs for this article:
Fred Mackintosh (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Politician who stood in national elections but was never elected, also a QC, but nothing to indicate enough notability. The page was a redirect for 10 years before being resurrected earlier this year. John Womble ( talk) 07:00, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. John Womble ( talk) 07:00, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. John Womble ( talk) 07:00, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Scotland-related deletion discussions. John Womble ( talk) 07:00, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
  • Delete - can't seem to find any significant coverage, so appears to fail GNG and BIO. The only real independent coverage is the "lawyer of the week" article, but that is not significant. I'd be open to the previous redirect if someone can show me that it had some utility. Deus et lex ( talk) 10:59, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
  • Delete - I do not think his political career meets notability requirements. He came very close to being elected as an MP in 2010 (and if I recall many political pundits tipped him to gain Edinburgh South for the Liberal Democrats), but that in itself does not make him notable, nor does his service as a councillor. Dunarc ( talk) 23:40, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
  • Delete. People don't get articles just for standing as candidates in elections they did not win — the notability test for politicians is holding office, not just running for it — but this neither demonstrates nor sources any strong evidence that he has preexisting notability for other reasons independent of the candidacy, and also fails to demonstrate a credible reason why his candidacy might have been more notable than the norm. Bearcat ( talk) 17:44, 9 December 2020 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Missvain ( talk) 15:53, 16 December 2020 (UTC) reply

1150 K Street

1150 K Street (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

An apartment building that does not meet WP:GNG, lacks coverage in independent sources. MrsSnoozyTurtle ( talk) 06:22, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. Engr. Smitty Werben 06:47, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Washington, D.C.-related deletion discussions. Engr. Smitty Werben 06:47, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 11:28, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. – bradv 🍁 07:03, 15 December 2020 (UTC) reply

The Blueprint (band)

The Blueprint (band) (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable band, cannot find any indication of notability. Fails WP:BAND Jay Jay What did I do? 05:18, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Jay Jay What did I do? 05:18, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. Engr. Smitty Werben 05:52, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Geschichte ( talk) 09:35, 15 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Valmont Academy

Valmont Academy (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD · Academy Stats)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Not a notable school or relevant in any way.-- UserNL2020 ( talk) 04:20, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 04:49, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 04:50, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 04:50, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. I'm just deleting the one that's nominated, as the others suggested do not have AfD notices posted. A proper group nomination is probably in order here. – bradv 🍁 07:01, 15 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Dinsmores, California

Dinsmores, California (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This one was brought up back in the 2009 discussion that originally questioned the mass-production of CA places. Although the original version of "unincorporated community" was soon changed to "locality" per Durham, GMaps doesn't show much of interest, and the topo suggests the Dinsmore family lived there (top left), labeled in the same font as "Ridge Cabin" to the east and "Deer Creek Ranch" to the south. Newspaper results are about Dinsmore, California, so it's unclear how this site is notable. Reywas92 Talk 04:18, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. Reywas92 Talk 04:18, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. Reywas92 Talk 04:18, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
  • Delete - I think at this point we can simply call WP:TNT on all of Carlossuarez46's 2009 California articles which are referenced only to GNIS/Durham. The essence of a TNT situation is: "if the article's content is useless (including all the versions in history) but the title might be useful, then delete the content to help encourage a new article. If you keep the article, then you're keeping something of no value until someone replaces it with something of value, when people tend to be more inclined to fill red links". This is clearly that kind of situation - these articles exist, which dissuades anyone from creating them in better form, but they are also garbage, with probably at most 1-in-20 being a WP:GEOLAND pass and then only with detailed research for each one of those 20. GNIS is a bad source, and Durham may be a good source but it has not been cited correctly whenever it has been checked (i.e., the locales it is being referenced for aren't communities that were ever inhabited). Much better for the project to delete all and then recreate the ones that can be recreated. Reywas92, Cxbrx, Hog Farm, Mangoe (users pinged as they have all recently contributed in AFDs involving California locales only sourced to GNIS/Durham) - I would support simply adding all of these California location articles that are cited only to GNIS/Durham and TNTing them in one go rather than separately PROD/AFD for each one. FOARP ( talk) 09:10, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Based on a quick review of the articles listed at Category:Former populated places in California that are cited only to Durham/GNIS and which do not mention a post-office, I propose also:

....and this is just the "A"s FOARP ( talk) 10:01, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
....and now the Bs. All of the above are cited to ultimately to GNIS/Durham, except Beal, California as noted. FOARP ( talk) 12:10, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
...and that's the Cs down. Seriously, at some point in the process of creating ~2 times more articles for ghost towns in California than there are for currently-inhabited places the realisation that California just doesn't have that many ghost towns should have dawned. FOARP ( talk) 14:43, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
....that's the Ds down. FOARP ( talk) 15:10, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
  • Thanks! I compared the above list with the CA list in ghosttowns.com, which it appears that you did too, because you found Dedrick. I found no other matches between the above list and ghosttowns.com.
I think reasonable criteria for WP:TNT would be articles articles with the following characteristics:
  • Have only a Durham citation and do not appear in GNIS and do not appear in ghosttowns.com. These are almost certainly not notable.
  • Have only Durham and GNIS citations and do not appear in ghosttowns.com. These are probably not notable.
In the above list, I'd like to keep Coso (former settlement), California because I found a reference (which I just added) that includes a bit of text and some photos. As this Coso is on China Lake Naval Weapons Station, it is not likely to have much modern coverage. This Coso is possibly not notable, but should probably be considered separately. Cxbrx ( talk) 17:20, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Hi Cxbrx very happy to strike Coso from the list. I think it's likely a duplicate of Coso Junction, California, which is also next to China Lake and used to be called Coso, but like you say that can be discussed separately. I believe every other one of the above list meets your TNT criteria (the only additional sources are clearly non-relevant - eg the pronunciation guide for Deseret - or duplicates of GNIS data). FOARP ( talk) 18:58, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Coso (former settlement), California and Coso Junction, California are two separate locations. Coso Junction, California is probably not notable. I'm not sure about Coso (former settlement), California. Cxbrx ( talk) 04:18, 9 December 2020 (UTC) reply
    • Soft delete all Checking these in Durham's California's Geographic Names that I just got a copy of, there is clearly widespread misrepresentation of the source going on. For Darwin, California, the cited p. 1096 has under the entry for Reedley: "California Mining Bureau's (1917a) map shows a place called Darwin located along the railroad..." and that's it. Cordua Bar, California's source under the Timbuctoo entry on page 568 says "Cordua Bar, named in 1848 for Theodore Cordua, who kept a trading post there, was on the north bank of of Yuba River." On what basis is this "a former mining town" or notable? Blinzing, California is actually "Blinzig" in Durham, which calls it a "locality", and says "From 1909 until 1912 this place was a railroad siding that served Camp Enjoyment..." This was misrepresented as "its railroad station served..." It did not have a station, it was the station, as the topo (using "Blinzig") makes clear! Look, if there are substantive sources that describe these places as actual, notable communities not just names on maps they are welcome to be recreated, but this distortion of what the source says is widespread and must be more efficiently addressed. Reywas92 Talk 22:45, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
  • Delete all Durham-only entries excluding the ghosttown.com cases. I haven't worked much with the former populated places, but when I have, the ones I have done sourced only to Durham have universally turned out to be a frustrating waste of time to attempt to verify. And even for real settlements, listing in a single omnium gatherum work just does not satisfy WP:GNG, and that's before the recent revelation that Durham's classification has been consistently misrepresented and that most of these are just place names that aren't even on a map. As far as the GNIS-and-Durham former settlements, I cannot offer my support on this group, having done vanishingly few of these, but I wouldn't oppose a TNT deletion of them as well. Mangoe ( talk) 16:14, 9 December 2020 (UTC) reply
  • Delete all the articles that FOARP suggests. This is to onerous to deal with case-by-case when the majority to all of the articles are actively spreading disinformation. Any sufficiently significant locations could be refunded on request by an editor other than Carlossuarez46. — Bilorv ( talk) 00:29, 12 December 2020 (UTC) reply
  • Delete all Sloppily created and if something falls through the cracks, it's an easy enough thing to reverse. The alternative is a monumental use of resources on a giant series of articles that should have, quite frankly, never existed. CoffeeCrumbs ( talk) 05:18, 13 December 2020 (UTC) reply
  • Soft delete all - Negligent mass-creation. I've looked at a lot of these over the last month, and the vast majority of those citing just GNIS, Durham, or both are generally non-community rubbish. Anything that turns out to be significant can be recreated. Hog Farm Bacon 03:23, 14 December 2020 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Missvain ( talk) 15:54, 16 December 2020 (UTC) reply

A. R. Scammell Academy

A. R. Scammell Academy (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD · R._Scammell_Academy Stats)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Not a notable school or relevant in any way.-- UserNL2020 ( talk) 03:27, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. Engr. Smitty Werben 04:17, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions. Engr. Smitty Werben 04:17, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. Engr. Smitty Werben 04:18, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep. Missvain ( talk) 15:55, 16 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Ghanada

Ghanada (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

A non-notable fiction character with no evidence of notability. The sources confirm the existence but not that the subject is notable. GSS  💬 07:53, 21 November 2020 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science fiction and fantasy-related deletion discussions. GSS  💬 07:53, 21 November 2020 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. GSS  💬 07:53, 21 November 2020 (UTC) reply

There are enough sources for this article to EXIST, though you may argue that it may not have enough sources for Verification. This article must NOT be deleted and it will be improved, more sources will be collected in the near future.

Ghanada is one of the biggest literary character of the Indian Sub-Continent. This article MUST STAY.-- Suborno Sabbir ( talk) 05:49, 22 November 2020 (UTC) reply

Logs: 2018-10 ✗ PROD
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – bradv 🍁 03:24, 1 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Missvain ( talk) 01:00, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
  • Keep - I am persuaded by the arguments and sources provided in this AfD that enough sourcers WP:NEXIST to show notability. The article is pretty young, so incorporating these references over time will improve the article, and deletion is not required. - 2pou ( talk) 23:34, 14 December 2020 (UTC) reply
  • Keep The sources appear to be reliable for the subject matter. The article is well-written and informative, and based on the discussion above, there is strong feeling that this subject is notable in South Asia.-- Concertmusic ( talk) 13:44, 15 December 2020 (UTC) reply
  • Keep, do not delete. Ghanada is a very popular character in India and its subcontinents, created by Premendra Mitra, the character spawned many media franchises throughout the years. I can see the article is providing many useful information with using many reliable sites. I can provide some more links of top level news media coverages. Here is some -

Click on this to know more about Ghanada related topics. Bloody Knight Rider ( talk) 14:11, 16 December 2020 (UTC) reply

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

The result was no consensus , been at AfD for over 1 month with no discussion. May be speedily renominated (NPASR). (non-admin closure) Natg 19 ( talk) 01:30, 16 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Brian Corsetti

Brian Corsetti (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

PRODded by KidAd, with the rationale Fails WP:GNG. Clear WP:PROMO piece. I contested, two 'Emmy's' may make him notable. Merits an AfD discussion. Eddie891 Talk Work 12:55, 14 November 2020 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Eddie891 Talk Work 12:55, 14 November 2020 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. Eddie891 Talk Work 12:55, 14 November 2020 (UTC) reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America 1000 16:02, 21 November 2020 (UTC) reply
Logs: 2011-02 ✗ A3
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – bradv 🍁 03:31, 1 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Missvain ( talk) 00:59, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Missvain ( talk) 15:56, 16 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Business Today (Kenya)

Business Today (Kenya) (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This article fails WP:INHERENTWEB. Gachangi ( talk) 03:34, 1 December 2020 (UTC) reply

  • Comment Gachangi has been involved in significant edits and promotion of the page James Mwangi which has some recent edits (from Business Today (Kenya)) that have been used to cite sexual assault allegations against James mwangi. Sources such as this describe notability of the editor luke. Gachangi is attempting to use this afd to fight sexual assault allegations against james mwangi. As per the specific edits on James mwangi: sources are clearly reliable and in a neutral point of view. Case in point, Esther passaris who claims she was assaulted by James Mwangi gave an interview to news sites directly e.g. Tuko news and Nairobi news of nation.africa. Then there are also allegations of land grabbing which are part of the edits on James Mwangi. Business today reported a story based on actual court records. This nomination to delete business today page is not in good faith as there are clearly other sources that make this news site valid. A news website cannot honestly be making news elsewhere except the editor whose notability can clearly be established. Gachangi is using this afd to fight off sexual assault and land grabbing claims against James Mwangi that are clearly well sourced and cited by business today. Business today wrote the story based on actual court records which are valid sources on wikipedia.

-- 2C0F:FE38:2020:EE4A:1:2:4E75:8BCE ( talk)

-- — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2C0F:FE38:2020:EE4A:1:2:4E75:8BCE ( talk) 23:50, 1 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. Gachangi ( talk) 03:34, 1 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. Gachangi ( talk) 03:34, 1 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Kenya-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 09:50, 1 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of News media-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 09:51, 1 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 09:51, 1 December 2020 (UTC) reply
  • Delete: Barely found anything about the site. Winning 2 awards are perhaps not enough for the page to establish notability. ASTIG😎 ( ICE T • ICE CUBE) 01:00, 4 December 2020 (UTC) reply
  • keep but update: blog constitutes opinion work by professional writer who is an editor with a reputation for opinion work.see 1, 2, 3 and 4 5, 6. Sources 5 and 6 mention editor plus business today. As per WP:NEWSBLOG this cannot be subjected to larger news organization review process. Operation is smaller and notable to pass WP:GNG lamely specifically in cases where editor has been mentioned and business today mentioned too(although minute). Business today plus the minor mentions, the awards and the editor qualify to keep article for a blog type of operation. This is mainly because this editorial work plus minor mentions can pass for oversight and fact checking for a smaller blog operation as per WP:SOURCE. The blog is regularly updated with relevant news and has been referenced by a number of notable corporates in kenya. It wouldn't be practical for the site to be making the news in other competing news sites with larger operations.- 2C0F:FE38:2324:76E:1:0:A969:264B ( talk) 17:49, 7 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Missvain ( talk) 00:59, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Missvain ( talk) 15:56, 16 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Epiphany Parish of Seattle

Epiphany Parish of Seattle (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I can't make this pass WP:NORG. The given references are either self-published or ancillary coverage (about the neighborhood where the parish is, for example). Mikeblas ( talk) 00:58, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Washington-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple ( talk) 05:36, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple ( talk) 05:36, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple ( talk) 05:36, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Geschichte ( talk) 09:30, 15 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Barbara Jackson (model)

Barbara Jackson (model) (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

A "2011 Huffington Post Game Changer Awards." is not enough for notability , nor is every individual model at The Battle of Versailles Fashion Show DGG ( talk ) 04:03, 1 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Africa-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 08:57, 1 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 08:57, 1 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Missvain ( talk) 00:57, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Missvain ( talk) 15:57, 16 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Walnut Hill, Kentucky

Walnut Hill, Kentucky (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Rennick's index calls it a locale, which is reserved for places where there was human activity but no signficant full-time population. Newspapers.com results are for roads and a church in Lexington, Kentucky, which is not near the supposed location of this feature. Can't really find much of anything about this supposed place, the topographic maps show the Walnut Hill name, but only some scattered buildings in a wide area. Seems to fail WP:GNG and WP:GEOLAND. Hog Farm Bacon 05:39, 1 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. Hog Farm Bacon 05:39, 1 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Kentucky-related deletion discussions. Hog Farm Bacon 05:39, 1 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Missvain ( talk) 00:54, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Geschichte ( talk) 19:55, 9 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Monola, California

Monola, California (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Topos show a railroad feature with one building that disappears when the railroad is taken up. After some searching, I was able to find this, which calls Monola a "small station". Fails WP:GEOLAND and WP:GNG. Hog Farm Bacon 06:06, 1 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. Hog Farm Bacon 06:06, 1 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. Hog Farm Bacon 06:06, 1 December 2020 (UTC) reply
  • delete Topos show a telltale short passing siding and nothing else. The spot appears to be in the middle of a salt flat. I'd need a lot more evidence than a GNIS entry to be convinced that there was a settlement here. Mangoe ( talk) 15:03, 1 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Missvain ( talk) 00:47, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Fenix down ( talk) 14:35, 15 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Abdullah Al-Shanqiti

Abdullah Al-Shanqiti (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Until they actually see time in a game for Al-Nassr, they don't pass WP:NFOOTY. Onel5969 TT me 00:46, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. Onel5969 TT me 00:46, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 04:51, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Saudi Arabia-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 04:52, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 05:03, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Malcolmxl5 ( talk) 21:15, 11 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Jay, California

Jay, California (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Searching on newspapers.com is very difficult due to the extreme commonness of this name (and the fact that there were apparently Inyo and Jay stables in Fresno at one point), but there's no GNIS entry for a Jay in Inyo County, and no feature of this name appears on the topos in the supposed location. Combined with the location on the railroad, this appears to be some sort of non-notable railroad feature. Hog Farm Bacon 06:14, 1 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. Hog Farm Bacon 06:14, 1 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. Hog Farm Bacon 06:14, 1 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Missvain ( talk) 00:46, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was no consensus. Try improving it and then if that doesn't work, consider a merge and discuss that on the appropriate talk pages. After improved, or attempted improvement, you can always re-nominate. But, after three relists we haven't really came to any better conclusions. I appreciate you all respecting this decision and assuming good faith. Thanks. Missvain ( talk) 15:58, 16 December 2020 (UTC) reply

EFanzines

EFanzines (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable, no reliable sources at all. Mansheimer ( talk) 14:38, 11 November 2020 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science fiction and fantasy-related deletion discussions. Shellwood ( talk) 15:24, 11 November 2020 (UTC) reply
Logs: 2007-12 ✗ deleted, 2007-12 move to → User:Ghostwords/EFanzines, 2007-12 ↻ restored, 2007-12 ✗ deleted
  • Merge or Keep: I agree with Julle's argumentation that this topic is encyclopedic. Secondary sources have been added, so there is definitely content to WP:PRESERVE and this article should not be deleted. I am fine to keep it, but the coverage found so far is not a lot. So a merge, e.g. to (the bottom of) Fanzine#Science fiction would also be a good solution in my opinion. Daranios ( talk) 08:16, 19 November 2020 (UTC) reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Barkeep49 ( talk) 17:11, 21 November 2020 (UTC) reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ─ The Aafī (talk) 10:07, 1 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Third time is the charm.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Missvain ( talk) 00:43, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
  • Leaning Keep. This is a tough one... It appears that several notable works somewhat rely on this website for their distribution. There are mentions of the site all over the internet regarding where to find certain published pieces, but there isn't much (readily available, at least) describing the history of the site and its establishment, etc. Since WP:NOTINHERITED is not a policy I'm going to lean keep. Although it did not win, the Hugo nomination is significant. Locus reported that they won a FAAn award for best website in 2018 and 2017. Hard to say how significant that is, but looking into the history of it here, it looks like this site has won that award so frequently, they withdrew from the category after receiving a special recognition. It's clearly niche, but it seems pretty notable within that niche—enough so for my !vote, at least. - 2pou ( talk) 00:23, 15 December 2020 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep. Missvain ( talk) 15:59, 16 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Namak Issk Ka

Namak Issk Ka (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

A draft for the article topic is already under development: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Namak_Issk_Ka Noobie anonymous ( talk) 12:34, 1 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. Noobie anonymous ( talk) 12:34, 1 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 13:07, 1 December 2020 (UTC) reply
  • Keep - not a valid reason for AfD. Histmerge should be done between this article and the draft. Onel5969 TT me 15:44, 1 December 2020 (UTC) reply
  • Keep, possibly speedily. Topic is notable and nominator does not provide a valid rationale for deletion. The draftspace version was indeed created first, but that doesn't mean that its author has "first dibs" on having their preferred version of the mainspace article in place, whatever form that may take. Note that the draft author Unknownnreasonn had previously tagged the mainspace article more than once for both speedy deletion (for reasons similar to the above, reverted because this is emphatically not a valid CSD rationale either) and for AfD (reverted because necessary followup steps were not done). All parties are reminded that Wikipedia is a collaborative project, not a battleground, and that the proper course of action is to discuss possible changes or compromises on the article's talk page rather than trying to get the "other guy's" version of the article rejected outright. -- Finngall talk 18:12, 1 December 2020 (UTC) reply
  • Weak Delete as Wikipedia is not a crystal ball, and failure to satisfy television notability.
      • There are conduct issues and content issues here, but AFD is a content forum.
      • This is a future television series. It does not satisfy general notability, and does not satisfy television notability because it does not have reception information (and won't for a week).
      • The best action would be to Draftify, but there is already a draft.
      • It appears, as noted by User:Finngall, that there is a race between two editors to get credit for the article, and both editors have made a false start in the race.
      • Both editors should be warned, but this is a content forum.
      • User:Onel5969 says that a history merge is in order. That is probably true, but the history-merged page should then be in draft space until the show airs.
      • The nominator has not made a case for deletion, but there is a policy-based case why this should not be in article space until the show airs. Robert McClenon ( talk) 17:50, 3 December 2020 (UTC) reply
        Robert McClenon, Don't disagree with your rationale, however, with an air date less than 4 days away, just felt that the 7 days of the AfD would not expire before the reason to draft was no longer valid. Onel5969 TT me 17:55, 3 December 2020 (UTC) reply
  • @ Unknownnreasonn: What we want is for the article to be of the highest quality possible, regardless of who is editing it. Dramadevil may have jumped the queue in this case, but in the end what matters here is encyclopedic content, not "justice". Neither you nor they "own" the article, and from what I see there are elements of your draft which can be incorporated into the mainspace version to improve it without throwing it out completely. Other editors may do this, and/or they may make their own improvements or additions. That's how Wikipedia works. Please understand and accept the advice from the more experienced editors who have taken the time to comment here, and do not hesitate to ask further questions. Thank you. -- Finngall talk 19:51, 6 December 2020 (UTC) reply
  • @ Finngall: so it's not wrong having two copies of the same page, I want to know if merge from draft to article happen so this existing article not deleted. Am I right? I know experienced editors better know than me I just asking about this. As you say don't hesitate to ask any question so this is I'm asking, please answer. Thank you Unknownnreasonn ( talk) 05:18, 7 December 2020 (UTC) reply
  • @ Unknownnreasonn: There's not a lot inherently wrong with having two versions, but it's preferable to have just one. Admins can merge the histories of the two versions so that all edits to both appear on a single version of the article, so that the full history is available. -- Finngall talk 17:49, 7 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Missvain ( talk) 00:42, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Missvain ( talk) 15:59, 16 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Flightside

Flightside (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Seemingly unnotable band. No significant coverage in reliable sources found. Proposed deletion template removed by an IP without providing a reason. Related article (one of the band members), also up for discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sarah Eaglesfield (2nd nomination) Dylanfromthenorth ( talk) 12:44, 1 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 13:07, 1 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 13:07, 1 December 2020 (UTC) reply
  • Delete. It took me some time to make that decision, because their early embrace of the internet and the now faintly comic attempt to "game" the streaming charts before streaming really took off (heavens - now, it would be attempting to game the much-diminished download market), do at least give a hint of notability. But on balance I don't think these are quite enough. RobinCarmody ( talk) 00:10, 2 December 2020 (UTC) reply
  • Keep. Full disclosure, I am Mark from the band! We had a lot of print coverage at the time in the 90s. Worked with people like Dave Stewart and Dave Grohl. It would pain me to see this go but appreciate Robin's point of view too. 62.31.81.43 ( talk) 16:04, 3 December 2020 (UTC) reply
    Can you provide us with citations to that print coverage? It doesn't have to be online, but if there are several sources published in major music or news magazines that are available in a library or print database, the article should be retained. Chubbles ( talk) 17:17, 3 December 2020 (UTC) reply
    • Will have to get my old clippings out to work out exact dates. Kerrang! used to have small snippets of news in the first front pages and they would tout our gigs (around 93?) they plugged us heavily. We were featured twice in X Magazine, and did a couple of Breakout Act interviews for Melody Maker. It was never more than a page but it was constant. Did a student radio tour so should be in quite a few student mags from the time. I will look and see if I can add references over the weekend if you can give me some grace time. Thank you for being responsive! 62.31.81.43 ( talk) 08:33, 4 December 2020 (UTC) reply
  • Delete. per nom . No significant coverege on independent relieble sources, No evidence of Notability , Samat lib ( talk) 09:48, 5 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Missvain ( talk) 00:42, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
  • Delete. I'm simply not seeing enough coverage to show that this band meets WP:GNG. The current sourcing in the article is mostly unusable, and I've been unable to find anything better. The current article has 13 sources in it, which consist of:
  1. A dead link to an MTV artist profile
  2. A dead link to a BBC music profile
  3. A Brunel university student newspaper, reporting on a Brunel university student band. This source is not independent of the subject and is probably not the most reliable reporting
  4. A short interview about a project Sarah was doing in Chile. Since this was published by an official Chilean website it is likely not independent, as the project was funded by the Chilean government
  5. A link to buy their EP on amazon
  6. A dead link to a BBC video on the launch of the UK streaming chart, which seems to have no relation to Flightside
  7. A random link to Deezer, no idea what it's doing there
  8. A Facebook post that is unrelated to Flightside
  9. A dead link to the bands own website
  10. A dead yahoo news link, which I thought would be a useable source but appears to actually be a reprint of this paid press release from prweb.com
  11. Musicbrainz, unreliable user generated content
  12. Musicbrainz again
  13. Another amazon link to buy their EP
Nothing here appears to be substantial, reliable, independent coverage. I've searched but been unable to find anything better. Since the Newspaper sources mentioned by the IP above haven't been added to the article it would appear that coverage of this band simply does not exist. 86.23.109.101 ( talk) 18:41, 9 December 2020 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep. Spartaz Humbug! 11:31, 16 December 2020 (UTC) reply

A Glass Eye at a Keyhole

A Glass Eye at a Keyhole (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non notable work Dronebogus ( talk) 14:26, 1 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 14:32, 1 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Missvain ( talk) 00:41, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 06:58, 16 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Arbee, California

Arbee, California (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This spot doesn't appear on topos until fairly late, I'm guessing mostly because they hadn't been updated. At any rate, it's exactly as the first GBooks hit on the name describes it: "a point on the Sacramento Northern Railway less than a mile east of Colusa". And that's what the topos show: a spur into some manufacturing concern, by that point sitting on the eastern edge of town. It's obvious this was never a settlement. Mangoe ( talk) 15:33, 1 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 17:03, 1 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 17:04, 1 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Missvain ( talk) 00:40, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
  • Delete - Note to closer, this article is part of a campaign of making many, many junk articles that the author carried out in 2009. They are all cited to GNIS (a bad source) and Durham (a potentially good source, but they've ignored how Durham actually describes these locations). We're ~300 AFDs in with thousands left to go. There is no need to relist these AFDs if they've received a delete !vote and doing so is just going to clog up AFD with relistings. FOARP ( talk) 12:51, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
In all fairness, back a decade ago it probably seemed like a good idea to make a lot of articles from what seemed at the time to be reliable sources. The problem is with the follow-through: in the end, someone has to go through and take all these stubs and try to turn them into something substantial—or try to get rid of them. Either way, a lot of work is involved, which was sloughed onto someone else. Mangoe ( talk) 15:32, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
I don't know about that Mangoe, the author in question had already been an admin for two years at the time they made this article (their RFA was in 2007) and carried on making articles like them until ~last year. It was pointed out at the time to them that GNIS was not a great source. I assume making thousands of articles like this was good faith at the start but we've ended up with counties in California with 3 times more "ghost towns" (in reality, "never-were towns") than inhabited locations - surely they should have realised at some point that this wasn't a good idea? I guess that's all water under the bridge at this point though, and you're right that they've basically sloughed all this work off onto other people and now we have to deal with it. My proposal is to apply WP:TNT to the worst of these articles (i.e., the ones that are GNIS/Durham only) since this is basically the epitome of a TNT situation - rescuing anything from these articles is way more work than just deleting the lot and recreating the few that might be worth recreating (assuming there are any). FOARP ( talk) 18:48, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 06:59, 16 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Junior Eurovision Song Contest 2021

Junior Eurovision Song Contest 2021 (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

In short, I believe this article currently fails WP:NOTABILITY because it is WP:TOOSOON.

The article currently statisfies the following criteria:

However, I believe that the 2021 edition of the contest has not received significant coverage from independent sources. Most coverage is currently about the 2020 edition which happened last Sunday, and only a few Eurovision-centric sources are reporting about the next contest (for example, take a look at the references section; it is almost entirely Eurovoix).

The lack of significant coverage is also evident from the fact that the article is very empty; it only contains a small bit about the host country, and a few countries that intend to participate. However, that's of course not a criterion for WP:TOOSOON.

I already had a discussion about this yesterday on the article's talk page, but it did not have a resolution. ― JochemvanHees ( talk) 15:36, 1 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 17:02, 1 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 17:02, 1 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Europe-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 17:02, 1 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Missvain ( talk) 00:40, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. – bradv 🍁 06:57, 15 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Insinia

Insinia (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

A bit unsure about this one. On one hand, the company's and/or the founder's main claim to fame is their Twitter hack, which was indeed well covered by UK media at the time. That seems like WP:ONEEVENT, though, and possibly WP:ILLCON. Other than that, I think this fails WP:CORPDEPTH / WP:GNG. -- DoubleGrazing ( talk) 08:15, 16 November 2020 (UTC) reply


  • Keep: The company passes the notability requirements in line with WP:CORP. A News Search turned up plenty of results about the company from independent news sources. I appreciate that the article needs to be refined to more appropriate wiki tone.
    • Thank you, IP editor (with no edit history other than this AfD...), for pointing out that there are "plenty of results" — would you like to share any of them with us? PS: Please don't edit or delete the comments of others, thanks! -- DoubleGrazing ( talk) 20:41, 23 November 2020 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple ( talk) 12:25, 19 November 2020 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple ( talk) 12:25, 19 November 2020 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple ( talk) 12:25, 19 November 2020 (UTC) reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Nosebagbear ( talk) 13:48, 23 November 2020 (UTC) reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, 78.26 ( spin me / revolutions) 15:52, 1 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Third time is the charm. It would be great if we could get some thoughts here before we close.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Missvain ( talk) 00:40, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
  • Delete The criteria for establishing notability for companies/organizations as per WP:NCORP is for multiple sources (at least two) of significant coverage with in-depth information *on the company* and (this bit is important!) containing "Independent Content". "Independent content", in order to count towards establishing notability, must include original and independent opinion, analysis, investigation, and fact checking that are clearly attributable to a source unaffiliated to the subject. None of the references in the article meet the criteria and having searched I am unable to locate any references that meet the criteria. Topic fails GNG/ WP:NCORP. HighKing ++ 18:15, 13 December 2020 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Geschichte ( talk) 19:56, 9 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Graino, California

Graino, California (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The short, contrived name suggests a rail spot, and that's indeed what it is. Regulatory records mention a Graino Warehouse Co. (address in nearby Grimes) and discuss a loading facility at Graino, which his consistent with the topos. But there's no sign of a town, and there's not even a public road to the place, which lies between a orchard and farm fields. Mangoe ( talk) 16:16, 1 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 17:05, 1 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 17:05, 1 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Missvain ( talk) 00:39, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
  • Delete - Note to any closer tempted to relist: look at the many, many, many other AFDs that are related to the same author using the same sources (GNIS/Durham - GNIS is a bad source, Durham might be a good source but the person who created these articles is simply ignoring how Durham describes them) to create WP:GEOLAND failing articles during the same period in 2009 and ask whether this really needs another week. FOARP ( talk) 12:31, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Geschichte ( talk) 19:56, 9 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Newburyport, California

Newburyport, California (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Doesn't look like this passes WP:GEOLAND or WP:GNG. Doesn't appear on topographic maps, no GNIS entry, and I can't find anything about it on Newspapers.com. Even searching Newburyport Inyo in California newspapers only brings up results about Newburyport, Massachusetts. Hog Farm Bacon 16:19, 1 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. Hog Farm Bacon 16:19, 1 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. Hog Farm Bacon 16:19, 1 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Missvain ( talk) 00:39, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
  • Delete - Note to any closer tempted to relist: look at the many, many, many other AFDs that are related to the same author using the same sources (GNIS/Durham - GNIS is a bad source, Durham might be a good source but the person who created these articles is simply ignoring how Durham describes them) to create WP:GEOLAND failing articles during the same period in 2009 and ask whether this really needs another week. FOARP ( talk) 12:32, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
  • Delete per nom; clearly never a settlement; article itself makes no assertion of notability and there is simply no evidence of it. User:Hog Farm please do claim back the hours of your life that you have spent on these wild goose chases. Spiderone 14:52, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was no consensus. No prejudice against speedy renomination per low participation. North America 1000 07:30, 16 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Sabin Lomac

Sabin Lomac (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This founder doesn't seem to satisfy basic notability. Current sources seem pr only. Mayoticks ( talk) 13:18, 19 November 2020 (UTC) Mayoticks ( talk) 13:18, 19 November 2020 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Mayoticks ( talk) 13:18, 19 November 2020 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 20:15, 19 November 2020 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 20:15, 19 November 2020 (UTC) reply
  • Keep This appears to be a well-supported and well-referenced article on a person with a couple of small but notable claims to fame. The Shark Tank appearance may cause someone to want to look up the name, and I'd like them to find information on our encyclopedia.-- Concertmusic ( talk) 17:21, 29 November 2020 (UTC) reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, 78.26 ( spin me / revolutions) 16:48, 1 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Missvain ( talk) 00:30, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Geschichte ( talk) 19:56, 9 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Delphos, California

Delphos, California (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

One name drop of this spot calls it Delphos siding, and that's what the topos show as well, along with a warehousing concern that is still there. Not a settlement. Mangoe ( talk) 16:49, 1 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 17:06, 1 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 17:06, 1 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Missvain ( talk) 00:29, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
  • Delete - Note to any closer tempted to relist: look at the many, many, many other AFDs that are related to the same author using the same sources (GNIS/Durham - GNIS is a bad source, Durham might be a good source but the person who created these articles is simply ignoring how Durham describes them) to create WP:GEOLAND failing articles during the same period in 2009 and ask whether this really needs another week. FOARP ( talk) 12:31, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
  • Speedy delete Mass-producer negligently misrepresented the source: Durham says "locality: 2.5 north-northwest of Williams along Southern Pacific Railroad", not that it is a community or notable settlement, as is obvious on the maps. Reywas92 Talk 00:08, 9 December 2020 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Geschichte ( talk) 19:56, 9 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Tony Paget

Tony Paget (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:SOLDIER. Lettler hello • contribs 17:37, 1 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Lettler hello • contribs 17:37, 1 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. Lettler hello • contribs 17:37, 1 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. Lettler hello • contribs 17:37, 1 December 2020 (UTC) reply
It isn't particularly important if they're "junior". What matters is if they are actually notable... Plenty of senior ones aren't! — Brigade Piron ( talk) 15:22, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Missvain ( talk) 00:28, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Missvain ( talk) 00:57, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Nick Heath (footballer)

Nick Heath (footballer) (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

His two minutes of professional football in League Two for Kidderminster means that he technically passes WP:NFOOTBALL. I have struggled to find anything that amounts to WP:GNG coverage and have searched his name in connection with all of the clubs that he has played for in non-league. The coverage is all local and just routine mentions in match reports [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16]. He appears to now be an U21 coach for Boldmere St. Michaels F.C. as per [17]. There is growing consensus that a borderline NFOOTBALL pass is insufficient when GNG is comprehensively failed.

In terms of WP:ATD, this could be redirected but I'm not sure where. Spiderone 17:39, 1 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 17:40, 1 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 17:40, 1 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 17:40, 1 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone 17:44, 1 December 2020 (UTC) reply
  • Delete - agree that failing GNG comprehensively is more important than scraping by on NFOOTBALL. Giant Snowman 19:23, 1 December 2020 (UTC) reply
  • Delete. A very minor figure who does not really fit on an encyclopaedia covering a broad range of subjects which hopes to avoid overt bias to particular fields or nations. He would have a place on a specialist Fandom site. RobinCarmody ( talk) 00:01, 2 December 2020 (UTC) reply
  • Keep It ain’t going to make a blind bit of difference what my opinion is, but surely this player playing in the Football League would qualify this item to remain, like millions of others, or have the rules been changed yet again? Skippo10 ( talk) 20:57, 5 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Please see all of the discussions linked here which all show strong consensus that a technical and trivial passing of NFOOTBALL is not necessarily enough for an article to be kept. There would usually need to be at least a suggestion that the footballer can meet GNG. Spiderone 12:40, 6 December 2020 (UTC) reply
  • Keep It's better to have a complete set of articles here for WP:NFOOTBALL than maintain a complete set on another site and a separate incomplete set here. Subject-specific guidelines are more important than WP:GNG as a reason to delete an article, there's no reason to say they shouldn't be as a reason to keep an article. Peter James ( talk) 17:01, 7 December 2020 (UTC) reply
At the very top of WP:NFOOTBALL, it says This guideline is used to help evaluate whether or not a sports person or sports league/organization (amateur or professional) is likely to meet the general notability guideline, and thus merit an article in Wikipedia. NFOOTBALL is merely a guideline to help us decide whether something will pass WP:GNG. If someone comprehensively fails GNG, it's fair to say that scraping by on NFOOTBALL is insufficient. Heath is an amateur footballer who just so happened to play two minutes of a game between two professional teams. Spiderone 18:57, 7 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Missvain ( talk) 00:28, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Geschichte ( talk) 19:57, 9 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Tuttle, Colusa County, California

Tuttle, Colusa County, California (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Not quite as certain as I usually am on what this place is, but it seems to fail WP:GEOLAND and WP:GNG. Can't find it on the topos in the supposed location of the railroad southeast of Colusa. No GNIS entry. Newspapers.com hits are for a Tuttle Station (which this probably is), and for the Tuttle Land Company, named after a prominent local family. Hog Farm Bacon 17:47, 1 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. Hog Farm Bacon 17:47, 1 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. Hog Farm Bacon 17:47, 1 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Missvain ( talk) 00:27, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
  • Delete - Per the many, many other AFD discussions this author's negligent article-creation campaign has spawned. FOARP ( talk) 12:28, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
  • Speedy delete Mass-producer negligently misrepresented the source: Durham says under the entry for Colusa: "California Division of Highways' (1934) map shows... a place called Tuttle located nearly 4 miles southeast of Colusa along Sacramento Northern Railroad", not that it is a notable community or settlement. Reywas92 Talk 00:11, 9 December 2020 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Missvain ( talk) 00:56, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Nathan Winder

Nathan Winder (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Another person who technically meets WP:NFOOTBALL because he made a one minute cameo in the old Third Division for Halifax and then faded into complete obscurity after. He does have some coverage post-retirement as he was recently appointed fitness coach at Ipswich. Being a fitness coach at a notable club doesn't make you notable, though, and I don't think the sourcing is enough for WP:GNG. I don't think that Winder warrants a stand-alone article but I'm happy to leave this to the community, hence AfD. Other sources [18] [19] [20] Spiderone 17:55, 1 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 17:55, 1 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 17:55, 1 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 17:55, 1 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone 17:57, 1 December 2020 (UTC) reply
At the very top of WP:NFOOTBALL, it says This guideline is used to help evaluate whether or not a sports person or sports league/organization (amateur or professional) is likely to meet the general notability guideline, and thus merit an article in Wikipedia. NFOOTBALL is merely a guideline to help us decide whether something will pass WP:GNG. If someone comprehensively fails GNG, it's fair to say that scraping by on NFOOTBALL is insufficient. Winder is an amateur footballer who just so happened to play one minute (one minute!) of a game between two professional teams. Spiderone 18:58, 7 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Missvain ( talk) 00:26, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was speedy keep. Nomination withdrawn. ( non-admin closure) Willbb234 Talk (please {{ ping}} me in replies) 20:19, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Sangeetha Kalanidhi

Sangeetha Kalanidhi (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Appears to be a minor music award, presented by a relatively small music academy ( Madras Music Academy). I managed to find this reference, but it only briefly mentions the award. No other thorough or reliable sources found. Regards Willbb234 Talk (please {{ ping}} me in replies) 17:56, 1 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Withdrawn by nominator it appears my location has restricted me from being able to find sufficient sources even when a thorough WP:BEFORE was conducted. Willbb234 Talk (please {{ ping}} me in replies) 20:16, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. Willbb234 Talk (please {{ ping}} me in replies) 17:56, 1 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Willbb234 Talk (please {{ ping}} me in replies) 17:56, 1 December 2020 (UTC) reply
  • Speedy-Keep. Was there a WP:BEFORE completed before this AfD filing? Also, I would be curious in the characterization of Madras Music Academy as a 'relatively small' music academy. Just a few searches would have shown that Madras Music Academy is amongst the most prestigious carnatic music academies. Back to this specific honorific titular award, a simple search WP:BEFORE would have surfaced an abundance of material. Furthermore, The Hindu calls this award Carnatic Music's Nobel Prize.[ [21]. The Deccan Herald calls this award a crowning achievement in a Carnatic musician's career. [22]
Just a few articles to look at from a simple WP:BEFORE
Source Links
Deccan Herald [23] [24]
The Hindu [25] [26] [27] [28] [29] [30] [31]
The Times of India [32] [33] [34]
Ktin ( talk) 08:21, 6 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Missvain ( talk) 00:25, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Missvain ( talk) 00:56, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Leigh Holbrook

Leigh Holbrook (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Only claim to notability is from technically passing WP:NFOOTBALL for playing 6 minutes of professional football for Mansfield. I could find no evidence of being able to pass WP:GNG. Almost a carbon copy of Wayne Stark who also made just one appearance for the same club. Spiderone 19:17, 1 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 19:19, 1 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 19:19, 1 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 19:19, 1 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone 19:20, 1 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Missvain ( talk) 00:24, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Missvain ( talk) 00:56, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Dean Hankey

Dean Hankey (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Only claim to notability is from technically passing WP:NFOOTBALL for playing 25 minutes of professional football for Mansfield. I could find no evidence of being able to pass WP:GNG; coverage for Ollerton was trivial. Almost a carbon copy of Wayne Stark who also made just one appearance for the same club. Spiderone 19:42, 1 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 19:42, 1 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 19:42, 1 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 19:42, 1 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone 19:45, 1 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Missvain ( talk) 00:23, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep. Missvain ( talk) 15:52, 10 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Ishan Pandita

AfDs for this article:
Ishan Pandita (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Out-of-process AfC move that circumspects a salting. Barely passes WP:NFOOTY; probably doesn't pass GNG. I dream of horses (Contribs) Please notify me after replying off my talk page. Thank you. 21:56, 1 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. I dream of horses (Contribs) Please notify me after replying off my talk page. Thank you. 21:56, 1 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. I dream of horses (Contribs) Please notify me after replying off my talk page. Thank you. 21:56, 1 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. I dream of horses (Contribs) Please notify me after replying off my talk page. Thank you. 21:56, 1 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone 22:01, 1 December 2020 (UTC) reply
  • Weak Keep - It is necessary to separate content issues from conduct issues. Deletion is a content issue, and turns on notability guidelines.
      • It appears that the subject has made one appearance in a fully professional game, and that is sufficient.
      • Articles have been deleted three times:
      • A7
      • Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ishan Pandita (2nd nomination).
      • Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ishan Pandita (3rd nomination).
      • It appears that he may not have played in a fully professional game at the time of the third deletion discussion, so that the close as Delete was correct, but is no longer governing.
      • I do not like the subordination of special notability guidelines to the general notability guideline. I am aware that I have a minority view. It is my view that special notability guidelines, which are mostly objective, are to be preferred over general notability, which is vague and leads to contentious AFDs and contentious Deletion Reviews. However, I will address both special notability and general notability.
      • This appears to be a case where ultras are carrying their fanatical support into Wikipedia. Ultras can be disruptive at football matches and can be disruptive in Wikipedia.
      • The conduct of the fans should not affect the outcome of a content debate.
      • There are occasionally cases where there has been so much support for someone outside of Wikipedia that it makes them famous for being famous, and that should satisfy general notability for those of us who do not like general notability.
      • The subject marginally satisfies association football notability, and marginally satisfies general notability, in spite of the conduct of the ultras.

Robert McClenon ( talk) 01:10, 2 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Missvain ( talk) 00:19, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Missvain ( talk) 00:55, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Andy Jones (footballer, born 1986)

Andy Jones (footballer, born 1986) (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Only claim to notability is from technically passing WP:NFOOTBALL for playing 8 minutes of professional football for Mansfield - cut short due to getting two very quick yellow cards. As interesting as this is, I only found routine coverage of his debut and almost nothing on his subsequent non-league career. I could find no evidence of being able to pass WP:GNG. Almost a carbon copy of Wayne Stark who also made just one appearance for the same club. Spiderone 21:58, 1 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 21:58, 1 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 21:58, 1 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 21:58, 1 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone 22:03, 1 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Missvain ( talk) 00:18, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete -- JHunterJ ( talk) 12:48, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Patriotic People's

Patriotic People's (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This seems to be a misunderstanding of disambiguation pages. None of the entries are ambiguous with the title. The pages involved already have hatnotes, which is the correct approach. -- Fyrael ( talk) 22:17, 1 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Disambiguations-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 22:21, 1 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Missvain ( talk) 00:18, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Malcolmxl5 ( talk) 22:18, 9 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Hershey, California

Hershey, California (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

A 1922 Ca. Rail Commission lists the "County Line and Hershey Warehouses", giving the manager's address as Dunnigan, and they are still there; in fact they show up on every topo that records any buildings. (The larger is a thousand feet long.) What they don't show, nor any other image, is anything else there. It's just another in a long series of shipping points, not a town. Mangoe ( talk) 22:36, 1 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. Mangoe ( talk) 00:49, 2 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. Mangoe ( talk) 00:49, 2 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Missvain ( talk) 00:17, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
  • Delete - Note to any closer tempted to relist: look at the many, many, many other AFDs that are related to the same author using the same sources (GNIS/Durham - GNIS is a bad source, Durham might be a good source but the person who created these articles is simply ignoring how Durham describes them, e.g., listing sidings and summits as settlements) to create WP:GEOLAND failing articles during the same period in 2009 and ask whether this really needs another week. These articles are clearly in WP:TNT territory. FOARP ( talk) 12:42, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
  • Speedy delete Mass-producer negligently misrepresented the source: Durham says "locality: 3.25 miles north-northwest of Dunnigan along Southern Pacific Railroad", not that it is a notable community or settlement, as is obvious on the maps. Reywas92 Talk 00:14, 9 December 2020 (UTC) reply
  • Delete - clearly never a community Spiderone 10:22, 9 December 2020 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 05:09, 15 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Jimmy Blackmon

Jimmy Blackmon (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

A very comprehensive telling of this individual's life, however it does not indicate how the subject is notable per Wikipedia's criteria of WP:GNG or WP:NBIO. A Google search for the name does not come up with significant discussion in multiple reliable sources. (There are other Jimmy Blackmons mentioned who are not this one.) ... discospinster talk 00:03, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. ... discospinster talk 00:03, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. ... discospinster talk 00:03, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Georgia (U.S. state)-related deletion discussions. ... discospinster talk 00:03, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
  • Comment Maybe passes WP:SOLDIER as the air mission commander on the operation that netted #2 and #3 in the famous Most-wanted Iraqi deck of cards? WP:AUTHOR: Cannot find reviews of his books that are not by the publisher, a bookseller or the author. WP:NSPORT: was a world champion archer. Also, while I accept the nom's comment about there being other Jimmy Blackmons, I am still inclined to believe that the JFBlackmon who wrote the article is the same one as the subject. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 02:33, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
  • Delete SPA puff-piece lacking SIGCOV in multiple RS so failing notability. No RS given for supposed claim of capturing #2 and #3 in the famous Most-wanted Iraqis. Mztourist ( talk) 03:11, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 18:40, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
  • Delete Personal puff-piece with almost no reliable sources, and no significant notability. ( If he actually captured two people numbered 2 and 3 in the playing card set, that would not be very notable.) Jackattack1597 ( talk) 22:27, 8 December 2020 (UTC) reply
  • Delete Vanity article with only primary sources and not enough of even them (the few secondary ones don't seem to support anything relevant). Besides, this has so many issues that I wouldn't know where to begin, other than by TNT'ing it and starting from scratch. And to pick up on an earlier point about this person's military record satisfying notability, that could be the case, but even then it would barely warrant a paragraph or two, not this epic. -- DoubleGrazing ( talk) 09:18, 9 December 2020 (UTC) reply
  • Comment: I came across this via WP:THQ#Jimmy Blackmon Page Editing Feedback and did some rudimentary cleanup, but the entire article has the feel of a PR release and probably needs to be re-written from scratch with lots of trimming done and more reliable sources cited. It seems like this might be a case of WP:NEXIST since the subject appears (at first read) to meet WP:NSOLDIER for at least a stub, but again lots of PR speak would need to be removed. There are also WP:AUTO/ WP:COI concerns, but those can be resolved separately if the consensus is that the subject is notable. -- Marchjuly ( talk) 22:35, 11 December 2020 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
  1. ^ https://angorussia.com/entretenimento/djeffrozila-agradece-premio-de-melhor-dj-do-ano-2014-em-uma-da
  2. ^ https://bwevip.com/angola-music-awards-anuncia-finalista/
  3. ^ https://www.angolama.com/
  4. ^ /info/en/?search=Angola_Music_Awards
  5. ^ /info/en/?search=Angola_Music_Awards
  6. ^ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wfr3tdnvlRU
  7. ^ https://allafrica.com/view/group/main/main/id/00042645.html
  8. ^ https://opais.co.ao/index.php/2020/08/23/angola-music-awards-e-moda-luanda/
  9. ^ http://www.expansao.co.ao/artigo/63013/angola-music-awards-volta-a-luanda-e-traz-novas-categorias?seccao=8
  10. ^ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uy6Fiv6bK2k - angola press
  11. ^ /info/en/?search=Angola_Music_Awards
  12. ^ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wfr3tdnvlRU
  13. ^ https://allafrica.com/view/group/main/main/id/00042645.html
  14. ^ https://opais.co.ao/index.php/2020/08/23/angola-music-awards-e-moda-luanda/
  15. ^ http://www.expansao.co.ao/artigo/63013/angola-music-awards-volta-a-luanda-e-traz-novas-categorias?seccao=8
  16. ^ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uy6Fiv6bK2k - angola press
Retrieved from " https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Log/2020_December_8&oldid=994605481"

Top Of Page

Home • Search • Translate

© CSE