Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/Today
Read how to nominate an article for deletion.
- Hanli Hoefer (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Single liner article that doesn't seem to pass WP:GNG. --Min☠︎rax«¦talk¦» 08:46, 8 February 2025 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Singapore-related deletion discussions. --Min☠︎rax«¦talk¦» 08:46, 8 February 2025 (UTC)
- Daoneua Siviengxay (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Unable to find any WP:SIGCOV. First name or last name may be misspelled. Unable to find name in original script, which made searches difficult. C679 08:35, 8 February 2025 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Laos. C679 08:35, 8 February 2025 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. C679 08:36, 8 February 2025 (UTC)
- Comment 2022 PROD removed with rationale at this Old revision of Daoneua Siviengxay. C679 08:39, 8 February 2025 (UTC)
- List of cities, towns and villages in the Maldives (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
The article only lists the cities and atoll capitals, which List of islands of the Maldives already do. This article could be redirected to that article since it fits WP:ATD-R. Unilandofma(Talk to me!) 08:26, 1 February 2025 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Lists and Maldives. Unilandofma(Talk to me!) 08:26, 1 February 2025 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 08:56, 1 February 2025 (UTC)
- It might be best to merge the articles? Barseghian Lilia (talk) 10:56, 1 February 2025 (UTC)
:Why is that? Unilandofma(Talk to me!) 16:46, 3 February 2025 (UTC)- Keep It's a list that's clearly a part of an established set of articles. Just because it's duplicative doesn't mean we can't have it - someone looking for this list may not know to go to the List of islands of the Maldives. SportingFlyer T·C 19:04, 4 February 2025 (UTC)
- Redirect to Administrative divisions of the Maldives, which already has prose about cities and atolls and tables with all of the atoll capitals and cities. I see no need for this duplicative page (there is nothing to even merge it seems), and a redirect and updated links will help users find this. Reywas92Talk 19:17, 4 February 2025 (UTC)
- Redirect to Administrative divisions of the Maldives: as suggested by Reywas. A redundant fork. Dclemens1971 (talk) 03:51, 8 February 2025 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, we have two different Merger/Redirect target articles suggested.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 08:07, 8 February 2025 (UTC)
- Purple Lamp (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
It appears to struggle with notability. Coverage appears to be around Harald Riegler and THQ Nordic's acquisition. Found this article from Der Standard for the latter. Perhaps merging into the legacy of Sproing Interactive or into THQ Nordic? IgelRM (talk) 07:20, 1 February 2025 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games, Companies, and Austria. IgelRM (talk) 07:20, 1 February 2025 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 08:03, 8 February 2025 (UTC)
- Metin Durmaz (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
This page may be considered for deletion because it does not have enough references to demonstrate notability according to Wikipedia guidelines. The article is missing coverage from independent, reliable sources, relying instead on self-promotion or primary sources, which is crucial to satisfy Wikipedia's notability standards for individuals in business and entrepreneurship. Garvitpandey1522 (talk) 07:20, 8 February 2025 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Businesspeople. Garvitpandey1522 (talk) 07:20, 8 February 2025 (UTC)
- Speedy delete. Tagged under WP:G11 as a promotional vanity page. Tag was removed by the nom due to an edit conflict, but I've now re-added it accordingly. CycloneYoris talk! 07:24, 8 February 2025 (UTC)
- Comment I am withdrawing my nomination. I completely agree with User:CycloneYoris, so please close this discussion as this is clearly a WP:G11 case.
- Ras Opoku (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Article about musical artist that does not satisfy musical notability or general notability. Nothing in the text of this article addresses any of the musical notability criteria or refers to third-party significant coverage. This article was draftified six months ago and has been moved back to article space, and so is a contested draftification that should not be unilaterally moved back to draft space again. A review of the sources shows that they are a user-generated biography, an interview, and listings by music streaming services. There is no independent secondary coverage.
Number | Reference | Remarks | Independent | Significant | Reliable | Secondary |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | www.deezer.com | Biographical sketch on site that has user-generated content | No | Yes | No. User-generated. | No |
2 | www.graphic.com.gh | An interview. | No | Yes | ? | No |
3 | music.apple.com | A listing on a music streaming service | No. Anyone can list their music. | No. Says that the recording is available. | Yes, but only as to the existence of the recording. | No |
4 | music.apple.com | A listing on a music streaming service | No. Anyone can list their music. | No. Says that the recording is available. | Yes, but only as to the existence of the recording. | No |
5 | music.apple.com | A listing on a music streaming service | No. Anyone can list their music. | No. Says that the recording is available. | Yes, but only as to the existence of the recording. | No |
Robert McClenon (talk) 06:56, 8 February 2025 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Music, and Ghana. Robert McClenon (talk) 06:56, 8 February 2025 (UTC)
- Delete no sign of notability of any flavour. --DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:12, 8 February 2025 (UTC)
- Dai Ying (producer) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Not notable. I can't find any sources that meet WP:42. Fails WP:GNG. Rosentad (talk) 16:01, 24 January 2025 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Businesspeople, Women, and China. Skynxnex (talk) 17:05, 24 January 2025 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:42, 24 January 2025 (UTC)
- Keep Article: Justification for Dai Ying’s Notability
- I strongly believe that Dai Ying meets Wikipedia’s General Notability Guideline (WP:GNG) and WP:ENT (Entertainment Industry-Specific Notability) due to her leadership role at iQIYI, her involvement in award-winning productions, and significant media coverage. Below are the key reasons why this article should be retained:
- 1. Professional Roles
- Dai Ying is a Vice President at iQIYI, one of China’s largest video streaming platforms, and serves as the General Manager of the Original Drama Development Center. Her leadership role in overseeing original content development at iQIYI positions her as an influential figure in China’s entertainment industry.[1] Executive-level figures in major entertainment companies frequently meet notability guidelines, given their direct impact on large-scale productions.
- Dai Ying, as Vice President of iQIYI, is directly responsible for developing original content and overseeing hit Chinese dramas that gained international recognition (The Bad Kids, The Long Night)[2]. This aligns with figures like Ted Sarandos, Kathleen Kennedy, and Bela Bajaria, who are considered notable for their impact on streaming and original content production.
- Another crucial aspect to consider is the underrepresentation of Chinese women executives in the entertainment industry on Wikipedia. While Western executives frequently meet notability guidelines, there are very few articles on Chinese female media executives, despite their significant impact on the entertainment industry.
- Wikipedia has a well-documented systemic bias issue, particularly in terms of gender and geographical representation. Studies reported on Wikipedia have shown that women are underrepresented in Wikipedia’s coverage. As mentioned by the co-founder Jimmy Wales, as a newcomer female editor, I'm hoping to be encouraged by writing about notable women in my lifetime even though I work 12 hours in a restaurant. Wikipedia is an inspiration and gives me hope one day I can also work in an office.
- Women in Chinese entertainment and business leadership are often overlooked, despite their contributions to global media.
- 2. Notable Productions with scale
- Dai Ying has served as the executive producer for several critically acclaimed Chinese dramas that have gained international recognition.[3] These include:
- The Bad Kids – A highly acclaimed suspense drama that became a cultural phenomenon in China, gaining high ratings on Douban (8.9/10) and sparking widespread discussion.
- The Long Night – An award-winning drama that received the Best OTT Original Series Award at the Busan International Film Festival. The show was also broadcast on NHK Japan.
- "Dr. Tang" – A notable medical drama highlighting China’s advancements in medical technology.
- War of Faith - Captured the attention of overseas markets
- These productions have been recognized both domestically and internationally, which strengthens Dai Ying’s case for notability. She has produced over 30 dramas. The dramas she produced has received 7 wins and 2 nominations.
- Source: IMDb
- 3. Significant Media Coverage
- Dai Ying has been interviewed and featured in various reputable media outlets discussing her role in shaping China’s streaming industry. These interviews and articles provide independent, in-depth coverage of her work, meeting Wikipedia’s WP:GNG requirement for multiple reliable sources.
- Source: Launch new projects
- Source: Won Producer of the Year
- Conclusion
- Dai Ying meets Wikipedia’s WP:GNG and WP:ENT guidelines as:
- She holds a top executive role at a major streaming company (iQIYI).
- She has produced multiple award-winning, widely recognized dramas.
- She has received independent media coverage from reputable sources.
- Based on these factors, I urge editors to reconsider the deletion nomination. I am most willing to learn and would greatly appreciate sharing on feedback on how to improve the article.
- Thank you for your kind consideration.
- Heureuxl 18:19, 24 January 2025 (UTC)
- Heureuxl is the creator of this article (posted by Nominator). Rosentad (talk) 07:34, 26 January 2025 (UTC)
KeepNeutral,I agree that [4] [5] likely constitute GNG, unless there is some connection between Sohu and iQIYI that I haven't found which would make them non-independent.(stricken per comment below) As a heads up for the future @Heureuxl, WP:WALLSOFTEXT are much less likely to help your argument than a more succinct and focused argument. 🌸wasianpower🌸 (talk • contribs) 19:45, 25 January 2025 (UTC)- Thank you for the clarity and well-understood on this.
- Heureuxl 01:15, 26 January 2025 (UTC)
- @Wasianpower: Source [4] actually originates from Qianlong.com (here) and is not an official Sohu release. It's most likely a commercial press release, as it's very promotional and doesn't have the reporter's name on it. Source [5] is actually posted by a Sohu self-media account. It is self-published content. They are clearly not independent of the subject. Rosentad (talk) 09:36, 26 January 2025 (UTC)
- I see, apologies — wasn't familiar with Sohu's formatting. I'll change my vote to neutral to now, there's enough breadth of coverage that it seems plausible to me that this subject could meet notability, but I don't have the experience to properly navigate the sourcing. [6] This source seems like it may meet GNG but it may also be self published, and this source [7] reads a bit promotional in tone (from the generated translation at least) but may also qualify. She also has an entry to on the CN Wikipedia, which could be used to find additional sourcing [8], though this entry is also tagged with concerns about COI and promotional content. 🌸wasianpower🌸 (talk • contribs) 17:47, 26 January 2025 (UTC)
- Hi @Rosentad @Wasianpower
- Thank you for your feedback. But just because it's reported by a sohu self media account, how does it say that it's self published content when it's a media report? Please let me know so I can improve my 3rd party sources selection for the future. Also, how can I further improve the article? Thank you both.
- I see, apologies — wasn't familiar with Sohu's formatting. I'll change my vote to neutral to now, there's enough breadth of coverage that it seems plausible to me that this subject could meet notability, but I don't have the experience to properly navigate the sourcing. [6] This source seems like it may meet GNG but it may also be self published, and this source [7] reads a bit promotional in tone (from the generated translation at least) but may also qualify. She also has an entry to on the CN Wikipedia, which could be used to find additional sourcing [8], though this entry is also tagged with concerns about COI and promotional content. 🌸wasianpower🌸 (talk • contribs) 17:47, 26 January 2025 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 06:57, 1 February 2025 (UTC)
- Delete. Producers are run of the mill, and do not get an encyclopedia article unless they pass both WP:NCREATIVE and WP:SIGCOV. Almost all producers are just managers of money and other resources. They are not creative people. If they are involved with the creative process, then we have a whole Guideline for that. I don't see how the subject "is regarded as an important figure or is widely cited," or has been "known for originating a significant new concept," etc, or theory, or technique. The only argument is the subject had "a major role in co-creating a significant or well-known work or collective body of work." Turning to significant coverage about them, I find it lacking. Compare Lorne Michaels. Bearian (talk) 06:13, 3 February 2025 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. User:Heureuxl, in AFDs, we don't need your arguments about why a subject is notable, we need solid, reliable sources that demonstrate notability.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 06:56, 8 February 2025 (UTC)
- Delete. I agree with Bearian that she definitely doesn't qualify for WP:NCREATIVE — she is a media executive, not a "creative professional". I had a look at Chinese language sources to see if there might be enough to satisfy WP:GNG, but wasn't able to find anything particularly useful. There are plenty of mentions/quotes in articles about new shows, a few interviews, and a few pieces about minor awards she's won, but nothing beyond that. Her articles on Baidu Baike and zhwiki don't have anything that would indicate a GNG pass either. MCE89 (talk) 08:24, 8 February 2025 (UTC)
- FAIRR Initiative (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
This organisation fails WP:NORG. Sources are none other than routine coverage. GTrang (talk) 04:13, 25 January 2025 (UTC)
- Keep : While the article is basically an ad and perhaps needs a total rewrite, I don't think sources are an issue. See [9], [10], [11], [12], [13], [14], [15]. I can't vouch for the quality of all these sources, but these were just the first things I found after hardly any searching. The coverage seems far beyond routine. — Anonymous 04:30, 25 January 2025 (UTC)
- Some of these sources were created by the org, and the rest are churnalism in trade publications (WP:TRADES) based on press releases. Helpful Raccoon (talk) 06:43, 25 January 2025 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Food and drink, Animal, Organizations, Environment, and England. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:40, 25 January 2025 (UTC)
- Comment: There might be enough coverage to meet WP:NORG. Reuters, FT are the best I could find; there's a lot of less significant coverage. Helpful Raccoon (talk) 07:39, 25 January 2025 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Can we get a source eval?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Benison (Beni · talk) 06:07, 1 February 2025 (UTC)
- Keep Notable initiative with pretty decent sourcing, mentioned above and we should keep in mind that there are almost additional sources in printed or other media per WP:NEXIST for such kind of orgs.--ג'ימיהחיה (talk) 13:07, 7 February 2025 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: As a general rule to participants in an AFD, PLEASE do not recommend sources unless you have checked them out before listing them in your comments. It's your job to vet the sources before suggesting them.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 06:48, 8 February 2025 (UTC)
- List of NAIA national football championship series appearances by team (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Subject lacks the requisite coverage to meet the WP:NLIST. Wikipedia is not a repository of primary sources as is currently the case here and a BEFORE didn't come up with anything better. PROD was removed without a rationale so taking this to AfD. Let'srun (talk) 23:57, 24 January 2025 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: American football and Lists. Let'srun (talk) 23:57, 24 January 2025 (UTC)
- Eh, I'm not sure this will letter of the law qualify but deleting this also feels like removing part of a set of college football stats articles. I can't make a source based argument for keep, but this isn't a delete which "feels" like it makes the encyclopaedia better. SportingFlyer T·C 04:25, 25 January 2025 (UTC)
- Perhaps the info can be covered in a different article? That being said, wikipedia isn't everything. Let'srun (talk) 13:30, 25 January 2025 (UTC)
- I don't have any problem if a better article or article title is established, I'd just prefer not to lose the information. SportingFlyer T·C 00:27, 26 January 2025 (UTC)
- Perhaps the info can be covered in a different article? That being said, wikipedia isn't everything. Let'srun (talk) 13:30, 25 January 2025 (UTC)
- I had the same reaction as Sporting Flyer. The piece is well done and sourced, records a significant piece of college football history, and seems to make the encyclopeida better. And I did find this which discusses the topic of NAIA teams ranked by the number of postseason appearances. Cbl62 (talk) 09:39, 25 January 2025 (UTC)
- OPPOSE for the reasons stated by Cbl62. It would be a shame if the encyclopedia were to lose this information. Jeff in CA (talk) 00:39, 27 January 2025 (UTC)
- Comment I do not think there are any independent sources regarding the set, but individual sourcing on each team's total playoff appearances seems likelier to find. I agree with Cbl62 that a list such as this is encyclopedic. Therefore, I would prefer a different option than deleting. A rename or even merge target may work better. Conyo14 (talk) 18:30, 28 January 2025 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: There are suggestions for ATDs, but can we please come into an agreement?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Benison (Beni · talk) 05:59, 1 February 2025 (UTC)Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: See previous relisting comment.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 06:46, 8 February 2025 (UTC)
- Women's Affairs Office (Syria) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Likely to become notable, but WP:TOOSOON. All we have are a handful of news articles from about a month ago and no further coverage. The status of the government of Syria itself is murky enough. — Anonymous 02:58, 25 January 2025 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Politics, and Syria. — Anonymous 02:58, 25 January 2025 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:47, 25 January 2025 (UTC)
- oppose, it seems to be a cabinet-level office and a part of the government. It is already there and it is already something. Not being covered enough doesn't mean that it's not notable enough I believe.
- - RamiPat (talk) 18:17, 2 February 2025 (UTC)
- (Note that comments should be placed at the bottom of deletion discussions.) Unfortunately, that is indeed how notability works. — Anonymous 00:22, 3 February 2025 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 05:29, 1 February 2025 (UTC)
- Draftify as an alternative to deletion. BilletsMauves€500 13:32, 1 February 2025 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. "Not being covered enough doesn't mean that it's not notable", coverage by reliable sources is how we assess notability so I disagree. Read WP:N.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 06:44, 8 February 2025 (UTC)
- WWE Hall of Fame (2025) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
WP:TOOSOON, Although, it is announced that Paul "Triple H" Levesque that will inducted on Hall of Fame, it is premature to create this solely article. However, there is a section on WWE Hall of Fame#2025. Much likely supporting to Redirect for a while, then if it's announced completely who's in the hall of fame, it can be created solely. ROY is WAR Talk! 05:25, 1 February 2025 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Wrestling-related deletion discussions. ROY is WAR Talk! 05:25, 1 February 2025 (UTC)
- Redirect to WWE Hall of Fame#2025 for now, until/unless we get more to work with. It's WP:TOOSOON.LM2000 (talk) 05:40, 1 February 2025 (UTC)
- Redirect to WWE Hall of Fame#2025 as per LM2000, the topic simply does not have enough information at this time to warrant a standalone article. JustARandomEditor123 (talk) 06:45, 1 February 2025 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events and Nevada. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 07:16, 1 February 2025 (UTC)
- Keep. This is a ridiculous nomination. Clear secondary sources exist such as [16] and the event is two months away. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 17:13, 1 February 2025 (UTC)
- It is obviously WP:TOOSOON like you said, it's two months away. According to WP:TOOSOON:
Sometimes, a topic may appear obviously notable to you, but there may not be enough independent coverage of it to confirm that. In such cases, it may simply be too soon to create the article.
It's Triple H that only have an announcement that inducted on Hall of Fame and if there is will be on hall of fame without a reliable sources might be WP:CRYSTALBALL. ROY is WAR Talk! 12:50, 2 February 2025 (UTC)- Did you even read what I wrote? Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 15:43, 2 February 2025 (UTC)
- It is obviously WP:TOOSOON like you said, it's two months away. According to WP:TOOSOON:
- Redirect to WWE Hall of Fame#2025 for now. Per WP:TOOSOON. Hansen Sebastian (Talk) 14:00, 2 February 2025 (UTC)
- Keep - Per WP:PWEVENT once the date and location has been announced for these events its deemed to have met the notability criteria. Therefore WP:TOOSOON does not apply. - Galatz גאליץשיחה Talk 13:31, 5 February 2025 (UTC)
- The date and location for this event have already been announced according to the article. The date is April 18, 2025, and the location is T-Mobile Arena in Paradise, Nevada. So, it is keep. Abhiramakella (talk) 17:07, 6 February 2025 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 06:42, 8 February 2025 (UTC)
- Maria Strong (attorney) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Fails GNG. She assumed some positions at the United States Copyright Office, but none of them was extraordinary enough to confer her notability. Even if some positions she held are notable enough to have a stand-alone page, that doesn't automatically make her notable.
- [17] Blog source.
- [18] Routine announcement, which most people who get appointed to assume relevant federal roles usually get.
- [19] Mostly Strong talking about her own work, not an independent source. Badbluebus (talk) 04:06, 1 February 2025 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Women, Law, and United States of America. Badbluebus (talk) 04:06, 1 February 2025 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: California and Washington, D.C.. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:10, 1 February 2025 (UTC)
- Keep for the valid arguments made by @TJRC
- Keep. She didn't just assume "some positions" at the Copyright Office; she was acting Register of Copyrights, the top position, the head of the entire Copyright Office, with responsibility for all U.S. policy relating to copyright law. I know that "register" sounds like a purely ministerial title, like a county register, but it is the equivalent to a position like the head of the US Patent and Trademark Office. It's just that the USPTO head's title has changed from the mundane U.S. Commissioner of Patents to the more ornate Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property, while the Copyright Office has stuck to its original title. Frankly, each of the registers in the List of registers of copyrights merits an article.
- No objection to improving the sourcing.
- Disclosure: I'm the editor who initially wrote the article. Frankly, I think it was better -- in content, sourcing and clarity of notability -- in its original form. I agree it should be cleaned up; but not deleted. TJRC (talk) 04:26, 2 February 2025 (UTC)
- Which policy are you using to back up the notability of this topic? NPOL? If yes then they didn’t merit NPOL#1, the sources itself are neither sufficient to merit NPOL#2. Best, Reading Beans, Duke of Rivia 04:04, 4 February 2025 (UTC)
- The United States Copyright Office is very clearly a national agency; and the head of the United States Copyright Office is very clearly someone "who [has] held ... national office" by virtue of holding the office heading that agency. TJRC (talk) 04:54, 4 February 2025 (UTC)
- The United States Copyright Office is a part of the Library Congress. This is what NPOL#1 says:
Politicians and judges who have held international, national, or (for countries with federal or similar systems of government) state/province–wide office, or have been members of legislative bodies at those levels.
Which part of NPOL here does she pass? She doesn’t pass NPOL#2 due to lack of significant coverage in reliable sources. Best, Reading Beans, Duke of Rivia 08:10, 4 February 2025 (UTC)- I don't understand the basis for your confusion. Are you saying that the US Copyright Office is not a federal agency? TJRC (talk) 18:33, 4 February 2025 (UTC)
- Holders of every federal agency is not notable; that’s not what NPOL is about. "Not every appointee (or elected position) automatically passes the bar of WP:BLP/WP:N. I would also note the language in NPOL: "are presumed to be notable" but it doesn't relieve them of the obligation in WP:GNG to have significant coverage in reliable sources. If the position was that important, it would be trivial to find SIGCOV in WP:RS, but that isn't the case. "Presumption" isn't a guarantee, it just means that it is likely you will find sources." Best, Reading Beans, Duke of Rivia 20:10, 4 February 2025 (UTC)
- I don't understand the basis for your confusion. Are you saying that the US Copyright Office is not a federal agency? TJRC (talk) 18:33, 4 February 2025 (UTC)
- The United States Copyright Office is a part of the Library Congress. This is what NPOL#1 says:
- The United States Copyright Office is very clearly a national agency; and the head of the United States Copyright Office is very clearly someone "who [has] held ... national office" by virtue of holding the office heading that agency. TJRC (talk) 04:54, 4 February 2025 (UTC)
- Which policy are you using to back up the notability of this topic? NPOL? If yes then they didn’t merit NPOL#1, the sources itself are neither sufficient to merit NPOL#2. Best, Reading Beans, Duke of Rivia 04:04, 4 February 2025 (UTC)
- Keep as per TJRC. For the record, most active Wikipedians are 2 or 3 degrees of separation from the subject via the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Directors member Kat Walsh, who's a mutual connection on LinkedIn and Copyright Counsel at Creative Commons. Bearian (talk) 06:24, 3 February 2025 (UTC)
- Delete: I don't necessarily understand the views above about WP:GNG. Serving non significant or perhaps public political or literary offices doesn't meets WP:NPOL. Safari ScribeEdits! Talk! 07:45, 3 February 2025 (UTC)
- Delete: Appears to be the head of a government corporation, doesn't seem to pass political notability. They’re a business person in the employ of the government, not a politician that's elected. Best, Reading Beans, Duke of Rivia 12:26, 3 February 2025 (UTC)
- Keep per TJRC. She was also vice-president of the International Intellectual Property Alliance, and was quoted in that role in newspaper articles about laws relating to piracy of software, CDs, etc. She has also published book chapters and journal articles on copyright. I have added some refs and info to the article. RebeccaGreen (talk) 15:05, 6 February 2025 (UTC)
- Delete Doesn't seem to qualify for WP:NPOL and also doesn't match WP:GNG. Pollia (talk) 10:56, 7 February 2025 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 06:41, 8 February 2025 (UTC)
- Kristina Gurung (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Role in just a single Notable film, the subject fails WP:NACTOR and WP:GNG. Taabii (talk) 06:20, 8 February 2025 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, Women, and Nepal. Taabii (talk) 06:20, 8 February 2025 (UTC)
- Karanni (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Having examined all the sources in the article (except the offline German article from the 1930s), and done some searches of my own, I think there is only a single sentence of information extant about this figure: he was king when Tudhaliya and Suppiluliuma invaded Hayasa-Azzi. He gets namedropped in passing in histories of the Hittites, but the discussion does not rise to the level of WP:SIGCOV. ~ L 🌸 (talk) 05:45, 8 February 2025 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Military, Royalty and nobility, and Turkey. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:52, 8 February 2025 (UTC)
- Dharampal Singh (party secretary) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Fails WP:NPOL and WP:GNG. The subject just holds a state-level post of a Notable National Party in India. Taabii (talk) 05:40, 8 February 2025 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Politicians, India, and Uttar Pradesh. Taabii (talk) 05:40, 8 February 2025 (UTC)
the person before him holding this post Sunil Bansal also had a Wikipedia page and this is a notable post in the party's state unit — Preceding unsigned comment added by Amplify Digital 21 (talk • contribs) 07:56, 8 February 2025 (UTC)
- Avon School District (Massachusetts) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Likely fails WP:GNG. Merge and redirect this content to Avon, Massachusetts#Education. –Aidan721 (talk) 04:56, 8 February 2025 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Education, Schools, United States of America, and Massachusetts. –Aidan721 (talk) 04:56, 8 February 2025 (UTC)
- The Delicious One (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
A user DePRODed this article stating to "not delete this because it can still have good sources and to give it a chance", however, I am not seeing this having good sources, it has failed WP:GNG for 15 years. This source might be good, [1], but it is still not enough to separate an article for the mascot. Opolito was right to PROD it, and he is also right that reliable sourcing will never happen. Toby2023 (talk) 04:19, 8 February 2025 (UTC)
- If this is not kept, I would recommend merging the info to Wienerschnitzel as its own section. DaniloDaysOfOurLives (talk) 05:35, 8 February 2025 (UTC)
References
- ^ "'The Delicious One' speaks in new TV spots for Wienerschnitzel". Nation's Restaurant News. October 2, 2000. Archived from the original on February 13, 2011.
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements, Food and drink, Advertising, and United States of America. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:55, 8 February 2025 (UTC)
- Sathyam gujja (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Recreation of salted title: Sathyam Gujja, which was salted in 2021 due to constant recreation. Subject appears to lack notability, and a WP:BEFORE search doesn't show much, if any, coverage from reliable sources. CycloneYoris talk! 04:17, 8 February 2025 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians and India. CycloneYoris talk! 04:17, 8 February 2025 (UTC)
- The subject is a well known activist in Telangana and Andhra Pradesh, he has gained more prominence in the past 4 years and deserves to be known Abcd45678 (talk) 04:21, 8 February 2025 (UTC)
- the subject is a back ward class activist and also an educationalist.see the references[1] D u p e s g w y n (talk) 04:43, 8 February 2025 (UTC)
- Observation: Just want to note that user above did not have any contributions prior to this AfD, and is likely a sock of the author. CycloneYoris talk! 04:52, 8 February 2025 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Telangana-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:56, 8 February 2025 (UTC)
- True Market Value (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
True Market Value is a common term. It refers to the price a buyer is willing to pay for a property, a product or service. It is not restricted to the real estate market or to online auctions. The text of this article is gibberish to me. The term True Market Value does not require a Wikipedia article; maybe an entry in wiktionary. Ruud Buitelaar (talk) 03:54, 8 February 2025 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Finance and Economics. Ruud Buitelaar (talk) 03:54, 8 February 2025 (UTC)
- Manuel Arroyo (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
I am unable to find anything approaching WP:SIGCOV for this Argentine rugby player. JTtheOG (talk) 02:54, 1 February 2025 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Rugby union, and Argentina. JTtheOG (talk) 02:54, 1 February 2025 (UTC)
- Keep as he has played professionally for Benetton Rugby in the United Rugby Championship, a top-tier international competition, and has represented Argentina at the Under-20 level, demonstrating notability in rugby. His career has been covered by reliable sources--Loewstisch (talk) 09:37, 7 February 2025 (UTC)
- WP:SPORTBASIC requires at least one source providing SIGCOV. JTtheOG (talk) 20:32, 7 February 2025 (UTC)
- Delete. Nothing beyond passing mentions on ProQuest. JoelleJay (talk) 21:14, 7 February 2025 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ZyphorianNexus Talk 03:06, 8 February 2025 (UTC)
- A Darkness Gathering (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Single, unnotable game accessory, only reviewed in 2 magazines, which are passing mentions. -Samoht27 (talk) 02:34, 8 February 2025 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Science fiction and fantasy and Games. -Samoht27 (talk) 02:34, 8 February 2025 (UTC)
- Keep I have added summaries of the two listed reviews to the article, and used details from the reviews to expand the description of the subject. The two reviews are not "passing mentions"; each is several hundred words long. Notability is not in question.Guinness323 (talk) 07:10, 8 February 2025 (UTC)
- Keep Thanks to the improvments we now have a referenced non-stubby article, which demonstrates that the reviews were not passing mentions, and therefore the topic fullfilling WP:WHYN/WP:GNG. A closer look at sources during the WP:BEFORE search seems warranted. Daranios (talk) 08:13, 8 February 2025 (UTC)
- Arnold Philimon Peter (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Soft deleted previously due to lack of in-depth coverage. Still fails WP:GNG. Gheus (talk) 01:19, 1 February 2025 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Law, and California. Shellwood (talk) 02:27, 1 February 2025 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ZyphorianNexus Talk 01:20, 8 February 2025 (UTC)
- Paolo Bergamo (entrepreneur) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Non-notable entrepreneur. Lacks direct and in-depth coverage to pass WP:GNG. Gheus (talk) 01:16, 1 February 2025 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 02:26, 1 February 2025 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Italy and California. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:32, 1 February 2025 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ZyphorianNexus Talk 01:16, 8 February 2025 (UTC)
- Bellevue Kandy (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
per WP:NACTOR, no sources provide coverage about the actress. The article is also littered with fake references FuzzyMagma (talk) 21:02, 24 January 2025 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Women, and Democratic Republic of the Congo. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 21:27, 24 January 2025 (UTC)
- Keep I have edited the article a bit. She at least meets WP:GNG, and probably WP:NCREATIVE, though I have not checked for reviews of all the films she has produced (there is a list in an earlier version of this article, but the current article only names two she received award nominations for in 2022). The sources do provide coverage of her, as suggested by their titles: "Zoom sur la meilleure scénariste de la RDC : Belinda Kikusa Kandi dit « Bellevue », la Femme sage"; "Belinda Kandy dit « Belle Vue », apporte une nouvelle touche dans le cinéma congolais"; "Bellevue KANDY | 50 Femmes qui inspirent"; ). "L'actrice comédienne Belinda Bellevie Officiel est à deux doigts d'instaurer un nouveau record historique dans le cinéma congolais". (Note both her professional and real names used with variations in spelling.) RebeccaGreen (talk) 11:27, 26 January 2025 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 00:22, 1 February 2025 (UTC)Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ZyphorianNexus Talk 00:20, 8 February 2025 (UTC)
- Internationality (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
WP:DICDEF and WP:SYNTH. It's a blend of various topics that can be found separately at the DAB page International. — Anonymous 00:05, 8 February 2025 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Law, Politics, and Geography. — Anonymous 00:05, 8 February 2025 (UTC)
- Delete: Concur with the nom. There is nothing here that passes our concept of an article subject. - UtherSRG (talk) 00:45, 8 February 2025 (UTC)
- Strong keep. Of course the concept of things being international exists, and a disambiguation page is no solution where it obscures, rather than elucidating, the fact that topics on the page express aspects of a single underlying topic. If the article requires further substance to pass muster, add that substance. Sources certainly exist. BD2412 T 03:05, 8 February 2025 (UTC)
- But this is an encyclopedia. "The concept of things being international", as you put it, is not an encyclopedic topic, not any more than "the concept of things being the color beige" is. Without context, this is just a word. I have no doubt that thousands of sources use it, but words are not inherently notable in and of themselves. — Anonymous 03:48, 8 February 2025 (UTC)
- The concept of Internationality is precisely as encyclopedic as the concept of Beige. In fact, some of the most important topics that we have (and I would count this among them) are high-level conceptual abstractions of fundamental aspects of human life. BD2412 T 03:59, 8 February 2025 (UTC)
- What exactly do you envision this article as being about? Perhaps a colour was a poor example on my part (as it's something distinct and tangible). How about the concept of things existing on Earth? Similarly abstract and far too broad. For this case, we're looking at the internationality of what exactly? Can you provide a reliable source discussing internationality without further context (not in relation to laws, regulations, relations, agreements, or ideologies)? Any source will do (except a dictionary, of course). — Anonymous 04:15, 8 February 2025 (UTC)
- Wikipedia has no requirement that sources discuss concepts "without further context". That would be like asking to have the article on Construction include sources on construction with no context about things being constructed. BD2412 T 04:32, 8 February 2025 (UTC)
- Construction is a process. I can point at something and say whether or not it is construction. Internationality is much more abstract. I think it's fair to say that abstract concepts require some kind of cohesive, concrete grounding. For instance Knowledge and Awareness are both pretty abstract, but they both represent consistent ideas that remain the same whether they're being discussed from a scientific, philosophical, or religious perspective. Internationality, on the other hand, can mean completely different things depending on the context. An international language is not comparable to an international treaty. They are two completely different things that happen to both be "international". — Anonymous 04:52, 8 February 2025 (UTC)
- Actually, now that I think of it, the construction analogy itself could be broken down further. As a word, construction can also be used to refer to the way a text is interpreted or a type of geometric figure. Despite the existence of these other meanings (which it acknowledges itself), our article on the subject makes it clear that we're talking about human beings taking materials and building stuff with them. Defining other meanings is why DAB pages exist. It would be pointless to try to discuss them all in a single article. — Anonymous 05:12, 8 February 2025 (UTC)
- I raised Construction as an example of a thing that is inherently tied to contexts, not as an abstraction of the level of Internationality. BD2412 T 05:20, 8 February 2025 (UTC)
- Isn't
the concept of things existing on Earth
covered by our article on ontology? TulsaPoliticsFan (talk) 04:43, 8 February 2025 (UTC)- That's a philosophical concept that is more to the tune of things existing in the universe. My very hypothetical example was based on the idea of having an article about things existing specifically on planet Earth with no further connection to each other. Sure, there are plenty of articles about these things. Perhaps you could make an article with a nice-sounding name like "Terran". However, it would still not be hopelessly broad and not describe a meaningful group. For a slightly more specific example, consider our DAB page for American. The first entry is
something of, from, or related to the United States of America, commonly known as the "United States" or "America"
So far, no one has created an article for this uselessly wide meaning, and information about more specific meanings can be found on the page. — Anonymous 04:57, 8 February 2025 (UTC)- We also have an article on Globalization, which is basically just internationality taken to its ultimate end. Of course, Internationalization and Cosmopolitanism cover narrower iterations. BD2412 T 05:00, 8 February 2025 (UTC)
- Is it really, though? Globalization is a process. As it is used by modern experts, it has a single, consistent meaning (it's arguably much less broad than the other examples I gave). — Anonymous 05:04, 8 February 2025 (UTC)
- Okay, try this on for size: Jonathan Rée, Internationality, Radical Philosophy 60, Spring 1992. BD2412 T 05:44, 8 February 2025 (UTC)
- Intriguing. It seems the author defines it as a tangible concept here akin to globalization. If there are additional sources supporting this usage, then I'd support keeping the article, but that would mean getting rid of the content on international languages and sporting events. — Anonymous 05:54, 8 February 2025 (UTC)
- Okay, try this on for size: Jonathan Rée, Internationality, Radical Philosophy 60, Spring 1992. BD2412 T 05:44, 8 February 2025 (UTC)
- Is it really, though? Globalization is a process. As it is used by modern experts, it has a single, consistent meaning (it's arguably much less broad than the other examples I gave). — Anonymous 05:04, 8 February 2025 (UTC)
- We also have an article on Globalization, which is basically just internationality taken to its ultimate end. Of course, Internationalization and Cosmopolitanism cover narrower iterations. BD2412 T 05:00, 8 February 2025 (UTC)
- That's a philosophical concept that is more to the tune of things existing in the universe. My very hypothetical example was based on the idea of having an article about things existing specifically on planet Earth with no further connection to each other. Sure, there are plenty of articles about these things. Perhaps you could make an article with a nice-sounding name like "Terran". However, it would still not be hopelessly broad and not describe a meaningful group. For a slightly more specific example, consider our DAB page for American. The first entry is
- Wikipedia has no requirement that sources discuss concepts "without further context". That would be like asking to have the article on Construction include sources on construction with no context about things being constructed. BD2412 T 04:32, 8 February 2025 (UTC)
- What exactly do you envision this article as being about? Perhaps a colour was a poor example on my part (as it's something distinct and tangible). How about the concept of things existing on Earth? Similarly abstract and far too broad. For this case, we're looking at the internationality of what exactly? Can you provide a reliable source discussing internationality without further context (not in relation to laws, regulations, relations, agreements, or ideologies)? Any source will do (except a dictionary, of course). — Anonymous 04:15, 8 February 2025 (UTC)
- The concept of Internationality is precisely as encyclopedic as the concept of Beige. In fact, some of the most important topics that we have (and I would count this among them) are high-level conceptual abstractions of fundamental aspects of human life. BD2412 T 03:59, 8 February 2025 (UTC)
- But this is an encyclopedia. "The concept of things being international", as you put it, is not an encyclopedic topic, not any more than "the concept of things being the color beige" is. Without context, this is just a word. I have no doubt that thousands of sources use it, but words are not inherently notable in and of themselves. — Anonymous 03:48, 8 February 2025 (UTC)