Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/Today

Purge
Shortcut WP:AFD/T

15 March 2025

Read how to nominate an article for deletion.

Recent AfDs: Today Yesterday

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

< March 14	March 16 >

Guide to deletion

Purge server cache

Jenn Monroe

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

did not find significant coverage of this figure at all Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 17:24, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Women, Poetry, and United States of America. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 17:24, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Society of Classical Poets

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

Not really seeing enough reliable coverage to meet WP:NORG. Maybe the inauguration poem is notable, but even that has hardly gotten any coverage outside of its immediate publication. The only mention I found more recently was [1]. Found no sigcov of the society itself. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 16:57, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Poetry and Organizations. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 16:57, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 17:11, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Gabiro Guitar

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

Article subject does not show up in any online searches except for YouTube and on social media accounts. All 13 of the article sources are from https://newtimes.co.rw, and none of them support the article text in any way—each is simply a puff piece listing upcoming concerts or providing promotion for various artists. Celjski Grad (talk) 15:49, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Bands and musicians, and Rwanda. Schützenpanzer (Talk) 16:13, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

List of lead guitarists

AfDs for this article:

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

Unclear criteria for 'significant lead guitarists', might be original research. Category:Lead guitarists already exists and can carry out what the list says. Aqurs1 (talk) 12:45, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists of people-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 13:05, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:39, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per WP:NOTCLEANUP and WP:NOTDUP. "Significant" was probably just an attempt at saying "notable" to limit the list to people with articles, but it's irrelevant because the nom is not claiming that we cannot know who a lead guitarist is, just that they don't like the current intro. That intro in any event should be rewritten to just summarize what a lead guitarist is per MOS:THISISALIST. postdlf (talk) 22:55, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Fails WP:NLIST. There is a lack of uniform inclusion criteria. How to determine which lead guitarists should be included? 深鸣 (talk) 02:24, 2 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Ones that have articles is pretty clear cut. PARAKANYAA (talk) 21:22, 2 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yep, exact same question as what goes into Category:Lead guitarists, which the nominator endorses. I also don't understand the WP:VAGUEWAVE to WP:NLIST regarding an index of notable people, particularly given that lead guitar exists anyway. postdlf (talk) 01:38, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 13:05, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:23, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Kevin (Sin City)

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

Reception is limited to a single listicle. Fails WP:GNG. Per ATD-R, could redirect to List of Sin City characters. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 13:40, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements and Comics and animation. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 13:40, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete With less than 50 links coming into this article I would argue there's no point to a redirect either; this is just an average sidekick villain. Nathannah • 📮 22:32, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge and redirect to Roark family#Kevin – As WP:ATD. Svartner (talk) 06:33, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Svartner, this article has been deleted so is not a suitable redirect target page. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:51, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

When I made the comment the article still exists. It can all be redirected to the List of Sin City characters. Svartner (talk) 09:55, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Right, except is that list encyclopedic? But for as long as it exists, sure, that's a valid target. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 06:07, 12 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: One proposed redirect target has been deleted. Redirect elsewhere or delete?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ^Complex/_Rational 14:11, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Berbiedoll

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

The subject fails the the Wikipedia General Notability Guideline. The sources and the awards could not help either as most of the sources are promotional and the awards are run off the mills. It seems the subject is mainly known for her mouth-watering Instagram page as indicated by the Blue Print and the Ghana Weekend Newspapers. Ibjaja055 (talk) 13:41, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Fashion, and Nigeria. Ibjaja055 (talk) 13:41, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. The subject fails WP:GNG and WP:ENTERTAINER. Majority of the sources cited in the article are highly promotional and written in a puffery tone; some of them are also not independent of her (this, this, this, and this). The awards that the subject won and have been nominated for appear to be non-notable awards. Moreover, she has ambassadorial deals with a bunch of non-notable brands. Versace1608 ^{Wanna Talk?} 14:40, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Which of the brands is a non-notable one can you state them lets interrogate it? Owula kpakpo (talk) 16:20, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

In recent times social media personalities have become even bigger than entertainers or artists so to allude to a mouth-watering instagram page is nothing but being disingenuous at best. She has received significant coverage in lots of media organizations and her work as a social media personality is well known. Owula kpakpo (talk) 16:17, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Shorouq Al Sowaidi

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

I don't think this person is notable enough. I couldn't find enough reliable sources to prove its notability. فيصل (talk) 01:13, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Golf and Qatar. فيصل (talk) 01:13, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and Women. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:20, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Of all nation-states, Qatar has the lowest proportion of women biographies: under 8%, according to humaniki. It feels like there's some WP:Systemic bias here, which was why I created the page. Dsp13 (talk) 11:40, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Qatar is also less than 30% women, and there are significant structural reasons that would explain why very few Qatari women become notable. Unless she has SIGCOV in multiple IRS sources, at least one of which must be cited in the article, there shouldn't be a standalone page for her. JoelleJay (talk) 20:10, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The latter two sentences are also clear copyvio from the source, which has a very strong warning about reproducing its content. JoelleJay (talk) 20:15, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I have found and added an article from the South China Morning Post, titled "Al-Sowaidi case highlights HK's folly in failing to send any golfers". It describes her amazingly low score, and that she finished last in a field of 24 in the women's individual competition. I wonder if there would be similar coverage to Eric the Eel. I have tried searching variants in the spelling of her name, and searching on her name in Arabic. One Arabic source, raya.com [2] says (according to Google Translate) "93 players participated in the tournament, the most prominent of whom was Shurooq Al Suwaidi, the first Qatari player to participate in the Asian Golf Championships, and she tried to prove her presence despite the high levels of the Asian champions, specifically South Korea." She is often mentioned as the first woman to represent Qatar internationally, but whether that resulted in what we would consider SIGCOV, I don't know. RebeccaGreen (talk) 14:52, 7 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:49, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 12:59, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Open Source Software CD

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

Fails WP:NSOFT: I could not find much coverage other than trivial mentions. The best coverage is a tiny 1-2 paragraphs on page 21 of this source. According to GScholar, this paywalled source also mentions it but I don't have reason to believe it's SIGCOV. This article was deproded. Helpful Raccoon (talk) 08:17, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. Helpful Raccoon (talk) 08:17, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Previous WP:PROD candidate, ineligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 12:56, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ismael Hassan

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

Declined prod with reason "Athlete at many high profile competitions during the 1980s and 1990s)". That doesn't grant automatic notability for WP:NATH. Lacking coverage to meet WP:SPORTSCRIT. Search with Arabic name yields many namesakes. LibStar (talk) 09:21, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 09:26, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Olympics-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 09:26, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sport of athletics-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 09:27, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Africa-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 09:28, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, meets WP:NATH from top-8 international championship finish. There's much more info about this person than the average Djiboutian Olympian, including multiple events like that he competed at the 1993 IAAF World Half Marathon Championships and that he competed at two separate editions of the Francophone Games – his 7th-place finish in the 10,000 m finals of the 1989 Games is a clear NATH prong 1 hit. Coverage should exist in the journal for that event: "Leichtatletik 35/1989". Leichtatletik (in French): 1124–1125. 31 August 1989.

He also set a 5000 m national record that's far superior to those from other countries in the region and recorded a top-25 finish at the 20 Kilomètres de Paris per World Athletics. --Habst (talk) 16:30, 9 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The president of the Djibouti Athletics Association appears to have the same name (Ismael Hassan), see here, although it seems it might be "Saed Ismael Hassan" whereas here we've got "Ali Ismael Hassan". BeanieFan11 (talk) 17:23, 9 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 12:55, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Mohamed Al-Kafraini

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

Declined prod with the rather weak reason "Also has a foreign Wikipedia page". The Arabic page is basically the same without in-depth coverage. Lacks coverage to meet WP:SPORTSCRIT. LibStar (talk) 09:26, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Olympics, Sport of athletics, and Jordan. LibStar (talk) 09:26, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, it seems like this page was created under an incorrect name. I found several alternate names for the subject (which I created as redirects) revealing a few other accomplishments going beyond simply competing at the Olympics. For example, he finished 13th at the 2001 Mediterranean Games 5000 m and was the only Jordanian athlete at the 2008 World Cross Country Championships (had to create redirects for both of these names). According to Tilastopaja he also competed at the 1999 Arab Games where he finished 4th in his heat.

Unfortunately as there are at least 9 names for the subject in use, that makes searching for coverage difficult. There are also thousands of Jordanian newspaper hits making the search more difficult. But I think there's enough here to demonstrate that based on known accomplishments, sources should exist. --Habst (talk) 01:09, 9 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Leading international Jordanian athlete. 109.38.153.179 (talk) 13:33, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
not an argument for establishing notability. LibStar (talk) 22:30, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 12:55, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tanks of Mumbai

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

Non notable, list like article with no sources from 2009. Not notable as a list as no sources discussing about the topic of Tanks in Mumbai. Prodded by me and Bearian, was contested. ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 10:45, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 10:45, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Maharashtra-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 11:17, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - so the tanks was clearly a notable phenomenon in urban Bombay in colonial period, and is covered in literature. See for example The City and Its Fragments: Colonial Bombay, 1854-1918, The Gazetteer of Bombay City and Island (1909), Reclaiming (the Urbanism Of) Mumbai, Bombay, the City of Dreams: A History of the First City in India, The History of the Municipal Corporation of the City of Bombay, and so forth. Whilst the tanks are now a bygone phenomenon, it's worth noting that the colonial-era tanks legacy remains in street names. --Soman (talk) 11:37, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Can you please add this information with links and pages? Bearian (talk) 13:44, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 12:54, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Mohammad Jorjandi

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

Inadequate sources for a BLP, particularly one which makes negative claims about the subject (e.g. that they were arrested and imprisoned). Omphalographer (talk) 10:20, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Crime, Internet, and Iran. Omphalographer (talk) 10:20, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep About those specific negative claims of being arrested and imprisoned, that's something they themselves even have talked about those here (parts of what they says https://imgur.com/a/zhLrVjE referring to Evin Prison, if one enables English subtitle) so that factor alone isn't that worrisome realistically but still understandable in strict Wikipedia policies terms if one means. I think the topic is worth to keep given all the local coverage and controversies as the nature of their work on studying cybercrime cases, some news agencies say things against them and some support what they said among many other less official pages and sites, they have been invited as an expert to VOA https://ir.voanews.com/a/6367544.html and BBC https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pX5PVH_6vGU −Ebrahim^talk 23:12, 5 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If there is substantial "local coverage" of Mr. Jorjandi which supports the claims made in the article, please add references citing that coverage. As the article currently stands, the only references are:

A page on an Iranian "people search" web site.
The home page / blog of the Shabgard Security Group (last updated in 2014, currently offline).
An archive of a defaced university web site.
An archived list of conference speakers identifying him and his employer.

None of these are adequate references for a biography, nor do any of them establish notability. Omphalographer (talk) 00:09, 6 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I've just removed those negative unreferenced claims and added one link from BBC that uses cybercrime expert title for him, used "HPSR Threat Intelligence Briefing Episode 11, February 2014" as a reference, it's copy exists here https://krypt3ia.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/companion-to-hpsr-threat-intelligence-briefing-episode-11-final.pdf which in page 45 it refers to him and added a link of an interview with his lawyer about his open cases in Iran and one other link about what activities he has revealed from another news agency, added some more news agencies articles who have references of him and added also a number of interviews he had with BBC Persian and VOA. There are indeed more stories and controversies about the person but they are in Persian Wikipedia and needs to be translated. −Ebrahim^talk 01:09, 6 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 12:40, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 12:52, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Johnny Contardo

AfDs for this article:

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

I really wanted to simply mark this as reviewed, as "Those Magic Changes" was an incredibly influential song for me back in the 70s. However, a search turned up zero in-depth references from independent reliable sources about him. Was a soft delete back in 2023, which has apparently recently been contested. As an ATD, a redirect to Sha Na Na might be warranted. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:44, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:44, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Massachusetts-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 13:14, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Not-deer

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

Basically WP:FRINGE. The one WP:RS (National Geographic) is a quote from a non-notable podcast author which gives this subject a passing mention. The other three sources are all marginal at best. Skeptical Enquirer is a blog post from a self-described "member of the Church of Satan" who in turn mostly cites "personal communication". A Little Bit Human describes their mission as " to provide bold entertainment content that sparks meaningful conversations". The East Tennessean source is a blog post in a small student paper which in turn cites The Skeptical Enquirer, 4Chan, Reddit, TikTok and Tumblr.

And to top it all off, the "artistic depiction of a not-deer" is by the author of this article, complete with image elements tp make it look like a screenshot from a camera viewfinder.

My own searching comes up with nothing better. RoySmith (talk) 12:02, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Chaotic Enby who marked the page as reviewed. RoySmith (talk) 12:10, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep as article creator. The religious views of a journalist have no bearing on their reliability and the personal communications are all with subject matter experts. ALBH providing entertainment content does not make it unreliable, it has an editorial team. Entertainment news sites with editorial teams are generally considered reliable. And an artistic depiction created by a Wikipedia user is not disallowed, see for example literally every image in Wikipedia:WikiProject Palaeontology/Paleoart review. I also don't see how WP:FRINGE applies here since the article does not claim that this cryptid or any other cryptids are actually real. ArtemisiaGentileschiFan (talk) 12:29, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I encourage you to list your image at Paleoart review. RoySmith (talk) 12:46, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That would make no sense since it is not paleoart. ArtemisiaGentileschiFan (talk) 13:05, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. This could be transwikified to the Cryptids Wikibook. MediaKyle (talk) 12:30, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of North Carolina-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 13:13, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Looking at the four sources:

National Geographic does make a passing mention: the only things it mentions is that they live in the Appalachians, and are deer-like in looks but not in behaviors. I don't think the fact that the quote is from a non-notable author matters, as notability and reliability are different things altogether, but the depth is clearly not enough for WP:SIGCOV.
Skeptical Inquirer is marked as "no clear consensus [...], leaning towards reliability" on Wikipedia:New pages patrol source guide. The linked discussion, Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 315#Skeptic and Skeptic Inquirer, points out that there is a level of editorial review, but that most of it is left to the authors (submission guidelines). I'd put this one as a borderline source. Also, it does rely on primary quotes, but has a lot of secondary commentary accompanying them.
A Little Bit Human has not been discussed at RSN, and, while they do describe themselves as "our mission to provide bold entertainment content that sparks meaningful conversations", I don't think that's enough to mark them as unreliable. They do appear to have a team of editors and writers, so it might be more solid than Skeptical Enquirer, although I can't say that it is reliable with 100% certainty either.
East Tennessean hasn't been at RSN either, but it does look like they have a level of editorial oversight. The "editorial" category, of which their not-deer article is part, is overseen by a section editor and the executive editor, so it isn't just a blog post, although it still remains a student newspaper.

Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 14:03, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I looked up the top two people listed at https://alittlebithuman.com/about-us/. Allia Luzong describes herself on LinkedIn as "Managing Editor, Lead Social Media Manager, Content Manager, SEO Writer, and then some." Justin Wagner says of himself, "Tasked with editing all content published on the site and ensuring that it follows our style guide, is grammatically correct, and is optimized for SEO. In addition, produced content that aligns with the site's focus, mainly entertainment." Neither of these things say to me "Provides editorial oversight to ensure what we publish is factual". What they say to me is, "If it is likely to generate clicks, we'll publish it". RoySmith (talk) 15:23, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

So basically, they do have editors, but you don't think they count because you read a brief description of the editors on LinkedIn and decided what their job is actually like based on that. ArtemisiaGentileschiFan (talk) 16:41, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Correct. RoySmith (talk) 16:47, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You haven't provided any actual arguments in favor of deletion. The only arguments I've seen are a critique of a journalist's religion, a claim that entertainment news is unreliable (with no evidence to back it up), a claim that illustrations made by Wikipedians are grounds for deletion, and an unexplained invocation of WP:FRINGE when it doesn't apply in any way. None of these are based in policy. If I were you I would retract this deletion request. ArtemisiaGentileschiFan (talk) 16:50, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Continuity Model of British Ancestry

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

There is no such thing as the "Continuity Model of British Ancestry", and the old sources being united under this heading are about different things, and are handled in various other WP articles. This new article fails in terms of WP:NOTE, WP:OR, and WP:V. There has been discussion already on the talk page, and no convincing source has been forthcoming.--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 10:42, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 11:30, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. --Andrew Lancaster (talk) 11:56, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Biology-related deletion discussions. --Andrew Lancaster (talk) 11:58, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Orthopostural Education

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

This seems to be a neologism to promote funding for the IIOPE (International Institute of Orthopostural Education). None of the references focus on this as a primary topic, but rather are a mix of alternative therapeutic approaches with no coherence. Google scholar search doesn't recognize this as a search term. Klbrain (talk) 10:38, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Addendum: the account creating this is a single-purpose account, User talk:IIOPE, which suggests a conflict of interest, also not specifically declared. Klbrain (talk) 10:41, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Health and fitness and Education. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 10:53, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. This is WP:ADMASQ buried beneath a cacophony of buzzwords. The "medical" element makes it even more concerning. MediaKyle (talk) 12:34, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sree Buddha College of Engineering

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

Article seems to be entirely promotional. Fails WP:PROMO. JekyllTheFabulous (talk) 10:09, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education, Schools, Engineering, and Kerala. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 10:33, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Daily Drop

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

Does not meet the requirements of WP:CORP. There are sources recommending the product, but very little discussing it from a neutral and reliable viewpoint. Dajasj (talk) 10:10, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Travel and tourism and Websites. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 10:34, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I respectfully disagree with the nomination for deletion and believe that Daily Drop meets Wikipedia’s notability guidelines for organizations (WP:CORP) due to significant coverage in independent, reliable sources and its demonstrated influence in the travel industry.

1. Independent, Reliable Coverage in Major Publications

Wikipedia’s notability guidelines require substantial coverage in independent, secondary sources. Daily Drop has been featured in multiple well-established publications, which provide independent discussions of the platform, including:

Forbes – Discussed Daily Drop’s approach to travel deals and strategies for maximizing travel rewards. (Source)
Business Insider – Covered the platform’s role in helping users find affordable travel. (Source)
Thrillist – Recognized Daily Drop in an article about the best travel deals and cheap flights. (Source)
9to5Mac – Included Daily Drop in its list of the best modern travel apps for iOS. (Source)

These articles discuss Daily Drop's impact on the travel rewards space, not just in passing, but in detail, indicating independent recognition and notability.

2. Industry Impact and Influence

Daily Drop has a large, engaged audience, with over 1.4 million subscribers to its daily newsletter. It has established itself as a widely cited authority in frequent flyer communities, financial media, and travel rewards circles. Its influence extends beyond its own platform, with industry experts referencing its content on credit card rewards, airline miles, and hotel loyalty programs.

3. Comparable Notable Wikipedia Pages

Daily Drop is comparable in scope to other notable travel rewards platforms that already have Wikipedia pages, including:

The Points Guy – Covers travel rewards, credit card strategies, and frequent flyer programs.
AwardWallet – A travel tool focused on managing loyalty program points.

Both The Points Guy and AwardWallet provide similar editorial content and have received independent media coverage. Daily Drop has been featured in similar high-quality sources, making its notability on par with these established Wikipedia entries.

4. Willingness to Improve the Article

I understand concerns about tone and neutrality. If specific sections appear promotional, I welcome constructive feedback and will edit the language to be more factual while retaining verifiable information.

Given the multiple independent sources, significant subscriber base, comparable Wikipedia-approved pages, and influence in the travel rewards industry, I believe Daily Drop meets Wikipedia’s notability guidelines for companies and organizations (WP:NCORP) and should be kept.

Rather than deletion, I encourage constructive improvements to the article, ensuring it aligns with Wikipedia’s neutrality and reliability standards. Bis310 (talk) 14:30, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Icepop

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

Not a notable singer/musician. Doesn't meet WP:NMUSIC or WP:BIO. Frost 09:44, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Spain. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 10:35, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for reaching out regarding the deletion discussion for Icepop. I appreciate the opportunity to clarify its significance and address any concerns.

I believe this article meets Wikipedia’s notability guidelines, as Icepop has received coverage from multiple reliable and independent sources. It is a recognized entity within its field and has made a meaningful impact, which is why I believe it deserves inclusion.

Additionally, I am open to improving the article further by adding more citations, expanding on notable aspects, and ensuring it adheres to Wikipedia’s quality standards. If there are specific areas that need work, I’d love to collaborate to enhance its credibility rather than removing it entirely.

I kindly request reconsideration and would love to hear any constructive feedback on how we can strengthen the article.

Here are some reliable sources that "Icepop" is a notable singer -

https://www.youtube.com/@iicepop/videos

https://open.spotify.com/artist/01NEdQ10ZjH4Oldy7vFgnb

https://music.apple.com/us/artist/icepop/1749415272 Whatsupguysm (talk) 14:29, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Anderson Heat

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

Literally can't find any sources on this team. it's lio! | talk | work 09:32, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Basketball and South Carolina. it's lio! | talk | work 09:32, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Lady Sophia Topley

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

This article doesn’t seem to meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines. TheSwamphen (talk) 08:10, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Women, Royalty and nobility, and England. TheSwamphen (talk) 08:10, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe we should redirect to Andrew Cavendish, 11th Duke of Devonshire? TheSwamphen (talk) 08:29, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I didn't find anything particularly notable in WP:BEFORE, although the subject's name is indeed mentioned in some books. However, that does not establish the subject's notability, so the subject completely fails WP:GNG. Baqi:) (talk) 13:21, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sarovar Hotels & Resorts

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

This article fails WP:NCORP. A WP:BEFORE search yields only routine business coverage, such as partnership announcements, acquisitions, and press mentions. Chanel Dsouza (talk) 07:51, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, India, and Maharashtra. Chanel Dsouza (talk) 07:51, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Travel and tourism-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 10:36, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Mymensinghi language

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

Unverifiable. There is no such thing called 'Mymensinghi language'. According to the classification by linguists, it is a typical Eastern Bengali dialect. None of the cited sources in this article call this dialect as a language of its own. There is no reliable source in this article to support these type of false statements. The WP:Hoax article is very much misleading to the wikipedia readers. So, it should be deleted. Snusho (talk) 07:29, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Language and Bangladesh. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 10:36, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Usage of "Language" and "Dialect" is interchangable in Bengali language. Sometimes we Bengali people call any dialect as "language". So, if the sources call it as a dialect then it is not a hoax. Saying a dialect "typical" is not actually policy based argument. If the title is so misleading then renaming is the best way, not deletion. And articles about dialect can be notable. So I will say ~~keep~~ (until someone can disprove its notability with source analysis). Mehedi Abedin 14:11, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
We Bengalis call our regional dialects as "ancholik bhasha" in Bengali language. We don't call distinct languages like Hindi, Mandarin, Arabic as ancholik bhasha. Language and dialect are not same thing in linguistics. The source titled "Bengali language and dialect, Sukumar, Ananda publishers" doesn't exist. The Banglapedia source [3] discusses about the term 'dialect' but doesn't call the dialect of Mymensingh as 'language'. Some sources like this and this are not reliable. These sources also don't call this dialect as a 'language' of its own. Most of the informations written in the article are misleading. Grierson and Sukumar Sen classified the dialect of Mymensingh district as Eastern Bengali/Bangali dialect. So, this article is not notable. Snusho (talk) 15:58, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Then I support delete. Mehedi Abedin 17:16, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nathmal Pahalwan

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

This biography lacks significant coverage in reliable independent sources also on looking upon the edit history the most of the content was added by IPs as unreferenced. Fails WP:GNG TheSlumPanda (talk) 07:42, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Wrestling, and India. TheSlumPanda (talk) 07:42, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and West Bengal. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 10:37, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ramkishan Adig

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

This page was created almost 15 years ago but still doesn’t have reliable source which could establish notability. Almost all references cited in this article are blogs except the tribune article which gives only a mention of his name and on WP:BEFORE I didn’t found sources which discuss the subject in depth, fails WP:GNG TheSlumPanda (talk) 07:03, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Artists, India, and Rajasthan. TheSlumPanda (talk) 07:03, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Vanity piece with no significant independent coverage. The sources are non-notable blogs, and reliable sources mention the subject without substantial information.Chanel Dsouza (talk) 08:09, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Fails GNG and NARTIST. All I am finding in a WP:BEFORE search is a lot of Blogspot posts, Instagram and other social media or user-submitted content. No evidence of reviews or permanent collections in notable museums or national galleries. Netherzone (talk) 15:34, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

2025 Indian Premier League playoffs

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

No need for separate stage articles; all are covered in 2025 Indian Premier League. Vestrian24Bio 06:35, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Cricket and India. Vestrian24Bio 06:35, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Unnecessary duplication, nothing to merge. No similar articles for other years. Peter James (talk) 12:03, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Shinola (Energy Orchard album)

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

Article has been unsourced for more than a decade, and I couldn't find any good stuff to meet WP:SIGCOV or WP:GNG. -Samoht27 (talk) 06:15, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. -Samoht27 (talk) 06:15, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Northern Ireland-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 10:38, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Allmusic has a rating (no review, so is not useful for notability), but it is a source for the track listing and credits. Peter James (talk) 12:08, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Anti-Bangladesh disinformation in India

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

This article talks rather about Godi media which prefers to spread disinformation about everything. Yes, they also spread disinformation about their ringleader Bharatiya Janata Party, though in a positive manner, but still that's disinformation. The article was mainly infested with the sock farm that is now blocked. I see no reason to retain this article anymore since it largely violates WP:NOTNEWS. It seems nothing more than a WP:POVFORK of 2024 Bangladesh_anti-Hindu violence, and the necessary content is already parked at 2024 Bangladesh anti-Hindu violence#Disinformation. Koshuri ^(グ) 04:33, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bangladesh and India. Koshuri ^(グ) 04:33, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Having read this whole article, I find no way to salvage it and present it as a distinct phenomenon which goes against the purpose of this article. If we are really supposed to cover every single instance of disinformation by Indian media, then I think we will create larger articles for Anti-Pakistan disinformation in India,[4][5][6] Disinformation over Indian history by Indian media,[7] Disinformation against Jawaharlal Nehru by Indian media,[8] and more. Everyone knows Godi media is indeed spreading disinformation, however, we don't have to create articles over the treatment of their targets. NXcrypto Message 05:23, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Strongly agreed & Delete per as per nomination. Pretty much Godi Media actually spreads disinformation on every trending topics worldwide, with that logic, many articles similar to this can be created. Also as nominator mentioned, largely violates WP:NOTNEWS. Imwin567 (talk) 05:28, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Per nom and above. It seems a clear violation of WP:NOTNEWS as well as GNG. Although its true that Godi media spreads misinformation on many topics, its not necessary to create articles on every such stuff.Mithilanchalputra (Talk) 12:19, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Journalism, Conspiracy theories, and Internet. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:21, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: In January 2025, this article was also nominated for deletion, but even then, the result remained unchanged. It is a fact that misleading propaganda was carried out by the Indian right-wing against Bangladesh, a claim that is documented in several reliable sources. Baqi:) (talk) 13:16, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
With that poor logic, you would also like to turn those red links that I mentioned into blue links, but I would absolutely oppose that because spreading disinformation is a very normal behaviour of Godi media. It is not special enough to warrant a separate article. NXcrypto Message 13:52, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep – This article is well-sourced and discusses an important issue regarding disinformation targeting Bangladesh. It contains relevant and reliable sources, ensuring accuracy and neutrality. There is no misleading information in this article.

The topic passes WP:GNG, WP:V and WP:RS.

RAIHAN ⚡ Got something to say? 16:09, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The main concern here is not about having reliable sources, we have reliable sources for Anti-Pakistani disinformation by India Media too as per mentioned above by the nominator and other users. Godi Media is not only targeting Bangladesh, it creates fake information on every worldwide trending topic. Also the disinformation only started after the July Revolution, prior to that I haven't seen Indian media creating any disinformation on Bangladesh. The essential portion of this article can be easily added within 2024 Bangladesh anti-Hindu violence#Disinformation and July Revolution (Bangladesh)#Disinformation in India. Imwin567 (talk) 16:22, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sanket Goel

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

Article about a non-notable professor that does not meet WP:GNG. Sources are self published and passing mentions. Bakhtar40 (talk) 09:13, 27 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Academics and educators, Education, India, and Uttar Pradesh. Bakhtar40 (talk) 09:13, 27 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. The subject is a dean at at major university in India (BITS Pilani) , which qualifies him for #C6. As for the IEEE Sensors Council's Distinguished Lecturer Program, the process is very selective and I believe qualifies for #C3. Further the subject has also co-authored many books on MEMS and Microfluidics which are used are coursebooks at many institutions. The subject is a Senior Member of IEEE and is an Editor of many IEEE journals. https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/author/37085761553 Shashy 922 (talk) 14:27, 27 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A dean definitely does not quality for #C6, which only applies to a person who has held the highest-level elected or appointed administrative post at a major academic institution. Only the Vice Chancellor of BITS Pilani would qualify under #C6, not one of the at least 13 deans. Being an IEEE Senior Member also does not confer notability (see the clear consensus at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bin Xie (researcher) from a few weeks ago). And only editors-in-chief of major journals automatically satisfy WP:NPROF, whereas this subject seems to only have held editorial board and associate editor positions. The Distinguished Lecturer Program appears to be a temporary, part-time guest speaker program, and while it seems to have a selection process of some kind, I do not think it is anywhere near an equivalent achievement to the distinguished professor appointment that is required to satisfy #C5. MCE89 (talk) 14:58, 27 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Under #C6, the case that a dean does not qualify is predicated on an overly narrow and rigid interpretation of WP:NPROF that ignores the real influence and decision-making authority that deans possess at prestigious universities. Although the Vice Chancellor is the highest ranking administrative official at BITS Pilani, the assertion that only this post fits under #C6 ignores how academic leadership really operates. Deans at a research-intensive university are not only administrative leaders; they also significantly influence research projects, supervise faculty hiring, guarantee funding, and create academic policies. Precedents in Wikipedia itself also support this—academics like G. "Anand" Anandalingam and Archana Chatterjee, both deans at prominent universities, have been regarded as notable despite not meeting your unfair rigorous interpretation. Furthermore, despite not meeting WP:NROF to this degree of scrutiny, other Wikipedia entries including those on Tanka Bahadur Subba and K. P. S. Mahalwar—who are only visiting professors—have been judged notable. Linda Aldoory, Theodosios Alexander , Rangapriya (Priya) Kannan are some other articles which fall far below the standard notability guideline and yet have been approved by the Wikipedia community, and the subject's notability far exceeds them. These are some articles that I found within a mere 5-minute surf. Given the time I'm sure that there will be far more articles on academicians on Wikipedia that fall below your interpretation of WP:NPROF.

Also, while fellowships at the IETE and IEI may not be at the level of an IEEE fellow, they are respected honors within the Indian engineering community. Further, only a small number of researchers from around the world in the very specific field of sensor technology are chosen for the distinguished lecturer program by the IEEE sensors council, which in itself is a leading organization in sensor technology. The program can be considered for #C2.

The subject also is a part of 3 different startups which impact industries related to biomedical devices. The impact of these startups can be clearly seen through the third-party reliable sources provided in the article.

Finally, one of the most objective indicators of scholarly influence, the subject's h and i10 indexes, place him well above the standard threshold of significant academic impact. To put this into perspective, his h-index of 37 (as of March 2025) and i10-index of 154 (as of March 2025) [9] higher by significant margins than that of John Jumper, the recent Nobel Prize winner in Chemistry who has an h-index of 29 and an i-index of 40 (as of March 2025). Both indexes are widely accepted measures in the research community for measuring a researcher's impact in their domain.

The extremely high and inconsistently applied standard being suggested here is not in line with established precedent on Wikipedia. Goel meets multiple criteria under WP:NPROF, including scholarly impact (#C1), prestigious academic recognition (#C2), professional honors (#C3), academic leadership (#C6), and industrial impact (#C8). Given that Wikipedia has recognized academics with far fewer citations, fewer sources, fewer honors, and lower levels of professional influence, there is no reasonable justification for claiming that Goel is not notable. The interpretation being applied here is far stricter than what has been used in past discussions of academic notability, and excluding Goel would establish an unrealistically high bar that is inconsistent with Wikipedia’s approach to evaluating notable academics. Shashy 922 (talk) 12:40, 3 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment being a Dean is specifically excluded from being enough for nitability. Ldm1954 (talk) 22:28, 4 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. I'm not seeing a pass of any of the WP:NPROF criteria. His citations are decent but don't strike me as quite enough for #C1, and I don't think participating in the Fulbright Visiting Scholar Program counts for much towards notability. Fellowships of the IETE and IEI don't appear to be the kind of selective elected memberships that would qualify for #C3, and I don't think his participation in the IEEE Sensors Council’s Distinguished Lecturer Program is at all equivalent to a "distinguished professor appointment" for the purposes of #C5. So I think it's probably WP:TOOSOON for a pass on any of the WP:NPROF criteria, and I didn't see anything else that could give much of a claim to notability. MCE89 (talk) 12:26, 27 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep. It is not the strongest case. As already mentioned above, it is NPROF that applies here, and no major WP:BEFORE was done. Dean does not count. His h-factor at 37 is OK, but his highest cited paper is 824 on a different topic (and I am not certain it is the same person) and the others are at most 100. The Fellowships do count somewhat, and without them I would have voted a weak delete. I have seen far weaker cases being defended and passing AfD. Hopefully this will not descend further into contentious statements; please stay calm! Ldm1954 (talk) 22:43, 4 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. I agree that while the subject may not be the most notable academician like a Nobel Prize winner, he is far more qualified than many previous articles published on different subjects in the same category. Instead of deleting the article, I feel as per WP:BEFORE (C), the community should try and improve the article since it has outdated information with sources from 2023. When I did research about him now there were many more sources and information. Shashy 922 (talk) 12:13, 5 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I don't really think these fellowships can be counted towards WP:NPROF#C3 though? If you look at the information on the IETE and IEI websites, only "Distinguished Fellows" and "Honorary Fellows" of the IETE and "Honorary Life Fellows" of the IEI are selective elected positions of the type described in C3. To become a Fellow of either organisation you just need to submit an application showing that you meet the age and education requirements and have held a "position of high responsibility" (just look at the examples they provide for what would qualify as a position of high responsibility), and then pay a fee. Neither strikes me as making this person a fellow of a major scholarly society which reserves fellow status as a highly selective honor. MCE89 (talk) 12:28, 5 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
While the subject's fellowships might not strike you as qualifying for #C3, there are other articles on Wikipedia with far less notable subjects. Further, there are other criteria in WP:NPROF that the subject qualifies for, as I described in my reply above. Shashy 922 (talk) 06:31, 6 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
WP:Otherstuff might apply to this argument. Augmented Seventh (talk) 19:06, 7 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
While it might seem that I'm pushing forward the "if that then why not this" argument, my aim over here is to bring attention to the fact that editors at Wikipedia have considered other academicians far less notable and qualified than the subject valid. Shashy 922 (talk) 06:33, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
That is WP:OSE and especially so when your sole focus here has been promoting Goel to the extent I had to remove your access to edit the page. Please be ware of WP:BLUDGEON Star Mississippi 14:10, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep based on his h factor and cited papers. Codonified (talk) 21:01, 5 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Keep or delete?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 01:37, 7 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Leaning move to draft at this time, without objection to restoration to mainspace if the subject becomes unequivocally better cited through publication, or is otherwise reported on. BD2412 T 21:33, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 04:05, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Usage data

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

Article has had no sources for years, I can’t find any reliable secondary sources for it myself. And it seems to duplicate the scope of an existing article, Traffic analysis. I fail to see how “analyzing web usage data” is different from web traffic analysis which the other article already covers.

Edit: Looking through the edit history, it seems there used to be a single source for the article (removed for an unexplained reason) “Stokes, R.(2009) eMarketing: The Essential Guide to Online Marketing, Second Edition, Quirk eMarketing (Pty) Ltd, pp 86” Not sure if a single reference is enough to warrant an article though.

(And I’m not sure if that citation is even a reliable source, or even talks about “usage data”. Can someone check that?) ApexParagon (talk) 03:35, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That book is available on-line. Page 89 supports nothing of the sort. However, this began as a straight copy of page 272. Unsurprisingly, 2010 is when the third edition of the book came out and this is not the only page where Dikshin23 (talk · contribs) just copied parts of the book into Wikipedia. Special:Permalink/403319339 is page 365. We shouldn't waste more time on this than the article creator expended in copying it out of a marketing book under a useless title. Delete. Uncle G (talk) 04:38, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:41, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Traffic analysis is primarily about military intelligence and computer security. Web analytics is more relevant. Also this was copied from a book (https://www.scribd.com/document/204162689/Rob-Stokes-eMarketing-the-Essential-Guide-to-Online-Marketing-Quirk-eMarketing-2008, page 86, paragraphs in Wikipedia not in the same order as in the book) and attribution was provided, but the licence is CC BY-NC-ND, which is not compatible with Wikipedia. I would suggest redirecting to web analytics, but most mentions of "usage data" in Wikipedia are about energy, water or public transport. Peter James (talk) 11:56, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as WP:COPYVIO. Chiswick Chap (talk) 14:06, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Delete per WP:COPYVIO and G11. Mast303 (talk) 15:33, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hakkari Expedition 1916

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

The article relies on a single primary source, and its tone is unbalanced. For a long time, no additional sources were added, and it is difficult to find references for such a minor battle. Although the Assyrians retreated during this battle, it is still considered a victory because the source comes from a book written by one of the Assyrian leaders who participated in the war. However, the part stating that the Assyrians retreated has been removed. Here is the old version of the article [1]. Sikorki (talk) 03:08, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. Sikorki (talk) 03:08, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Iraq, and Turkey. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:44, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nevada Lynx

AfDs for this article:

Articles for deletion/Nevada Lynx

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

Fails WP:NSPORTS, this team did almost nothing before folding, not to mention all the sources about the team, which were brief of the team, have pretty much faded. ロドリゲス恭子 (talk) 01:17, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2025 March 1. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 01:34, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Automated comment: This AfD cannot be processed correctly because of an issue with the header. Please make sure the header has only 1 article, and doesn't have any HTML encoded characters.—^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 01:34, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, American football, and Nevada. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:16, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment If sourcing isn't found, merge to 2012 American Indoor Football season. ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 05:31, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. doesn't have enough proper sources to establish notability. Darkm777 (talk) 02:55, 4 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:52, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to American Indoor Football#Former teams per nom. Fails GMG due to lack of SIGCOV. Frank Anchor 14:42, 12 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting as we have two different Redirect/Merge Proposed target articles.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:43, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Al Anood Al Obaidly

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

I don't think this person is notable enough. I couldn't find enough reliable sources to prove its notability فيصل (talk) 01:22, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Artists, and United Arab Emirates. فيصل (talk) 01:22, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:18, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment There seems to be a lot of coverage already in the article. I will check through it and add more info from it to the article. RebeccaGreen (talk) 15:07, 7 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:51, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per WP:HEY based on the work by RebeccaGreen. Good job so far! Bearian (talk) 09:38, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The subject fails WP:ARTIST. She has not been a substantial part of a significant exhibition, or won significant critical attention, or been represented within the permanent collections of any notable galleries or museums. The sources are not the reliable sourcing needed. Much of the coverage is local and within that, many sources are announcements of exhibitions, including student exhibitions. Several sources are "pay to play", membership required for listing, etc. Quantity does not equal quality. WP:TOOSOON. --WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 01:33, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:41, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

All Nations Party of British Columbia

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

Article topic fails WP:ORG. The party is defunct and achieved insignificant results in the one election it fielded candidates in (0.21% of the popular vote, less than 7% in ridings it contested).

The article was previously PRODed in 2020 but deproded by Spinningspark with the explanation: "This is more than the usual joke/personal soapbox minor party. It needs a more thorough discussion before deleting, and some evidence of WP:BEFORE". I looked through Google (general web search), Google Books, Google Scholar, and my university databases (local to BC) for reliable sources and found no in-depth coverage. The only content about the party that has survived on the web is non-in-depth public records from the provincial government (i.e. date registered, deregistered, etc.).

I found this article by a local Indigenous publisher, but the coverage does not include a claim of notability. The coverage is quite routine and is a basic breakdown of the party's ambitions. Yue🌙 02:05, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and Politics. Yue🌙 02:05, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:44, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Westphalia Township, Shelby County, Iowa

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

Westphalia Township, Shelby County, Iowa does not even meet WP:GNG Oona Wikiwalker (talk) 01:35, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This has White 1915, pp. 114–115 in one county history (reaching back to when it was known as Sumner Township) and Dunbar 1889, p. 238 in the other, both specifically on the township, as well as other information dotted throughout those. Then there are things like the Iowa Secretary of State publishing population and housing statistics for Iowa broken down by township. Uncle G (talk) 05:04, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Secretary of State information on statistics isn't in-depth discussion of the townships and doesn't make them notable, and clicking those links brings me back to this page. The link text doesn't even give enough information for a person to try to track them down to see the coverage. Why not add them to the pages as sources, so the sources can justify the pages' existence? That would cost about the same amount of effort as having posted here but the benefit would be greater.. Oona Wikiwalker (talk) 08:46, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Iowa. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:45, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Union Township, Shelby County, Iowa

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

Union Township, Shelby County, Iowa does not even meet WP:GNG Oona Wikiwalker (talk) 01:30, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This has White 1915, p. 218 in one county history and Dunbar 1889, p. 238 in the other, both specifically on the township, as well as other information dotted throughout those. Then there are things like the Iowa Secretary of State publishing population and housing statistics for Iowa broken down by township. Uncle G (talk) 05:00, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Secretary of State information on statistics isn't in-depth discussion of the townships and doesn't make them notable, and clicking those links brings me back to this page. The link text doesn't even give enough information for a person to try to track them down to see the coverage. Why not add them to the pages as sources, so the sources can justify the pages' existence? That would cost about the same amount of effort as having posted here but the benefit would be greater.. Oona Wikiwalker (talk) 08:45, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Iowa. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:45, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Shelby Township, Shelby County, Iowa

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

Shelby Township, Shelby County, Iowa does not even meet WP:GNG Oona Wikiwalker (talk) 01:32, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This has White 1915, pp. 216–217 in one county history and Dunbar 1889, pp. 237–238 in the other, both specifically on the township, as well as other information dotted throughout those. Then there are things like the Iowa Secretary of State publishing population and housing statistics for Iowa broken down by township. Uncle G (talk) 04:55, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Secretary of State information on statistics isn't in-depth discussion of the townships and doesn't make them notable, and clicking those links brings me back to this page. The link text doesn't even give enough information for a person to try to track them down to see the coverage. Why not add them to the pages as sources, so the sources can justify the pages' existence? That would cost about the same amount of effort as having posted here but the benefit would be greater.. Oona Wikiwalker (talk) 08:45, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Iowa. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:46, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Polk Township, Shelby County, Iowa

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

Polk Township, Shelby County, Iowa does not even meet WP:GNG Oona Wikiwalker (talk) 01:28, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This has White 1915, p. 122 in one county history and Dunbar 1889, p. 237 in the other, both specifically on the township, as well as other information dotted throughout those. Then there are things like the Iowa Secretary of State publishing population and housing statistics for Iowa broken down by township. Uncle G (talk) 05:08, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Secretary of State information on statistics isn't in-depth discussion of the townships and doesn't make them notable, and clicking those links brings me back to this page. The link text doesn't even give enough information for a person to try to track them down to see the coverage. Why not add them to the pages as sources, so the sources can justify the pages' existence? That would cost about the same amount of effort as having posted here but the benefit would be greater.. Oona Wikiwalker (talk) 08:44, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Iowa. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:46, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Umm Aktham

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

I don't think this person is notable enough. I couldn't find enough reliable sources to prove its notability. فيصل (talk) 01:12, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Qatar. فيصل (talk) 01:12, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors and Women. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:20, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Of all nation-states, Qatar has the lowest proportion of women biographies: under 8%, according to humaniki. It feels like there's some WP:Systemic bias here, which was why I created the page. Dsp13 (talk) 11:42, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I have found and added several sources, which are overviews of Arab women writers and literature, tertiary sources rather than secondary. The content within them about this writer is short, but the fact that they include her, and the way they write about her writing, leads me to think that secondary sources exist. The last source currently in the article, at magazine.jouhina.com, is unfortunately a deadlink and not archived (as far as I have been able to find). From what I can see on the Wayback Machine of other articles in that magazine, it would have included critique of her writing, by the author of the article and others, and biographical detail, and would certainly count as SIGCOV. Perhaps a WP editor will have access to it offline. I have tried googling her Arabic name (I do not read or speak Arabic!), and there is one source the title of which translates as Writers from the Arabian Gulf, with the content described as "Arab authors; women Arab authors; Persian Gulf countries; biography." Even if I could read Arabic, only a snippet view is available on Google Books, but if anyone has access to أدباء وأديبات من الخليج العربي offline, it may also be useful. RebeccaGreen (talk) 13:09, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:48, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:40, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Lincoln Township, Shelby County, Iowa

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

Lincoln Township does not meet even WP:GNG Oona Wikiwalker (talk) 01:25, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This has White 1915, p. 218 in one county history and Dunbar 1889, p. 237 in the other, both specifically on the township, as well as other information dotted throughout those. Then there are things like the Iowa Secretary of State publishing population and housing statistics for Iowa broken down by township. Uncle G (talk) 05:14, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Secretary of State information on statistics isn't in-depth discussion of the townships and doesn't make them notable, and clicking those links brings me back to this page. The link text doesn't even give enough information for a person to try to track them down to see the coverage. Why not add them to the pages as sources, so the sources can justify the pages' existence? That would cost about the same amount of effort as having posted here but the benefit would be greater... Oona Wikiwalker (talk) 08:43, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Iowa. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:46, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Kim Yeong-gil

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

Fails WP:SPORTSCRIT and WP:NOLY. A search for sources did not yield anything. LibStar (talk) 01:30, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Olympics, Sport of athletics, and South Korea. LibStar (talk) 01:30, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, as usual there are lots of translation issues, but I'm finding coverage, for example: "京畿(경기)2연패 京釜(경부) 역전경주 조선일보 | 1987.11.24 기사(뉴스)" [京畿(Gyeonggi)2nd consecutive defeat 京釜(Gyeongbu) reverse race]. newslibrary.naver.com (in Korean). [The best player of this tournament was Kim Young-gil (Daegu). ◇Comprehensive record(Seoul~Busan 4882.8km(km))=1Gyeonggi 24h23min40sec2경North24h36min34sec3Seoul 24h48min39sec4Daegu24h53min51sec5 Jeonbuk 24h...] See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chae Hong-nak for an example of a similar AfD made recently. --Habst (talk) 23:45, 9 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per sources in Korean language. 109.38.153.179 (talk) 12:10, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Paolo Bediones per nom 120.29.77.53 (talk) 08:03, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Huh??? BeanieFan11 (talk) 16:33, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  also confused by this redirect vote. LibStar (talk) 22:54, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:35, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Abu Usamah

AfDs for this article:

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

Subject is not notable and there is no real possibility of an encyclopaedic entry for him. I can find no sustained coverage of the subject himself—media coverage consistently frames his views, not him, as the primary subject. Given WP:CRITICISM—and that this is a BLP—I believe this content should be removed from Eng Wikipedia. — ImaginesTigers (talk∙contribs) 22:12, 28 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. — ImaginesTigers (talk∙contribs) 22:12, 28 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Islam-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 23:17, 28 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: England and New Jersey. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:27, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep – The subject has received extensive media coverage, meeting Wikipedia's WP:GNG criteria. His influence in religious discourse, as well as the controversies surrounding his teachings, have been the focus of in-depth investigative journalism.

"Undercover Mosque". Channel 4. 15 January 2007. This documentary exposed Abu Usamah's inflammatory rhetoric, including advocating for the punishment of homosexuals and expressing extremist views against non-Muslims.

"Tolerance and Extremism". The Guardian. 4 February 2007. Abu Usamah's divisive ideology has been scrutinized by media, highlighting concerns over radicalization within communities.

"Abu Usamah at-Thahabi". Counter Extremism Project. The Counter Extremism Project has profiled Abu Usamah, detailing his history of hate speech, calls for violence, and controversial remarks about Western society.

"Why has the BBC removed its programme about the Islamists at City University?". The Jewish Chronicle. A detailed examination of Abu Usamah's homophobic statements and his role in the broader debate over Islamist extremism in the UK.

This extensive coverage from credible sources underscores the subject’s prominence and impact on public discourse. Given the depth of reporting, the article meets Wikipedia's notability standards. Rimesodom (talk) 05:43, 2 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Rimesodom: None of these are detailed, sustained coverage of the subject. As I said in the nomination, it is coverage of his views. — ImaginesTigers (talk∙contribs) 15:12, 2 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 01:01, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:31, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Pitchup.com

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

No evidence of any notability for this 2016 stub. Searches reveal advertising and social media sites only. Fails WP:GNG Velella ^{Velella Talk} 01:26, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Websites and England. Velella ^{Velella Talk} 01:26, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and Travel and tourism. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:47, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. This could've just been prodded honestly. There is absolutely no notability for this "campsite and holiday park booking website". MediaKyle (talk) 12:37, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Agreed that it fails WP:GNG. ScrabbleTiles (talk) 14:12, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Per nominator. No WP:SIGCOV on the subject. Jamiebuba (talk) 15:46, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Freedom Party of British Columbia

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

Absence of reliable, in-depth coverage of both the 2001–2009 party, which this article's scope was originally limited to, and the 2023–present party, details of which were added after Freedom Party of British Columbia (2023) was deleted following a discussion (thus an attempt to circumvent the deletion process). Both parties were insignificant in the provincial elections they contested in, garnering less than a thousandth of a percent of the popular vote and barely exceeding 1 percent of a riding's vote in their best results.

The sources cited for the 2023 iteration of the party focus on the anti-SOGI advocacy of the party leader as one part of the much wider anti-SOGI movement in Surrey, British Columbia. The party is not covered in-depth nor the focus. Yue🌙 23:51, 7 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and Politics. Yue🌙 23:51, 7 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:14, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete ~~or Draftify (ATD) only if COI issues are resolved.~~ The article really needs a "Do OVER". Everything in the "Election results" section was deleted as a BLP violation. Concerns: The article was previously deleted. Although created by Kevintoronto, 28.3% of the content was edited by Amrit.Birring. There seems to be an obvious conflict of interest. Draft:Freedom Party of British Columbia 2023 has been submitted to WP:AFC, which will likely suffer the same issues as it has been declined publication several times. NOTE: The subject does have some notability. A minority party can create a conundrum in those political circles. The party and apparent COI editor did show up with candidates and results in Surrey North, Surrey-Newton, and likely more. The party has a platform and, as of March 2025, was listed among "Registered Political Parties". For inquiring minds. -- Otr500 (talk) 08:56, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

I removed "draftify". The sources: I could not find significant and independent reliable sources, that at least is "mainly" about the "party that was". My comments above accidentally crossed up the defunct party with the 2023 party. While a defunct corporation can be temporarily "revived" (under certain conditions), no sources show that a defunct political party can be revived. The party, which will inevitably involve names of living persons, requires better sources for compliance.

Current sources:

1)- Magher, Jennifer is a non-English source that is about Counter-protesters for LGBTQ+ rights and opposition protesters demanding the removal of policies that integrate sexual orientation and gender identity into B.C. schools.
2)- Thayarapan, Arrthy is more about "Opponents of sexual orientation and gender-identity policies bring Surrey school board meeting to halt"
3)- [a] more about clashes, [b] "Petition filed to recall Surrey MLA Rachna Singh", [c] "Protesters clash in Surrey over SOGI in B.C. schools"
4)- Bower, Angela, "Protesters clash in Surrey over SOGI in B.C. schools"
5)- Burns, Anna, "Saturday’s anti-SOGI protest in Surrey was a missed opportunity to educate, says Surrey teacher" more protests and a missed opportunity.

The creating editor might have missed that this is a political piece. This, in my opinion, places it in the middle of What Wikipedia is Not. "NOT" a place for promotion, advocacy, place to right great wrongs, a place to advance political causes, a newspaper, and certainly not a political battleground. Such articles must be written neutrally. While a political pundit could attempt to argue away some of these, it only takes one to justify removal.-- Otr500 (talk) 16:10, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Otr500: I didn't even catch the possible COI edits. Seems to me like the article for the 2023–present party was deleted after a discussion (as noted above) and the article's creator (possibly the leader himself), just moved some of the content to this nomination's article, which was originally just about the 2001–2009 party. As you pointed out though, most of the existing sources are about the political protests relevant to (but not focused on) the leader of the 2023–present party. Remove that and all the COI edits, and you're left with nothing of significance for either iteration of the party name. Yue🌙 22:03, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I reverted two inappropriate closes by an IP editor. Aydo h8^[contribs] 02:53, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Aydoh8, Thank you. You are right about nothing being left if all the problematic sources and edits were deleted. I dig pretty deep, trying to prove that an article has merit to remain. My laptop was getting old and would bog down after sometimes opening three browsers and around 40 to 60 tabs, so I purchased a new PC. I removed the ATD not just because of the COI (an issue and the user has had previous notification), but I agree there appears to be some side-stepping. I didn't dig into any COI timelines. Some people don't know. If someone has been advised and made edits, it is usually caught. There is a Username policy and an organization leader, not even counting if they are an SPA, might end up with someone curious looking at the "User creation log" unnumbered (Bulleted) #4. Whew! Since I am not an Admin, I will bail out of this before I get a migraine. Again, thanks. -- Otr500 (talk) 05:32, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 00:58, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Jeffrey Gitomer

AfDs for this article:

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

I am not sure if he is notable. Most of sources seem to be either primary or only tangentially related to him. I am unsure whether he meets WP:CREATIVE; points 3 and 4 are relevant. I am not sure if the attention he got was critical and whether his work has been covered in enough periodical articles. (I see [10], but not much more.) Even if The Little Red Book of Selling had made him notable, he would seem to be a bit too BLP1E-ish, as the rest of the coverage is more-or-less trivial or primary. Janhrach (talk) 15:15, 28 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Business, United States of America, and Florida. Janhrach (talk) 15:15, 28 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Ineligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:45, 7 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - I see plenty of good sources. I remember the incident that lead to his being banned from the airline, so BLP1E doesn't apply. There are issues with the article, but they can be resolved through ordinary editing. Bearian (talk) 13:51, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Bearian: Do you think he meets points 3 or 4 of WP:CREATIVE? I did not express that well, but WP:CREATIVE was intended to be the main point of my nom. I am willing to withdraw this nom if there is a convincing argument that he does. Janhrach (talk) 11:16, 9 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I think that he meets factor #3 as having written several related books. Bearian (talk) 11:55, 9 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, but it also says that:

In addition, such work must have been the primary subject of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews, or of an independent and notable work (for example, a book, film, or television series, but usually not a single episode of a television series);

I don't see multiple independent periodical articles or reviews, but I haven't really done a thorough search. Like I have written, I have found [11], but the other articles I have found were blogs (or similar), not articles from periodicals. Janhrach (talk) 12:36, 9 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment (may return with !vote) This is a typical promotional article for someone whose main skill is promoting. He writes those books a friend of mine calls "business porn": which promise great wealth not unlike that of megachurch leaders. I removed some irrelevant promotional statements, but there are undoubtedly more. I am not sure that the speaking awards (e.g. "Certified Speaking Professional (CSP) Award") are of value because the organization appears to be a speakers' bureau. Two of the book awards (IPPY) are indeed awards but he is among other winners, in one case one of 66. A fairly snide article in Time magazine was used for one "cute" quote but ignored 4 paragraphs of negative review of his work. (I fixed some of that.) The reviews by Jack Covert seem to be in a personal blog, albeit a pretty ambitious one. His books have sold many copies, and I can see some presence in library collections. I confess that I have little regard for this category of output, along with all of the self-help books. I just thought I should be honest about my prejudice. Lamona (talk) 00:31, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 00:57, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Qaseem Haider

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

Unreliable sources, WP:NEWSORGINDIA, and mentions. Anything that does seem promising is either non-bylined, a paid press piece, or unreliable source. CNMall41 (talk) 17:56, 28 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, Bands and musicians, and India. CNMall41 (talk) 17:56, 28 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, Bihar, and Uttar Pradesh. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:29, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep : The subject meets WP:GNG. Sources like Hindustan Times (1), DNA India (2), The Times of India (3), Jagran (4), and Firstpost (5) provide significant coverage, establishing notability. These are reliable, independent sources that address concerns about unreliable sources and paid content. The articles offer more than mere mentions, detailing the subject's career and contributions MH-wiki2025 (talk) 03:02, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

DNA India is the only one I see that talks about the subject and does not rely on information provided about the subject (non-independent). --CNMall41 (talk) 23:03, 7 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. The subject meets Wikipedia:GNG. IdanST (talk) 18:22, 7 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 00:58, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 00:55, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete or cleanup: Per nom, no byline, the article and some citations contains wording that promotes the subject in a subjective. Chippla360 (talk) 11:55, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Progress, Oregon

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

Completely uncited article. No sources could be found, and only one is cited (a weather website), thus no notability. Typically, neighborhoods are not notable on their own. Propose merging into other city pages. thetechie@enwiki (she/they | talk) 19:20, 28 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Oregon. Shellwood (talk) 19:58, 28 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
What you want is McArthur & McArthur 1992, p. 692, Progress harvnb error: no target: CITEREFMcArthurMcArthur1992 (help), which traces post-office → crossroads → part of suburbia. Uncle G (talk) 20:00, 28 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- McArthur, Lewis Ankeny; McArthur, Lewis L. (1992). McArthur, Lewis L. (ed.). Oregon Geographic Names (6th ed.). Oregon Historical Society Press. ISBN 9780875952369.
- I'm unclear what you mean. What is your vote? Or are you commenting? thetechie@enwiki (she/they | talk) 03:40, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  - Uncle G never(?) leaves bolded words, which is fine, but I too thought "traces post-office → crossroads → part of suburbia" was a bit cryptic. I guess it means "traces the settlement's history from having a post-office, being located at a crossroads, to becoming a part of suburbia due to adjacent growth". In that sense, neighbourhoods might be notable as former "independent" settlements. Anyway, if anyone has the source, the source would speak for itself. Geschichte (talk) 07:58, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    - Exactly. Now that it's been cited its up to people to evaluate it; and indeed see whether, now that the obfuscating "unincorporated community" and the vague recentist "neighborhood" from the article are out of the way, there's more to be found. The next step after a placenames book is usually a search of the county histories. I still have over 50 county histories in Indiana awaiting my attention, thanks to Mangoe. ☺ Uncle G (talk) 08:51, 2 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  - This is a discussion, not a vote. Uncle G (talk) 08:51, 2 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete neighbourhoods have to pass GNG, this one does not, and a BEFORE search was not helpful. However if there's proof this was an independent settlement at some point (or better sourcing) I'd be willing to reconsider. SportingFlyer T·C 06:02, 3 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
comment I've updated the article with better coordinates from GNIS, which places it at the intersection NNE of the originally supplied spot. On the one hand it does show as a knot of buildings in older topos, but this is in the context of it being surrounded a thicket of similar named spots. Mangoe (talk) 15:21, 3 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 00:59, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. The nominator mentions a possible Merge but doesn't identify what articles this one should be Merged into.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:46, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Operational intelligence

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

18-year-old article that reads far more like an essay, is devoid of sources or further reading materials, has no substantial improvements over the years. Effectively unsalvageable even though the term itself is notable and important. DemocracyDeprivationDisorder (talk) 17:25, 28 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Business and Computing. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:41, 28 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - This doesn't look bad enough to justify WP:TNT to me. The subject trivially meets WP:GNG, as the nomination notes. Per WP:ATD, the existing content can be stubbified in favor of deletion if improvements are not forthcoming. Suriname0 (talk) 17:47, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Unless someone comes forward to try to rescue this mess, I'm afraid that it's better to start over. Ping me if you're making a real effort. Bearian (talk) 14:32, 2 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep AfD is not a substitute for cleanup. Nomination indicates the term is notable. HighKing⁺⁺ 14:16, 4 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 00:57, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - While I agree with the sentiment that the term itself is notable and important, the problem is the term's broadness. It's not a specific thing, like a book. It's possible to write prose describing this term in different ways. The definition may be substantively different from person to person, industry to industry. I'd argue that due to the lack of any sourcing to support it's current definition that the current state of the article is functionally WP:OR. In this way, while WP:N dictates that The absence of sources or citations in a Wikipedia article <...> does not indicate that a subject is not notable... editors are strongly encouraged to... consider the possibility that sources may still exist, I think the encyclopedia is benefited more with deletion and allowing an interested editor start from scratch (and some sources). I toyed with the idea of trying to find a source to swap to a Keep vote to stubify, but I admit I don't believe I have the research skill for such a non-specific term. —Sirdog (talk) 06:35, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: No consensus here.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:38, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Winter Bird (song)

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

NN song: I changed this to a redirect to the album from which it comes, but was reverted by article creator. Seeking a wider consensus. TheLongTone (talk) 14:50, 28 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep -

Please note that the failure to meet any of these criteria does not mean an article must be deleted; conversely, meeting any of these criteria does not mean that an article must be kept. - via WP:NMG.

The approach should be to improve documents by allowing other users to contribute and add more information on it, per WP:BEFORE, rather than simply removing it just because it does not adhere to regulations. Camilasdandelions (talk!) 14:58, 28 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 15:26, 28 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. No inherent problems aside from being a relatively obscure single. Agreed with Camila. DemocracyDeprivationDisorder (talk) 07:58, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

comment As mentioned, an obscure single. It would be absurd to maintau=in than every song ever recorded merits an article; in most case (including this one) what there is to say about it can readily be includee in the articler on the album on which it appears. The actual content of this article is almost zero.TheLongTone (talk) 14:39, 5 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to All My Demons Greeting Me as a Friend. Per WP:NSONG, "If the only coverage of a song [or single] occurs in the context of reviews of the album on which it appears, that material should be contained in the album article and an independent article about the song should not be created." I can find a little about this song outside reviews of the album, but not enough to constitute SIGCOV. This book in Ukrainian [12] has a para which translates in part as "AURORA in the visual composition “Winter Bird”. Her “tears are forever frozen”, because she is in a state of permafrost and does not know how to cry and who can give her this sensuality to cry. However, intuitively she ..." (per Google Translate - I do not read Ukrainian). This book in German [13] about drones has a sentence about the video accompanying the single, in which drones build a cocoon around the singer. Of the sources in the article, 1 has a full sentence about this song on the album, and 2 others have half a sentence about it, also in reviews of the full length album. So not enough for its own article, as far as I can see. RebeccaGreen (talk) 11:39, 7 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 00:57, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to the album page All My Demons Greeting Me as a Friend. The sources talking about the song are doing so in the context of the album. No sources are dedicated to the song, discussing it in depth. Binksternet (talk) 16:30, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, opinion divided between Keep and Merge/Redirect
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:33, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge/redirect. Sources only write about the song in context, and not in depth; https://www.coupdemainmagazine.com/aurora/11949 is specifically about the song and video but is only one sentence. Peter James (talk) 17:02, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Gervais (psychologist)

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

Previously deleted and salted: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michael Gervais * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 00:38, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors and Psychology. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 00:45, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep — Michael Gervais meets WP:GNG and WP:BIO as a notable psychologist specializing in high-performance mindset training. He has been featured in major publications like The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, and Forbes, demonstrating significant coverage in reliable sources. As co-founder of Compete to Create and a consultant for elite athletes and organizations, his work has had a substantial impact. His podcast, Finding Mastery, further establishes his influence in the field. Given the depth of coverage and professional significance, he meets Wikipedia’s notability standards. Mercurydry (talk) 01:58, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:35, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment and note to closer: the title Michael Gervais is WP:SALTED to admin only. So in case, this was kept, kindly move the page (for non-admins, kindly make a request on WP:RM/T) to the said title as this current title includes unnessesary disambiguator. Thanks and no opinion on the AFD. Warm Regards, Miminity (Talk?) (me contribs) 13:54, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:30, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: The WSJ story contains sigcov, along with this Outside story. There's also some coverage in this half-interview. I note that the article was originally deleted due to copyvio, not notability, then deleted several times because it was blatant promotion. Helpful Raccoon (talk) 01:22, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Article creator has been CU-blocked. Helpful Raccoon (talk) 03:21, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]