Википедия: Сортировка удаления WikiProject / Люди

AfD : Сегодня , вчера

Скрипты Delsort

Это сборник обсуждений по удалению статей, связанных с людьми . Это один из многих списков удаления, координируемых сортировкой по удалению WikiProject . Кто угодно может помочь вести список на этой странице.

Примечание. В большинстве случаев существует другая, более конкретная категория, чем эта.

Если возможно, используйте вместо этого одно из следующих :

Примечание: Следующие страницы включены через на сортировочной страницу Биография Удаления

Примечание: Следующие страницы не включены через на сортировочной страницу Биография Удаления

Википедия: WikiProject Deletion sorting / Группы и музыканты
Википедия: WikiProject Deletion sorting / Fashion (например, модели)
Википедия: Сортировка удаления WikiProject / Вымышленные элементы
Википедия: Сортировка удаления WikiProject / Женщины
Википедия: WikiProject Pornography / Удаление для актеров и актрис фильмов для взрослых

Добавление нового обсуждения АдГ

Добавление AfD на эту страницу не добавляет его на главную страницу WP: AFD . Точно так же удаление AfD с этой страницы не удаляет его с главной страницы WP: AFD . Если вы хотите назначить статью для удаления, пройдите процедуру на этой странице, прежде чем добавлять ее на эту страницу. Чтобы добавить обсуждение на эту страницу, выполните следующие действия:

Отредактируйте эту страницу и добавьте {{Wikipedia: Статьи для удаления / PageName}} в начало списка. Замените «PageName» соответствующим названием статьи, то есть тем, что есть в существующем обсуждении AFD. Также укажите заголовок статьи в сводке редактирования , особенно полезно добавить ссылку на статью в сводке редактирования. Когда вы сохраните страницу, обсуждение появится автоматически.
Вы также должны пометить AfD, добавив к нему {{subst: delsort | People | ~~~~}} , что проинформирует редакторов о том, что он указан здесь. Вы можете разместить этот тег над или под заявлением о выдвижении или в конце обсуждения.

Обратите внимание, что есть несколько скриптов и инструментов, которые могут упростить эту задачу.

Удаление закрытого обсуждения АдГ

Закрытые обсуждения АдГ автоматически удаляются ботом .

Другие типы обсуждений

Вы также можете добавлять и удалять ссылки на другие обсуждения ( prod , CfD , TfD и т. Д.), Связанные с людьми.

Дальнейшая информация

Для получения дополнительной информации см. Политику удаления Википедии и WP: AfD для получения общей информации о статьях для удаления, включая список удаленных статей, отсортированный по дням номинации.

Архивные обсуждения (начиная с сентября 2007 г.) можно найти по адресу:

WikiProject Deletion sorting / Люди / архив
WikiProject Deletion sorting / Люди / архив 2
WikiProject Deletion sorting / Люди / архив 3

Очистить кеш страницы

смотреть

Люди [ править ]

Айя мэй [ править ]

( Найти источники: Google ( книги · новости · газеты · ученый · бесплатные изображения · WP рефы ) · FENS · JSTOR · NYT · TWL )

Не удовлетворяет никаким критериям WP: SINGER . Статья выглядит очень рекламной. Ссылки, найденные в WP: BEFORE , предлагают WP: TOOSOON . Чирота ( разговор ) 02:22, 7 мая 2021 (UTC)

Примечание: это обсуждение было включено в список обсуждений удаления, связанных с людьми . Чирота ( разговор ) 02:22, 7 мая 2021 (UTC)

Примечание: это обсуждение было включено в список обсуждений удаления, связанных с музыкой . Чирота ( разговор ) 02:22, 7 мая 2021 (UTC)

Примечание. Это обсуждение было включено в список обсуждений удаления, связанных с развлечениями . Чирота ( разговор ) 02:22, 7 мая 2021 (UTC)

Примечание: это обсуждение было включено в список обсуждений удаления, связанных с Австралией . Чирота ( разговор ) 02:22, 7 мая 2021 (UTC)

Джон Пол Хосе [ править ]

( Найти источники: Google ( книги · новости · газеты · ученый · бесплатные изображения · WP рефы ) · FENS · JSTOR · NYT · TWL )

Незаметное лицо. Fails WP: GNG Sonofstar ( обсуждение ) 19:21, 6 мая 2021 г. (UTC)

Примечание: это обсуждение было включено в список обсуждений удаления, связанных с людьми . Sonofstar ( разговор ) 19:21, 6 мая 2021 (UTC)

Примечание: это обсуждение было включено в список обсуждений удаления, связанных с Индией . Shellwood ( разговор ) 19:33, 6 мая 2021 (UTC)

Примечание. Это обсуждение было включено в список обсуждений удаления, связанных с окружающей средой . Spiderone ^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:33, 6 мая 2021 (UTC)

Хридит Судев [ править ]

( Найти источники: Google ( книги · новости · газеты · ученый · бесплатные изображения · WP рефы ) · FENS · JSTOR · NYT · TWL )

Большая часть этого саморекламы BLP не цитировалась с 2012 года (некоторые более ранние версии были еще хуже). Если удалить не процитированный материал и пухлость, этого будет недостаточно для поддержки известности.

Среди необоснованных претензий:

эта награда International Energy Globe Awards, Австрия (о которой у нас нет статьи), присужденная организации, одним из основателей которой он был, является «Нобелевской премией природы»
что он «один из самых молодых лауреатов» этой награды
что его самоизданный сборник стихов является «одним из самых продаваемых сборников стихов на английском языке на Ближнем Востоке».
Что он выпускник перечисленных школ.

Материал цитируется только из корыстных местных псевдо-интервью, где он говорит то, что ему небезразлично.

что его школьный экологический клуб превратился в крупную организацию
что его работа была вдохновлена домашними практиками его бабушки
что «он много работал над прекращением гендерного насилия и расовой дискриминации, основываясь на своем личном опыте».
что его занятия - «поэт, эколог, оратор». Похоже, что его настоящий статус - студент колледжа (подумал, что это тоже нецитированное утверждение)

среди рыхлых или крайне незначительных материалов и обширных названий, даже если некоторые из них и должны быть правдой:

что он происходит из королевской семьи
что «его часто называли« самым зеленым мальчиком в мире »за его заботу об окружающей среде»
его самоописание в разделе личной жизни и активности
что его последнее предприятие может «помочь решить мировую водную проблему в регионах с нехваткой воды».
что у него «научная карьера» в области медицинских исследований
что его единственная опубликованная статья по очистке воды составляет научную карьеру в области управления водными ресурсами.

что у него карьера писателя-фантаст, когда он еще не опубликовал ни одной работы в этой области

что он «участвовал в митингах Black Lives Matter в Денвере и Авроре и вскоре после этого выразил солидарность с Джорджем Флойдом, Элайджей Макклейном, Трейвоном Мартином и Бреонной Тейлор в видео в Instagram [10]».
что он «назвал поэта и лауреата Нобелевской премии Пабло Неруду, писательницу и активистку Джессику Митфорд и писательницу из Instagram Линдси О'Коннел, оказавших на него литературное влияние.
что «Судев несколько раз идентифицировал исследователя PennState Стефани Батлер Велегол, на чьей работе основаны его исследования, а также его наибольшее вдохновение в науке вместе с российским химиком Дмитрием Менделеевым и индийским ученым-ракетчиком APJ Абдулом Каламом» DGG ( разговор ) 16:42, 6 мая 2021 (UTC)

Примечание: это обсуждение было включено в список обсуждений удаления, связанных с людьми . Shellwood ( разговор ) 16:45, 6 мая 2021 (UTC)

Примечание: это обсуждение было включено в список обсуждений удаления, связанных с Индией . Shellwood ( разговор ) 16:45, 6 мая 2021 (UTC)

Примечание: это обсуждение было включено в список обсуждений удаления, связанных с наукой . КАПИТАН РАДЖУ^(T) 17:40, 6 мая 2021 (UTC)

Примечание: это обсуждение было включено в список обсуждений удаления, связанных с авторами . КАПИТАН РАДЖУ^(T) 17:40, 6 мая 2021 (UTC)

Примечание. Это обсуждение было включено в список обсуждений удаления, связанных с окружающей средой . КАПИТАН РАДЖУ^(T) 17:41, 6 мая 2021 (UTC)

Примечание: это обсуждение было включено в список обсуждений удаления, связанных с поэзией . КАПИТАН РАДЖУ^(T) 17:41, 6 мая 2021 (UTC)

Малкит Рауни [ править ]

( Найти источники: Google ( книги · новости · газеты · ученый · бесплатные изображения · WP рефы ) · FENS · JSTOR · NYT · TWL )

Статья была ранее PROD и удалена, так как не удовлетворяла WP: NACTOR . Он снялся в нескольких пенджабских фильмах, но ни один из них не выглядит примечательным. Три процитированных источника - это профили и WP: BEFORE поиск не дает ничего примечательного. Не удается WP: GNG и WP: NACTOR . Умакант Бхалерао ( разговорное ) 14:56, 6 мая 2021 (UTC)

Примечание: это обсуждение было включено в список обсуждений удаления, связанных с людьми . Умакант Бхалерао ( разговорное ) 14:58, 6 мая 2021 (UTC)

Примечание: это обсуждение было включено в список обсуждений удаления, связанных с актерами и режиссерами . Умакант Бхалерао ( разговорное ) 14:58, 6 мая 2021 (UTC)

Примечание: это обсуждение было включено в список обсуждений удаления, связанных с Индией . Умакант Бхалерао ( разговорное ) 14:58, 6 мая 2021 (UTC)

Хейзел Бойер [ править ]

( Найти источники: Google ( книги · новости · газеты · ученый · бесплатные изображения · WP рефы ) · FENS · JSTOR · NYT · TWL )

Чистое тщеславие / рекламная статья о не очень заметном местном политике и бизнесмене, по сути, просто говорит о том, что у них была карьера. Источников немного и они бедны, особенно. как только вы обесцените Wiki, и поиск ничего лучше не найдет. Не работает WP: GNG / WP: ANYBIO / WP: NPOL . (Что касается последнего пункта, для тех, кто не знаком со структурами местного правительства Великобритании, окружной совет и близко не подходит к субнациональному выборному органу, упомянутому в NPOL.) - DoubleGrazing ( разговор ) 08:07, 6 мая 2021 г. (UTC )

Примечание: это обсуждение было включено в список обсуждений удаления, связанных с людьми . DoubleGrazing ( разговор ) 08:07, 6 мая 2021 (UTC)

Примечание: это обсуждение было включено в список обсуждений удаления, связанных с Деловыми людьми . DoubleGrazing ( разговор ) 08:07, 6 мая 2021 (UTC)

Примечание. Это обсуждение было включено в список обсуждений удаления, связанных с политиками . DoubleGrazing ( разговор ) 08:07, 6 мая 2021 (UTC)

Примечание: это обсуждение было включено в список обсуждений удаления, связанных с женщинами . DoubleGrazing ( разговор ) 08:07, 6 мая 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:07, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

Ysabelle Cuevas[edit]

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

Very weak coverage. "Popular" = notable. Fails WP:GNG. —hueman1 (talk • contributions) 04:55, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

Примечание: это обсуждение было включено в список обсуждений удаления, связанных с людьми . - hueman1 ( обсуждение • вклады ) 04:55, 6 мая 2021 г. (UTC)

Примечание: это обсуждение было включено в список обсуждений удаления, связанных с группами и музыкантами . - hueman1 ( обсуждение • вклады ) 04:55, 6 мая 2021 г. (UTC)

Примечание: это обсуждение было включено в список обсуждений удаления, связанных с женщинами . - hueman1 ( обсуждение • вклады ) 04:55, 6 мая 2021 г. (UTC)

Keep Часто упоминается в источниках Gnews, в основном филиппинских. Oaktree b ( разговорное ) 16:46, 6 мая 2021 (UTC)

Yungeen Ace [ править ]

( Найти источники: Google ( книги · новости · газеты · ученый · бесплатные изображения · WP рефы ) · FENS · JSTOR · NYT · TWL )

Оспаривается Prod оригинальным автором. Исполнитель не соответствует критериям включения. Они терпят неудачу в WP: NSINGER и WP: GNG . Воспроизведение на YouTube не является признаком Известности. Макматтер ^{( разговор )} / _{( вклад )} 03:29, 6 мая 2021 г. (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. McMatter ^(talk)/_(contrib) 03:29, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. McMatter ^(talk)/_(contrib) 03:29, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. McMatter ^(talk)/_(contrib) 03:29, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

Удалить - здесь и здесь есть некоторые упоминания , но нет никаких указаний на награды, песни в чартах или существенное освещение, чтобы поддержать известность. Magnolia677 ( разговорное ) 09:45, 6 мая 2021 (UTC)

Примечание: это обсуждение было включено в список обсуждений удаления, связанных с Индией . Spiderone ^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:30, 6 мая 2021 г. (UTC)

Прадип Рай [ править ]

( Найти источники: Google ( книги · новости · газеты · ученый · бесплатные изображения · WP рефы ) · FENS · JSTOR · NYT · TWL )

Неудача WP: GNG и WP: POLITICIAN . nearevil 665 05:51, 5 мая 2021 г. (UTC)

Примечание: это обсуждение было включено в список обсуждений удаления, связанных с Индией . nearevil 665 05:51, 5 мая 2021 г. (UTC)

Примечание: это обсуждение было включено в список обсуждений удаления, связанных с людьми . Spiderone ^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:04, 5 мая 2021 г. (UTC)

Примечание: это обсуждение было включено в список обсуждений удаления, связанных с законом . Spiderone ^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:04, 5 мая 2021 г. (UTC)

Мохаммад Реза Хомами Ния [ править ]

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

crosswiki spam, it was nominated for deletion on Persian. Hasan (talk) 15:53, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Hasan (talk) 15:53, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 16:10, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Iran-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 16:10, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

Сохраняйте иранских поп-исполнителей - Бахесаб ( разговор ) 11:53, 6 мая 2021 г. (UTC)
@ Bahesab. Вам нужно будет привести аргументы, почему вы считаете, что тема достаточно известна согласно Википедии: Известность (музыка) - «быть иранским поп-певцом», боюсь, явно недостаточно. Коммандер Уотерфорд ( разговор ) 16:14, 6 мая 2021 (UTC)
@ CommanderWaterford Я добавил ресурсы в статью, и статья была ранее удалена, но после исправления тега она была удалена. Я не знаю, зачем снова удалять этот тег, - Бахесаб ( выступление ) 16:16, 6 мая 2021 г. (UTC).

Праздничная мечта Гила Мантеры [ править ]

( Найти источники: Google ( книги · новости · газеты · ученый · бесплатные изображения · WP рефы ) · FENS · JSTOR · NYT · TWL )

Он был номинирован в 2015 году (теперь заблокированный носок), но не получил обсуждения, поэтому был закрыт как Keep. Известный звукозаписывающий лейбл даже не перечисляет эту группу на своем веб-сайте. Они провалили WP: NBAND и ничего не производили с 2009 года. HickoryOughtShirt? 4 ( обсуждение ) 00:03, 5 мая 2021 года (UTC)

Примечание: это обсуждение было включено в список обсуждений удаления, связанных с людьми . HickoryOughtShirt? 4 ( разговор ) 00:03, 5 мая 2021 (UTC)

Примечание: это обсуждение было включено в список обсуждений удаления, связанных с группами и музыкантами . HickoryOughtShirt? 4 ( разговор ) 00:03, 5 мая 2021 (UTC)

Примечание: это обсуждение было включено в список обсуждений удаления, связанных с музыкой . HickoryOughtShirt? 4 ( разговор ) 00:03, 5 мая 2021 (UTC)

Примечание: это обсуждение было включено в список обсуждений удаления, связанных с Огайо . HickoryOughtShirt? 4 ( разговор ) 00:03, 5 мая 2021 (UTC)

Комментарий. Большинство статей из RS (в данном случае газет, а их на удивление много) написаны примерно так: «они чокнутые, они едут в город, проверь их» - типа аннотаций, большинство ( но не все) всего несколько предложений. Тем не менее, это дает кумулятивный эффект, и есть несколько более длинных вещей в Spin , Lansing State Journal , The Post и Courier ... И они действительно были на Fat Possum, чего это стоит. В интересах полного раскрытия информации я засмеялся, когда увидел "ссылку" на answers.com. Caro7200 ( разговорное ) 00:35, 5 мая 2021 (UTC)

Уильям Дэниел Чилкотт [ править ]

( Найти источники: Google ( книги · новости · газеты · ученый · бесплатные изображения · WP рефы ) · FENS · JSTOR · NYT · TWL )

Никаких признаков известности. Sɱαɾƚ ყ Pαɳƚʂ22 ( Ⓣⓐⓛⓚ ) 19:48, 4 мая 2021 г. (UTC)

Чилкотт - бывший казначей Общества судей и юристов Верхней Канады. Казначей Юридического общества - важная должность. Пользователь: martinscriminalcode, 4 мая 2021 г. ^[1]
- @ Martinscriminalcode : Я понимаю это, однако сам офис не придает личности врожденной известности. С наилучшими пожеланиями - Sɱαɾƚ ყ Pαɳƚʂ22 ( Ⓣⓐⓛⓚ ) 21:01, 4 мая 2021 г. (UTC)

Примечание: это обсуждение было включено в список обсуждений удаления, связанных с людьми . Spiderone ^{(Talk to Spider)} 20:18, 4 мая 2021 (UTC)

Примечание: это обсуждение было включено в список обсуждений удаления, связанных с Онтарио . Spiderone ^{(Talk to Spider)} 20:19, 4 мая 2021 (UTC)

Примечание: это обсуждение было включено в список обсуждений удаления, связанных с законом . Spiderone ^{(Talk to Spider)} 20:19, 4 мая 2021 (UTC)

Комментарий не означает, что позиция Высшего суда Онтарио встречает WP: NJUDGE ? --- Возможно ( разговор ) 21:17, 4 мая 2021 г. (UTC)
- Возможно нет. В нем 300 судей, и он охватывает только одну провинцию. Сравните, например, самый низкий ранг английских судей, которые обычно считаются квалифицированными, - судей Высокого суда, которых во всей стране всего 105! - Necrothesp ( разговор ) 12:57, 6 мая 2021 (UTC)

Рекомендации

^ https://lso.ca/about-lso/osgoode-hall-and-ontario-legal-heritage/collections-and-research/treasurers-and-benchers-of-the-law-society-of-uppe/list -оф-закон-общества-казначеев

Ve Gascon [ править ]

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

Although the criteria for WP:NHOCKEY are more vague for women than they are for men, she still fails. Particularly, point #6 specifies that only playing on a senior national team for the World Championship qualifies for notability, and she only played on a U18 team. Give her a few years. Kncny11 ^(shoot) 18:00, 4 May 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Kncny11 ^(shoot) 18:00, 4 May 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Kncny11 ^(shoot) 18:00, 4 May 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Kncny11 ^(shoot) 18:00, 4 May 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ice hockey-related deletion discussions. Kncny11 ^(shoot) 18:00, 4 May 2021 (UTC)

Keep per WP:BASIC. Regardless of the weirdly specific and arbitrary per-sport guidelines, she has been the subject of significant coverage in reliable sources. These are well past the WP:ROUTINE coverage one might expect for the average athlete. Examples already in the article include Hockey News Canada ("The Masked History Maker") and Le Journal de Quebec ("Une gardienne en renfort"). These are both profiles of the subject, demonstrating that she passes WP:BASIC and WP:GNG. pburka (talk) 18:56, 4 May 2021 (UTC)
Слабая крепость: Как оказалось, рекомендации NHOCKEY - это результат мучительных лет, в течение которых Wikilawyers обыгрывали исходные правила здравого смысла; Я полагаю, что пбурка жалуется на то, что существуют соревнования на «чемпионат мира» с участием 14-летних и крайних стран, которые никогда, никогда не приблизятся к настоящему чемпионату мира. Это не более «произвольно», чем любое другое указание или критерий известности в Википедии. Кроме того, анализ pburka неверен : из двух источников, процитированных выше, hockeycanada.ca является зонтичной организацией, управляющей молодежной национальной сборной, за которую играл испытуемый (и, таким образом, является основным источником), а другой - это интервью с субъект, и, следовательно, не может использоваться для подтверждения его известности.
Это , как говорится, есть есть два надежные, независимые, сторонние источников в статье обстоятельного освещения ( La Presse и Radio-Canada), обрез скрипеть. Ravenswing 02:35, 5 мая 2021 г. (UTC)

Вы правы насчет хоккея Канады. Я ошибочно определил источник как The Hockey News , независимый источник новостей, но ошибся. pburka ( разговорное ) 03:33, 5 мая 2021 (UTC)

Держите - хотя я согласен со "слабой" категоризацией Ravenswing . Когда я просматривал статью, я чувствовал, что освещения едва хватило, чтобы пройти WP: GNG , не заходя в NHOCKEY SNG. Онель 5969 ^{TT мне} 02:57, 5 мая 2021 (UTC)

Барклай Фокс [ править ]

( Найти источники: Google ( книги · новости · газеты · ученый · бесплатные изображения · WP рефы ) · FENS · JSTOR · NYT · TWL )

Википедия - это не сайт генеалогии . Не удается WP: GNG , большинство источников - семейные журналы Фокса или генеалогические ссылки. Penale52 ( разговорное ) 13:07, 4 мая 2021 (UTC)

Примечание: это обсуждение было включено в список обсуждений удаления, связанных с людьми . Spiderone ^{(Talk to Spider)} 13:13, 4 мая 2021 (UTC)

Примечание: это обсуждение было включено в список обсуждений удаления, связанных с Англией . Spiderone ^{(Talk to Spider)} 13:13, 4 мая 2021 (UTC)

Хуссейн Ахмед Хан [ править ]

( Найти источники: Google ( книги · новости · газеты · ученый · бесплатные изображения · WP рефы ) · FENS · JSTOR · NYT · TWL )

Незаметный телеактер, не сыгравший главной роли в известных сериалах. Не удалось пройти WP: NACTOR & WP: GNG Sonofstar ( обсуждение ) 10:14, 4 мая 2021 г. (UTC)

Примечание: это обсуждение было включено в список обсуждений удаления, связанных с людьми . Sonofstar ( разговорное ) 10:14, 4 мая 2021 (UTC)

Примечание: это обсуждение было включено в список обсуждений удаления, связанных с актерами и режиссерами . Sonofstar ( разговорное ) 10:14, 4 мая 2021 (UTC)

Примечание: это обсуждение было включено в список обсуждений удаления, связанных с Индией . Shellwood ( разговор ) 10:20, 4 мая 2021 (UTC)

Удалить : Нет значительного освещения в надежных источниках, не работает как WP: NACTOR, так и WP: GNG . Умакант Бхалерао ( выступление ) 10:30, 4 мая 2021 г. (UTC)
Удалить : То, что этот человек не играл ведущей роли, довольно свидетельствует о недостаточном освещении этого человека. Не удается WP: BIO . Ураган на Яве, 06:24, 5 мая 2021 г. (UTC)
Удалить : сыграли только второстепенные роли. Известность темы в настоящее время очень слабая, чтобы пройти WP: GNG . Kaspadoo ( разговор ) 13:11, 6 мая 2021 (UTC)

Эмси Джозеф [ править ]

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

Незаметный режиссер выпустил всего один фильм. Не удалось пройти WP: FILMMAKER & WP: GNG Sonofstar ( разговор ) 09:49, 4 мая 2021 года (UTC)

Примечание: это обсуждение было включено в список обсуждений удаления, связанных с людьми . Sonofstar ( разговор ) 09:49, 4 мая 2021 (UTC)

Примечание: это обсуждение было включено в список обсуждений удаления, связанных с актерами и режиссерами . Sonofstar ( разговор ) 09:49, 4 мая 2021 (UTC)

Примечание: это обсуждение было включено в список обсуждений удаления, связанных с Индией . Sonofstar ( разговор ) 09:49, 4 мая 2021 (UTC)

Перенаправить на Викрути . Он получил некоторое освещение в СМИ. Однако основной темой источников новостей является его фильм, и по этой причине он будет перенаправлен на Викрути. Кроме того, он снял два фильма «Викрути» и «Эннитту Авасанам». [1] . Я не думаю, что удаление предпочтительнее "перенаправления". Кроме того, киноактер был удостоен премии штата Керала за лучшую мужскую роль в диктаторском фильме Джозефа. TheBirdsShedTears ( обсуждение ) 11:17, 4 мая 2021 года (UTC)
Appeal - I want to know the reason why this article is nominated for deletion. I'm one who follows Malayalam film industry and cinemas. So, I decided to create a Wikipedia article for him. His film won a state award and many more achievements. After all, He is a director, Screenwriter. You can check the reference links in the article published in top Indian portals. Please do the needful. It's not about how many projects he completed, it's about how popular and how much achieved director he is.

Joseph Fox the elder[edit]

( Найти источники: Google ( книги · новости · газеты · ученый · бесплатные изображения · WP рефы ) · FENS · JSTOR · NYT · TWL )

Википедия - это не сайт генеалогии . Эта статья представляет собой полный беспорядок, в основном состоящий из семьи Джозефа Фокса-старшего, завещания и дневниковой записи. Penale52 ( разговорное ) 01:32, 4 мая 2021 (UTC)

Примечание: это обсуждение было включено в список обсуждений удаления, связанных с людьми . Kpg jhp jm 05:06, 4 мая 2021 г. (UTC)

Примечание: это обсуждение было включено в список обсуждений удаления, связанных с Англией . Kpg jhp jm 05:06, 4 мая 2021 г. (UTC)

Удалить - Абсолютно ноль надежных источников, демонстрирующих известность, и большая часть этой статьи в любом случае не имеет источника. - Инди Жук ( разговор ) 07:08, 4 мая 2021 года (UTC)
Удалить : эта статья - беспорядок. Пора его взорвать . Sungodtemple с TCG вентилятор !! 1 ! 11 !! ( разговор ) 12:09, 4 мая 2021 (UTC)

Семья Фокс из Фалмута [ править ]

( Найти источники: Google ( книги · новости · газеты · ученый · бесплатные изображения · WP рефы ) · FENS · JSTOR · NYT · TWL )

Wikipedia is not a genealogy site. Fails WP:GNG, most of the sources are Fox family journals or genealogy-type references. Penale52 (talk) 01:27, 4 May 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. SunDawn (talk) 03:31, 4 May 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. SunDawn (talk) 03:31, 4 May 2021 (UTC)

Примечание: это обсуждение было включено в список обсуждений удаления, связанных с Англией . SunDawn ( разговорное ) 03:31, 4 мая 2021 (UTC)

Удалить по ном. Источники явно не поддерживают идею о том, что эта семья примечательна. Скорее, кто-то собрал кучу информации как из надежных, так и из ненадежных источников о различных членах семьи и объединил их здесь как возможное нарушение СИНТЕРА. - Инди Жук ( разговор ) 07:07, 4 мая 2021 г. (UTC)

Грег Кнаусс [ править ]

( Найти источники: Google ( книги · новости · газеты · ученый · бесплатные изображения · WP рефы ) · FENS · JSTOR · NYT · TWL )

The subject has little to no notability. The article has 4 independent sources, and none of them talk about the subject in detail. As far as I can tell, the subject does not meet the criteria at WP:GNG or WP:BIO. Orcaguy Talk Mon œuvre 01:54, 4 May 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Orcaguy Talk Mon œuvre 01:54, 4 May 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. Orcaguy Talk Mon œuvre 01:54, 4 May 2021 (UTC)

Примечание: это обсуждение было включено в список обсуждений удаления, связанных с Интернетом . Обсуждение Orcaguy, понедельник, 01:54, 4 мая 2021 г. (UTC)

Примечание: это обсуждение было включено в список обсуждений удаления, связанных с Калифорнией . Spiderone ^{(Talk to Spider)} 09:07, 4 мая 2021 г. (UTC)

Сохраняйте / улучшайте - как и во многих статьях о веб-людях, может быть трудно найти хорошие детали, потому что они работают за кадром. Я попробую это сделать и посмотрю, смогу ли я найти источники, которые поддержали бы известность, а если нет, я буду рад изменить свое предложение. Джессамин ( разговорное ) 00:53, 5 мая 2021 (UTC)

Gregory Gourdet[edit]

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

appeared in Top Chef several times, but never won. I don't think that qalifies for an article; generally we have only the winners. I am listing the other non-winners who have articles but show no obvious notability; I'm listing them separately, because checking might show that some of them might have notability otherwise.

Article is highly promotional, even for a field like this where promotional articles are not uncommon. DGG ( talk ) 18:30, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. DGG ( talk ) 18:30, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

DGG, I really wish you'd do research before nominating pages for deletion. Clear keep here. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 19:56, 3 May 2021 (UTC)
Быстрое сохранение для WP: GNG благодаря значительному освещению в Portland Business Journal, Portland Monthly и Street Roots, которые являются сильными публикациями в соответствии со стандартами WP: RS . Я согласен с Another Believer, об этом следовало поднять на странице обсуждения или предшествовать WP: PROD , любой подход избавил бы читателей и редакторов Википедии от хлопот, связанных с обсуждением удаления. Однако было бы хорошо, если бы кто-нибудь мог улучшить ведущий раздел, чтобы лучше отразить значимость предмета. - Пит Форсайт ( разговор ) 20:05, 3 мая 2021 года (UTC)
- (Prod был бы неуместным. Если бы никто не заметил продукт в течение недели, статья была бы удалена без промедления .) Pburka ( разговор ) 22:13, 3 мая 2021 (UTC)

Примечание: это обсуждение было включено в список обсуждений удаления, связанных с Нью-Йорком . Spiderone ^{(Talk to Spider)} 20:33, 3 мая 2021 (UTC)

Примечание: это обсуждение было включено в список обсуждений удаления, связанных с людьми . Spiderone ^{(Talk to Spider)} 20:33, 3 мая 2021 (UTC)

Keep I revised the lead a bit and added one review of his new book. DGG, could you point out whatever seems promotional to you in this article? I'm just not seeing it. Chers! Grand'mere Eugene (talk) 20:47, 3 May 2021 (UTC)
Keep per WP:BASIC. Reliable sources have covered his cooking career and his cookbook. pburka (talk) 22:17, 3 May 2021 (UTC)
Комментарий . 1 / местные отзывы о местном ресторане не показывают примечательности - чтобы быть заметным, он должен быть известен за пределами своей зоны обслуживания 2 / рекламные элементы включают в себя: раздел личной жизни, способ, которым на самом деле написана система анонимных атак хвала ему и использование PR-ссылок - журнал Portland Busines, как и все аналогичные издания, всего лишь место для публикации пресс-релиза, Colorado Tourism Office - еще менее надежный источник. . 3 / для книги, один обзор PW, в котором просто перечислено несколько блюд, является тривиальным обзором - и тем не менее, ссылка NYT не присутствовала, когда я ее перечисляла, и может считаться заметной, если другой упомянутый здесь материал будет удален. DGG ( разговор ) 00:28, 4 мая 2021 (UTC)
- DGG , Прежде чем выдвигать статью для удаления, вы должны просмотреть доступные источники, а не только источники, которые в настоящее время используются в статье. Вы правы, местные отзывы о местном ресторане могут не демонстрировать примечательности, но простой поиск в Google показывает, что есть подходящие источники. --- Другой верующий _{( Обсуждение )} 00:46, 4 мая 2021 г. (UTC)
- @ DGG : Кое-что из того, что вы говорите, требует суждения, и я оставлю это в стороне. Но когда вы заявляете, что «Портлендский деловой журнал, как и все подобные издания, всего лишь место для публикации пресс-релизов», вы абсолютно неправы. Конечно, есть местные деловые издания, которые соответствуют этому описанию, но PBJ не таковой. Просто щелкните по статье - автор статьи - «Штатный репортер». Нет ничего постыдного в том, чтобы не знать об этом, но я настоятельно призываю вас - особенно как человека, пользующегося большим заслуженным уважением здесь, - быть более осторожными, делая резкие заявления о публикациях, с которыми вы на самом деле не знакомы. - Пит Форсайт ( разговор ) 08:04, 4 мая 2021 года (UTC)

Я читал именно эту статью. Это рекламный рассказ или интервью такого типа, которые запрещены nCORP, где человеку разрешено говорить все, что он захочет - в данном случае »Гурде поделился своей историей сегодня на завтраке, устроенном CODA, давним поставщиком лечения от наркозависимости в Портленде, который даровал Гурде с премией Advocacy Award 2016 ... "Так что, по сути, это перепечатка его речи. Глядя дальше, на журнал в целом, я должен был сказать, что журнал состоит в основном из PR и анонсов, с некоторыми новостями на общие деловые темы; его освещение конкретных руководителей и проблем кажется пиаром. Я, конечно, могу ошибаться с незнакомыми источниками, но не в этот раз. Когда я это сделаю, я признаю свою ошибку. DGG ( разговор ) 09:22, 4 мая 2021 (UTC)

My language above may have been stronger than necessary, which I regret; but I stand by my point. I've documented some specifics about the Business Journal here, feel free to look there if you want evidence for what I say here.

"merely a placeto publish press release" -- this is a statement about the advertising department of the Business Journal, so it's irrelevant to our consideration of the editorial product. Yes, the publication will distribute press releases, clearly marked as paid content, for a fee. Other news publications that have an advertising department include the New York Times and the Wall Street Journal.
Your personal opinion of this specific article has no particular bearing on the case for notability. Discussion of how much value to assign to a specific source would make sense on the article's talk page, but it's not very relevant here. The relevant consideration for an AfD is whether a publication, overall, matches up against the WP:RS standard, which the Business Journal certainly does. With reference to WP:NCORP, which you bring up, the Business Journal certainly does not have a "vested interest" in Gourdet. The simple fact that their editorial department (notих рекламный отдел) посчитали, что их читателям будет интересен профиль этого человека, которого достаточно для оценки его известности. (Как бы то ни было, многие публикации публикуют как высокоинтенсивные журналистские расследования, так и профильные статьи, которые не содержат много критических комментариев. Однако это не удар по фактической точности статьи или ее суждению о значимости ее основного предмета. .)
В качестве примечания, я хочу еще раз заявить, что существует множество деловых публикаций, которые активно вредят своей репутации, действуя как фабрики контента, которые принимают пользовательские материалы без особого или какого-либо редакторского надзора и / или публикуют пресс-релизы таким образом, чтобы не отличает их от редакционного материала. Я понимаю, почему редакторы Википедии часто скептически относятся к деловым публикациям. Но вопреки тому, что было сказано выше, данная публикация не делает ни того, ни другого. - Пит Форсайт ( разговор ) 00:01, 7 мая 2021 г. (UTC)

Держи . Хотя участие в Top Chef не дает автоматически известности, Gourdet получил достаточно информации в надежных источниках, чтобы соответствовать GNG. Помимо источников Oregonian , New York Times и Publishers Weekly, которые уже цитировались в статье, я нашел значительное освещение в журналах Food & Wine ( [2] ) и The Haitian Times ( [3] ). - Лорд Болингброк ( разговор ) 02:22, 4 мая 2021 года (UTC)

Анджело Соса [ править ]

( Найти источники: Google ( книги · новости · газеты · ученый · бесплатные изображения · WP рефы ) · FENS · JSTOR · NYT · TWL )

несколько раз появлялся в Top Chef, но ни разу не выиграл. Я не думаю, что это подходит для статьи; в основном у нас только победители. Я перечисляю других не победителей, у которых есть статьи, но нет явной известности; Я перечисляю их отдельно, потому что проверка может показать, что в противном случае некоторые из них могли бы иметь известность. DGG ( разговор ) 18:32, 3 мая 2021 (UTC)

Примечание: это обсуждение было включено в список обсуждений удаления, связанных с едой и напитками . DGG ( разговор ) 18:32, 3 мая 2021 (UTC)

Примечание: это обсуждение было включено в список обсуждений удаления, связанных с людьми . Spiderone ^{(Talk to Spider)} 20:32, 3 мая 2021 (UTC)

Keep : известный шеф-повар, который участвовал в конкурсах лучших шеф-поваров со значительным охватом в надежных источниках, чтобы пройти WP: GNG . Kaspadoo ( разговор ) 12:48, 6 мая 2021 (UTC)

Брайан Вольтаджо [ править ]

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

appeared in Top Chef several times, but never won. I don't think that qalifies for an article; generally we have only the winners. I am listing the other non-winners who have articles but show no obvious notability; I'm listing them separately, because checking might show that some of them might have notability otherwise. DGG ( talk ) 18:32, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. DGG ( talk ) 18:32, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 20:32, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Maryland-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 20:32, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

Держи . Все эти номинации на звание лучшего шеф-повара остаются неизменными, так как по любой из них можно легко найти значительный охват. Журнал Baltimore Magazine , например, опубликовал длинный профиль Вольтаджо. pburka ( разговор ) 03:35, 4 мая 2021 (UTC)

Стефан Рихтер [ править ]

( Найти источники: Google ( книги · новости · газеты · ученый · бесплатные изображения · WP рефы ) · FENS · JSTOR · NYT · TWL )

несколько раз появлялся в Top Chef, но ни разу не выиграл. Я не думаю, что это подходит для статьи; в основном у нас только победители. Я перечисляю других не победителей, у которых есть статьи, но нет явной известности; Я перечисляю их отдельно, потому что проверка может показать, что в противном случае некоторые из них могли бы иметь известность. DGG ( разговор ) 18:38, 3 мая 2021 (UTC)

Примечание: это обсуждение было включено в список обсуждений удаления, связанных с едой и напитками . DGG ( разговор ) 18:38, 3 мая 2021 (UTC)

Примечание: это обсуждение было включено в список обсуждений удаления, связанных с людьми . Spiderone ^{(Talk to Spider)} 20:31, 3 мая 2021 (UTC)

Примечание: это обсуждение было включено в список обсуждений удаления, связанных с Финляндией . Spiderone ^{(Talk to Spider)} 20:31, 3 мая 2021 (UTC)

Примечание: это обсуждение было включено в список обсуждений удаления, связанных с Калифорнией . Spiderone ^{(Talk to Spider)} 20:31, 3 мая 2021 (UTC)

Delete I agree, taking part in some talent show doesn't qualify for anything, nor is there much in how the rest of his career is described that suggests notability, either. The sources might just about meet WP:GNG criteria, but all the same, this reads to me like a 'famous for being famous' vanity piece that doesn't justify an encyclopaedia entry. --DoubleGrazing (talk) 18:11, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

Sam Talbot[edit]

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

несколько раз появлялся в Top Chef, но ни разу не выиграл. Я не думаю, что это подходит для статьи; в основном у нас только победители. Я перечисляю других не победителей, у которых есть статьи, но нет явной известности; Я перечисляю их отдельно, потому что проверка может показать, что в противном случае некоторые из них могли бы иметь известность. DGG ( разговор ) 18:39, 3 мая 2021 (UTC)

Примечание: это обсуждение было включено в список обсуждений удаления, связанных с едой и напитками . DGG ( разговор ) 18:39, 3 мая 2021 (UTC)

Примечание: это обсуждение было включено в список обсуждений удаления, связанных с людьми . Spiderone ^{(Talk to Spider)} 20:30, 3 мая 2021 г. (UTC)

Примечание: это обсуждение было включено в список обсуждений удаления, связанных с Северной Каролиной . Spiderone ^{(Talk to Spider)} 20:30, 3 мая 2021 г. (UTC)

Ивонн Савио [ править ]

( Найти источники: Google ( книги · новости · газеты · ученый · бесплатные изображения · WP рефы ) · FENS · JSTOR · NYT · TWL )

Неудача WP: GNG . Ссылки либо на первоисточники, либо на сайты блогов. nearevil 665 18:11, 3 мая 2021 г. (UTC)

Примечание: это обсуждение было включено в список обсуждений удаления, связанных с людьми . nearevil 665 18:11, 3 мая 2021 г. (UTC)

Примечание: это обсуждение было включено в список обсуждений удаления, связанных с Соединенными Штатами Америки . nearevil 665 18:11, 3 мая 2021 г. (UTC)

Сахил Султанпури [ править ]

( Найти источники: Google ( книги · новости · газеты · ученый · бесплатные изображения · WP рефы ) · FENS · JSTOR · NYT · TWL )

Не известный автор текстов. Первая ссылка - это интервью с испытуемым и не является независимым от него. Ссылки 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 даже не упоминают его. Не удается WP: GNG . Умакант Бхалерао ( разговорное ) 17:33, 3 мая 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Umakant Bhalerao (talk) 17:33, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Umakant Bhalerao (talk) 17:33, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Umakant Bhalerao (talk) 17:33, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

EDP445[edit]

( Найти источники: Google ( книги · новости · газеты · ученый · бесплатные изображения · WP рефы ) · FENS · JSTOR · NYT · TWL )

Был депродирован, помимо обвинений, которые должны были быть удалены в соответствии с BLPCRIME, нет никаких признаков достаточной известности в WP: BIO или WP: GNG, так что давайте искать консенсус CommanderWaterford ( разговор ) 17:06, 3 мая 2021 года (UTC)

Примечание: это обсуждение было включено в список обсуждений удаления, связанных с людьми . Коммандер Уотерфорд ( разговорное ) 17:06, 3 мая 2021 года (UTC)

Примечание: это обсуждение было включено в список обсуждений удаления, связанных с Интернетом . Spiderone ^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:14, 3 мая 2021 (UTC)

Удалить статью - это случай TOOSOON. Я согласен с коммандером Уотерфордом в том, что помимо обвинений в хищниках, на самом деле не так много примечательного, что вы можете написать о нем, поэтому у него никогда не было статьи в Википедии до обвинений. Кроме того, просто посмотрите на все другие проблемы, которые были в этой статье и были ранее. Вандализм BLP, нарушения BLPCRIME, использование возможно ненадежных источников. Статья серьезно просто не должна существовать до тех пор, пока его ситуация не станет больше. Может быть, тогда будет еще о чем написать. - 🌀 Locomotive207 - talk 🌀 (Ранее Kieran207 ) 20:24, 3 мая 2021 (UTC)
Keep. EDP445 passes WP:NOTABLE. He had thousands of YouTube subscribers, and millions of views. His jokes and videos were widely used on the Internet. Outside of his recent odious actions, he was a notable YouTube personality. However, this article will need Semi or Extended Protection to stop vandalism, whether fits. Modern Major General I quote the fights historical 22:04, 3 May 2021 (UTC)
- Views and subscribers are not a valid measure of notability per WikiProject Youtube consensus.--🌀Locomotive207-talk🌀 (Formerly Kieran207) 22:16, 3 May 2021 (UTC)
Удалить по локомотиву 207 . Похоже, что статья была создана 21 апреля 2021 года (через день после того, как ютубер Чет Гольдштейн загрузил теперь удаленное видео, в котором поднимались обвинения в сексуальных проступках ) пользователем, который в последующих редакциях включил обвинения в статью , что могло предполагают, что статья была создана в ответ на эти обвинения, нарушая дух WP: BLPCRIME . Не похоже, чтобы EatDatPussy445 широко освещался в СМИ помимо этих обвинений, поэтому статья, скорее всего, в любом случае не вырастет за пределы размера заглушки. - Kzkzb ( обсуждение ) 00:06, 4 мая 2021 года (UTC)
Удалить Его почти не видно. Может быть, когда-нибудь люди поймут, что быть мемом или предметом бурных споров внутри определенной субкультуры не означает, что вам нужна статья в Википедии. Предположительно человек ( разговор ) 04:40, 4 мая 2021 (UTC)
Удалить не удается WP: ENT, WP: PERP и WP: ANYBIO. Массовый провал по причинам известности. - S Перс 10:59, 4 мая 2021 (UTC)
Delete He was certainly a large content creator with a large audience, however he never received enough coverage by reliable sources to be notable by Wikipedia’s standards. He’s only been in the news because of the allegations, and even then the coverage has been limited. CAMERAwMUSTACHE (talk) 14:19, 4 May 2021 (UTC)

Folu Adeboye[edit]

( Найти источники: Google ( книги · новости · газеты · ученый · бесплатные изображения · WP рефы ) · FENS · JSTOR · NYT · TWL )

никакой заметной известности, кроме публикации некоторых религиозных трактатов; по сути нет независимых источников, не являющихся пр. Одна из группы похожих статей DGG ( обсуждение ) 10:11, 3 мая 2021 (UTC)

Удалить по ном. Мне нравится, как ее известность определяется как его жена. Нет. Лучший Александр Макнабб ( разговор ) 11:46, 3 мая 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Sun8908 _Talk 14:33, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Nigeria-related deletion discussions. Sun8908 _Talk 14:33, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:17, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:18, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

Delete — This is very much similar to this now deleted article which was correctly AFD’ed by DGG. Individuals aren’t notable due to their proximity to notable individuals they are notable because the satisfy our general notability criteria for inclusion or the relevant SNG. The subject of the article doesn’t seem to satisfy any/either. Celestina007 (talk) 00:31, 4 May 2021 (UTC)

Brewster Yale Beach[edit]

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

The sourcing here is clearly inadequate. I did a deep sourcer search. I was able to find a brief mention of his sourcing the earliest actions of the Associated Press in archival outlook, but I would not coniser that substantive. I also was able to find basically a church bulletin mentioning him becoming education director for the Episcopalian Diocese of Delaware. I also came across a mention of him in a geneology book that listed all the descandants of someone much earlier no matter how prominent or not promient they were. The claim of his uniquely deep understanding of Jung's work does not amount to notability and is seeminly sourced to a work by Beach himself. I just do not see any actual claim to notability here. John Pack Lambert (talk) 12:20, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. AllyD (talk) 14:28, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. AllyD (talk) 14:28, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Sun8908 _Talk 14:29, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

Delete. The main claim for notability is correcting an error in AP's founding date in 2005 (from 1848 to 1846). Beach was related to one of the founder of AP. This led AP to publish a short obit on Beach's death mentioning the relationship and error. I don't think the previous dating error of AP's founding deserves a mention on the Associated Press page. At most this would be a clarifying footnote there.--Eostrix (🦉 hoot hoot🦉) 14:50, 3 May 2021 (UTC)
delete with a short mention in Associated_Press#History. --hroest 17:20, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 20:26, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

Delete: An article which appears to be more appropriate to a family history site. That the subject retrieved an 1872 memo written by one Moses Sperry Beach describing the role of Moses Yale Beach in establishing AP does not confer biographical notability (WP:NOTINHERITED). Nor do the subject's roles in a Center for Jungian Studies and at Lithgow, New York#St. Peter's Episcopal church credibly indicate attained notability. AllyD (talk) 12:20, 4 May 2021 (UTC)

Mersheena Neenu[edit]

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

She appeared apparently only in a single notable production Konjam Konjam, not sure if in a lead role. The television appearances do not give impression that she passes WP:NACTOR. Chirota (talk) 02:03, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Chirota (talk) 02:03, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Chirota (talk) 02:03, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Entertainment-related deletion discussions. Chirota (talk) 02:03, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Chirota (talk) 02:03, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:30, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Kerala-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:30, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

Francis Alphonsus Jayarajah[edit]

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

Player fails WP:CRIN - has not played at a suitable level to meet the inclusion criteria and so is a non-notable cricketer who ultimately fails WP:GNG. Games played for the national team were minor matches, and being a president of a cricket club in Italy doesn't satisfy any administrator inclusions in CRIN, nor does being a qualified coach or umpire, unless these have some notable context to them. StickyWicket (talk) 17:12, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. StickyWicket (talk) 17:12, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. StickyWicket (talk) 17:12, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Cricket-related deletion discussions. StickyWicket (talk) 17:12, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

Weak keep Doesn't pass CRIN, but there does seem to be some coverage, for example this and this, although how reliable these sources are I'm not sure. He seems to have done a lot for sport in Italy so there may well be more in Italian sources or newspapers that I'm not seeing. Weak keep for me. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 17:46, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sri Lanka-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:55, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Italy-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:55, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

Keep Matches player with the National team so minor so fails WP:CRIN but passes WP:GNG as the first Captain of the Italian National team and founder of the game of Cricket in Italy. There are several italian newspaper articles on him and a few pubblished books have full chapters on him such as this or this
Comment. Cricket was first played in Italy during the Napoleonic Wars and many of the leading football clubs started life as cricket clubs, like AC Milan who started off as the Milan Football and Cricket Club at the end of the 19th century, so he definitely never founded the game in Italy. StickyWicket (talk) 19:02, 3 May 2021 (UTC)
Comment. Correct Cricket was played in the italian peninsula before the 18th century. But Jayarajah is the first the spread cricket with the Italians and not only for the expats. He is a key founder of Italian Cricket Board, which brought the recognition of Italian Cricket as the first affiliate nation ever (1984) and by law in Italy entrance to the Italian Olympic Committee (1995). Another book on with his contribution to Italians starting to play cricket and the creation of the Italian Cricket Board here User:Eelhardiniero (talk) 09:37, 4 May 2021 (UTC)

Massimo Brian Da Costa[edit]

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

Player fails WP:CRIN - has not played at a suitable level to meet the inclusion criteria and so is a non-notable cricketer who ultimately fails WP:GNG. StickyWicket (talk) 17:08, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. StickyWicket (talk) 17:08, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Cricket-related deletion discussions. StickyWicket (talk) 17:08, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Italy-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 17:27, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

Redirect to 1997 ICC Trophy squads#Italy Fails CRIN as he hasn't played in an ICC Trophy final, only the tournament. In terms of GNG again just match reports, and nothing like enough to pass GNG. Redirect a suitable WP:ATD although either the page will have to be moved to Massimo da Costa (which seems to be his common name) or the link changed on the page. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 17:43, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:55, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 00:04, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

Leandro Jayarajah[edit]

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

Player fails WP:CRIN - has not played at a suitable level to meet the inclusion criteria and so is a non-notable cricketer that ultimately fails WP:GNG. StickyWicket (talk) 17:05, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. StickyWicket (talk) 17:05, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Cricket-related deletion discussions. StickyWicket (talk) 17:05, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Italy-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 17:27, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

Delete Fails CRIN and I'm only seeing match reports from non-notable matches, nothing like enough to pass GNG. No suitable redirect as he hasn't played for any major teams. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 17:40, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:54, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

Keep - Played for national team while minor matches but has played for the Marylebone CC here, so has played for a major team and has newspaper articles on him in Italian here — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eelhardiniero (talk • contribs) 18:13, 3 May 2021 (UTC)
@Eelhardiniero: Please provide explicit links to sources that provide significant coverage; from a Google News search, I'm only seeing one trivial passing mention in Il Messaggero, and a press release type article for "Italian Cricket TV" (mentioning him as the CEO) on Daily Muslim. _wjemather^{please leave a message...} 13:37, 4 May 2021 (UTC)

Matty Healy[edit]

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

This page was deleted before, there is no indication that the subject is of note outside of the band. Karst (talk) 15:50, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Karst (talk) 15:50, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:46, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:47, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

Keep An article was redirected before; the editor who replaced the redirect with a stub[4] is an administrator. Most of the current article is about the band, but enough coverage can be found. The 2016 AFD was the correct decision at the time; there was not much participation at the 2020 AFD and no indication of an attempt to find sources, and the non-standard title and lack of sources in the article influenced the outcome. Peter James (talk) 09:16, 3 May 2021 (UTC)
Delete or redirect all possible derivations to The 1975 and make it stick once and for all. This needs to stop, as certain editors cannot accept the fact that Healy does not qualify for his own Wikipedia article, and keep creating new ones under different derivations of his name. See the previous AfDs, and the associated histories of reverted redirects. He had no independent notability as "Matthew Healy" nor as "Matthew Healy of The 1975", and that has not changed just because someone created yet another article calling him "Matty Healy". He has done nothing notable outside of The 1975, and this article (like its predecessors) repeats the band's history with a few sentences about his personal life. The previous voter said "enough coverage can be found" but provided no examples; they probably meant totally unreliable chatter from social media and gossip rags about his famous girlfriend. His old high school bands have only ever been mentioned in softball interviews and are even less notable. Get over it. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 14:13, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

Fairooj Maliha[edit]

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

Article deleted last year due to WP:UPE. Notability unclear as the reliability of the provided sources should probably be determined by a native speaker, but a quick Google Translate seems to show they are all coverage of the subject winning a musical reality show. If the sources are reliable this would still seem to be a case of WP:BLP1E. nearlyevil665 12:45, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. nearlyevil665 12:45, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bangladesh-related deletion discussions. nearlyevil665 12:45, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 12:51, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 12:51, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

Nithya Mammen Singer[edit]

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

No indication of notability. resources provided are not reliable and independent of the subject. fails WP:GNG, WP:NSINGER Randfiskin (talk) 11:34, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Randfiskin (talk) 11:34, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. Randfiskin (talk) 11:34, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Randfiskin (talk) 11:34, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 12:57, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Kerala-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:44, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:44, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

Delete - Note that "Singer" is not her surname, so the article is titled incorrectly. Anyway, she has some documented movie appearances but not enough significant and reliable coverage to qualify for a WP article. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 13:54, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

See comments below. It turns out that I voted to delete the previous article for this singer, and (unsurprisingly) this version suffers from the exact same problems. Recreating such an article with a different title is a common tactic for someone who is unaware of a previous deletion or refuses to accept it. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 12:51, 4 May 2021 (UTC)

weak keep - "weak" because I'm not totally clear how the notability criteria work for singers who have primarily worked in movies - she clearly has been responsible for the soundtracks of multiple notable films. Her song Alaare Neeyenile has been covered in The Hindu [5], Times of India [6] and [7] . Long interview with her, dubbing her "the voice of Malayalam" here. The Malayalam version of her name is നിത്യ മേനോൻ , but a google search for that name mostly gives coverage of Nithya Menen the film actress. Furius (talk) 13:31, 3 May 2021 (UTC)
Please see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nithya Mammen where User:MurielMary, User:VocalIndia, User:Usernamekiran, User:Pharaoh of the Wizards, and User:BJackJS voted delete 6 months ago.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 42.106.217.212 (talk • contribs) 14:31, 3 May 2021 (UTC)— 42.106.217.212 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
- Comment To help avoid an appearance of WP:CANVASS, also pinging the other participants in the prior AfD: doomsdayer520, Jehowahyereh. Beccaynr (talk) 14:51, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

Henry Holmes (Confederate soldier)[edit]

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

Fails WP:GNG. A sergeant who died in an escape attempt from a POW camp. Lettler^{hello • contribs} 00:13, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Lettler^{hello • contribs} 00:13, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. Lettler^{hello • contribs} 00:13, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

Delete: Non-notable soldier, fails WP:GNG. Also completely unsourced. Curbon7 (talk) 00:28, 2 May 2021 (UTC)
~~Delete~~ - turned up a few passing mentions in sources such as [8] and [9], but no significant coverage to be found. The statement in the article that he commanded part of the Confederate force at Picacho Pass conveniently fails to mention that said command appears to have encompassed 9 soldiers. Hog Farm _Talk 00:35, 2 May 2021 (UTC)
- Agree, a redirect would be appropriate here. His small detachment seems to have been the main Confederate force at Picacho Pass. Hog Farm _Talk 14:06, 3 May 2021 (UTC)
~~Delete~~. A reasonable search finds nothing substantial meeting WP:RS which directly details the subject. BusterD (talk) 03:34, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

Redirect. A good case has been made that redirect may be the better outcome (and redirects are cheap). Holmes is definitely verified per the AHS source available on Jstor, so he is perfectly good search term. BusterD (talk) 13:51, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Arizona-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 04:28, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

Delete lacks SIGCOV in multiple RS to meet WP:GNG. Mztourist (talk) 04:53, 2 May 2021 (UTC)
Redirect to Battle of Picacho Pass where he is mentioned (as commander in infobox and in the prose). I looked for sources to confirm that he was imprisioned in Yuma - but the Yuma Territorial Prison opened in 1876 and there is no Yuma National Cemetery, so that part appears to be made-up, otherwise this should be a Merge. MB 06:00, 2 May 2021 (UTC)
Redirect as above. Not notable per GNG. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 09:15, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

Infanta Alicia, Duchess of Calabria[edit]

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

The subject does not appear to be notable as an individual. She had little to no public role. She only got some coverage when she died, and that was routine. The entire article revolves around her place on the family tree of the Spanish royal family, but Wikipedia is not a genealogy website. Surtsicna (talk) 19:38, 1 May 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Surtsicna (talk) 19:38, 1 May 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Surtsicna (talk) 19:38, 1 May 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Austria-related deletion discussions. Surtsicna (talk) 19:38, 1 May 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Spain-related deletion discussions. Surtsicna (talk) 19:38, 1 May 2021 (UTC)

Delete. This looks like a classic case of claiming notability by inheritance. Guy (help! - typo?) 12:35, 2 May 2021 (UTC)
Comment The Spanish article does reveal some significant contemporary coverage of her wedding in 1936 by reliable sources, but I'm not sure that this counts for notability. Given her long life, it is possible that she received significant coverage in historical society publications that would be difficult to access and assess. Hemiauchenia (talk) 15:19, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

All I see on es.wikipedia is genealogy. Could you please point out what strikes you as signifcant coverage? Surtsicna (talk) 19:37, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

@Surtsicna: It's references 9 and 10 in Wiener Salonblatt direct link and ABC respectively. I can't speak german and spanish so I can't evaluate whether these sources are sigcov. Hemiauchenia (talk) 20:01, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

Keep. Pretender to the throne of Navarre. This website isn't demosntration of notability itself, since it looks self-published, but it cites dozens of sources under Fuentes y bibliografía Furius (talk) 19:27, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

That she was a pretender to something is pure rubbish. The website indulges in a fantasy; she never claimed any throne or associated herself in any way with the long-defunct Navarrese monarchy. The sources do not demonstrate significant coverage of the subject. Surtsicna (talk) 19:37, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

Delete a clear case of deposed monarchy cruft. The throne of Navarre seems to have ceased to exist in 1841. There is not even a clear place that it would applies to.John Pack Lambert (talk) 16:29, 3 May 2021 (UTC)
Keep. The significant aspect here isn't that she was pretender to Navarre, but that she was part of the royal family (and very close to succession, if Alfonso XII didn't have children, she would've been queen: [10][11]). Her funeral got significant coverage, even by the Daily Fail ([12]) as well as several reliable sources: [13], [14], [15], [16], [17], [18]. Coverage of her was not limited to her funeral, here is an in-depth piece from her birthday in 2015: [19] in El Mundo. or coverage from ABC in 2015: [20]. British royals much more removed from succession than Alicia are notable, she was very much part of the Spanish royals and has significant coverage.--Eostrix (🦉 hoot hoot🦉) 07:17, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

That does seem like decent coverage. Thank you! Surtsicna (talk) 07:22, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

Keep She was the oldest and senior member of the Spanish royal family. She have plenty of coverage by Spain mainstream news source (not about her funeral) such as [21],[22], Alicia de Borbón, the longest-lived Infanta who could have been Queen of Spain, The titles of the King's family from El Mundo, [23] from La Razón, [24] from ABC (newspaper). Moreover, a lot of coverage about her high-profile funeral ALICIA DE BORBÓN, THE WOMAN WHO COULD REIGN IN SPAIN, DIES with quote Doña Alicia was 99 years old, she was the last living aunt of King Don Juan Carlos and, for many, a living history of our country., The four Kings attend the funeral of Alicia de Borbón-Parma, which the Infanta Cristina has also attended with quote Given her condition as Infanta of Spain, she had the right to be buried in the Panteón de Infantes de El Escorial and She could have become Queen of Spain if Alfonso XIII and Victoria Eugenia, Felipe VI's great-grandparents, had not had children., Death of Infanta Alice, the dean of the gotha with quote King Felipe VI of Spain and Queen Letizia, King Emeritus Juan Carlos and Queen Sophie, Infantes Elena, Pilar and Margarita, his nephews and nieces, the princes of Bourbon-Sicilies, mourn the disappearance of a great lady., Disappearance of Princess Alice of Bourbon-Parma, The Infanta Doña Alicia de Borbón-Parma, aunt of Don Juan Carlos, dies at 99 years of age with quote The King has ordered that the coffin be veiled by the Royal Guard and covered with the flag of Spain and the last living aunt of King. The oldest Infanta in Spain., Alicia de Borbón, aunt of King Juan Carlos, dies and many many more. I think these multiple RS enough to meet WP:GNG.VocalIndia (talk) 19:00, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

Isabella Tugume[edit]

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

Article about a news anchor that fails WP:BASIC. Reference 1 is practically blank, ref 2 is a gossip website. Fails WP:SIGCOV. TheChronium (talk) 17:54, 1 May 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. TheChronium (talk) 17:54, 1 May 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. TheChronium (talk) 17:54, 1 May 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. TheChronium (talk) 17:54, 1 May 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Africa-related deletion discussions. TheChronium (talk) 17:54, 1 May 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Journalism-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 04:49, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

Insyde (artist)[edit]

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

Article about a musician that doesn't meet WP:NMUSICBIO. Sources are mostly from press distribution websites as seen on Yahoo News, references 12 is a press site, reference 13 is just passing mention. Nothing much on his athletic career. TheChronium (talk) 17:30, 1 May 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. TheChronium (talk) 17:30, 1 May 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. TheChronium (talk) 17:30, 1 May 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. TheChronium (talk) 17:30, 1 May 2021 (UTC)

Speedy Delete. Repost Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Insyde. And probably created by a block evading sock. duffbeerforme (talk) 03:45, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

Seinudeen Marikar Isham Marikar[edit]

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

Had been deprod-ed by creator. Fails WP:BIO + WP:GNG, being a member of a Youth Parliament does not pass WP:NPOLITICIAN CommanderWaterford (talk) 17:04, 1 May 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. CommanderWaterford (talk) 17:04, 1 May 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sri Lanka-related deletion discussions. CommanderWaterford (talk) 17:04, 1 May 2021 (UTC)

Delete: concur with nom, fails WP:NPOLITICIAN. Dan arndt (talk) 23:18, 1 May 2021 (UTC)

Bakare Mubarak[edit]

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

Does not meet WP:NBIO- being the tallest male model from a certain region is not grounds for notability (see WP:NOTGUINNESS). MrsSnoozyTurtle (talk) 02:05, 1 May 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 09:35, 1 May 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Nigeria-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 09:35, 1 May 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fashion-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 17:30, 1 May 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Beauty pageants-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 17:30, 1 May 2021 (UTC)

Delete — I agree with MrsSnoozyTurtle and their decision to AFD this article was the best route. My rationale mirrors that of noms, at best this is bare notability. Celestina007 (talk) 00:50, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

Delete — Also agreed. The shortest such model, or the shortest model who is also male, or who is also female, and then the tallest female model, etc. would need their own articles if this were the standard of notability. Quicklibrary (talk) 18:57, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

Zachary Bloom[edit]

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

Disputed PROD. Written by the article's subject, who is a city councilmember in a community of under 1,000 people and has no other positions of note. The subject has no significant coverage beyond local newspapers and thus fails WP:NPOL. SounderBruce 06:59, 1 May 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. SounderBruce 06:59, 1 May 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. SounderBruce 06:59, 1 May 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pennsylvania-related deletion discussions. SounderBruce 06:59, 1 May 2021 (UTC)

Delete: The borough council itself is not notable enough to have its own article; its individual memebers are even less so. The subject himself does not have any other sufficiently notable activities or significant, non-localised coverage; thus, a mention in the table at Houtzdale, Pennsylvania#Government is sufficient. W. Tell DCCXLVI ^{converse | fings wot i hav dun} 07:50, 1 May 2021 (UTC)
Delete per the WP:NPOL, that major local political figures who have received significant press coverage outside their specific region, clearly Bloom is not notable outside the city. SunDawn (talk) 09:02, 1 May 2021 (UTC)
Do Not Delete: If the Borough council and this area are not worthy of their own article, I would like to know why Bud George is allowed to remain, as that article has less information and very little citation. Also SunDawn that table has been made a point of contention in itself simply for being there, and if that table should remain, I would happily concede the argument for this page. In addition I would like to thank SounderBruce for finally taking a diplomatic approach to this issue. Zackmanb67 (talk) 13:39, 1 May 2021 (UTC)zackmanb67

Bud George was a state legislator, which is not equivalent to a smalltown city councillor. Our rule is that state legislators are "inherently" notable, which means that they must have articles even if their current state of sourcing is inadequate (for one thing, the question of whether we have actually found and used all of the best sources that a person has is a very separate matter from whether good quality sources exist or not) — but municipal councillors are not inherently notable, which means that in order to make a person notable enough for inclusion here on the basis of having been a municipal councillor per se, you have to show a credible reason why they should be treated as a special case of significantly greater notability than most other municipal councillors. What you cannot do is say that a municipal councillor automatically has to have an article just because a state legislator has one — their notability claims aren't parallel with each other, so they don't have to be treated the same way. Bearcat (talk) 14:40, 1 May 2021 (UTC)

Hello Zackmanb67. For AfD discussion it is not good to bring up discussions about other article, per WP:OTHERSTUFF as the argument should be about the article. Though in the case of Bud George as he has been in Pennsylvania House of Representatives he can fulfill The person has been elected or appointed to serve on a given country's legislative body or legislature on a national or subnational level., thus fulfilling the WP:NPOL criterion. SunDawn (talk) 14:46, 1 May 2021 (UTC)

@Zackmanb67: You want to address me, not SunDawn. I have not said the area is not worthy of its own article, merely the council. And I have extensively explained to you over here why bringing up Bud George is of no use. W. Tell DCCXLVI ^{converse | fings wot i hav dun} 16:46, 1 May 2021 (UTC)

Delete. People are not automatically entitled to have Wikipedia articles just for serving on smalltown municipal councils, the fact that some other person with an entirely different notability claim has an article is irrelevant per WP:WAX, and the depth of sourcing shown here (a mixture of primary sources and the routine local coverage that every municipal councillor everywhere is simply expected to have) is not enough to make this smalltown municipal councillor more special than other smalltown municipal councillors. Bearcat (talk) 14:40, 1 May 2021 (UTC)
Delete. Bearcat I was simply confused by Wikipedia's policy as it does not clarify as deeply as you went. I viewed those policies of notability previous to creating the article, and took what it said as local notability. Thank you for explaining it further, My assumption was that the notability from sources reaching a regional audience was sufficient to be over local. I concede after having read Bearcat description that the article is not of notability. Zackmanb67 (talk) 17:39, 1 May 2021 (UTC)zackmanb67
Delete fails WP:NPOL. --Enos733 (talk) 16:34, 4 May 2021 (UTC)
Delete Clearly fails WP:NPOL. KidAd • SPEAK 20:32, 4 May 2021 (UTC)

Bryon Cook[edit]

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

Non-notable American football player. Hasn't played in the NFL or any other leagues mentioned in WP:NGRIDIRON. Natg 19 (talk) 03:55, 1 May 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Natg 19 (talk) 03:55, 1 May 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of American football-related deletion discussions. Natg 19 (talk) 03:55, 1 May 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 04:22, 1 May 2021 (UTC)

Delete per nom.-UCO2009bluejay (talk) 15:43, 1 May 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ohio-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 17:29, 1 May 2021 (UTC)

Delete Fails WP:NGRIDIRON Suonii180 (talk) 17:50, 2 May 2021 (UTC)
Delete. Does not qualify under WP:NGRIDIRON. Moreover, his Division III collegiate career (summarized here - 27 catches for 400 yards in his best season) doesn't include the types of accomplishments that qualify under WP:NCOLLATH. Finally, my searches did not turn up WP:SIGCOV of the type needed to pass WP:GNG. Cbl62 (talk) 12:40, 4 May 2021 (UTC)
Delete. Fails WP:NGRIDIRON, WP:NCOLLATH, and WP:GNG, per all above. Ejgreen77 (talk) 03:52, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

Syed Imam Hayat[edit]

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

Subject fails NPOL. Does not have enough coverage in reliable sources to pass WP:GNG; ignoring the coverage of his organisation. All the coverage are on his organisation except for one which is on his father which does not mention him. Vinegarymass911 (talk) 01:19, 1 May 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Vinegarymass911 (talk) 01:19, 1 May 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Islam-related deletion discussions. Vinegarymass911 (talk) 01:19, 1 May 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bangladesh-related deletion discussions. Vinegarymass911 (talk) 01:19, 1 May 2021 (UTC)

Delete. There is not a single significant coverage! - Owais ^Talk 01:30, 1 May 2021 (UTC)
Delete A search on Google News on his Bengali name সৈয়দ ইমাম হায়াত founds 0 results. A regular search on his name found out nothing notable. His organization is notable, but not himself. SunDawn (talk) 04:50, 1 May 2021 (UTC)
Keep Imam Hayat and his organisation is notable and there are many news on regular search in bengali in google of his organisation.Sciencelover1998 (talk) 15:44, 2 May 2021 (UTC)
Oppose Imam Hayat's organisation is active in Bangladesh and there are some reliable sources of activities of him in google bengali search.Shafa2020 (talk) 16:15, 2 May 2021 (UTC)
Delete per User:SunDawn (His organization is notable, but not himself). --আফতাবুজ্জামান (talk) 18:01, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

@আফতাবুজ্জামান: এটা দেখুন। - Owais ^Talk 20:01, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

Sophia Fracassi[edit]

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

Nonnotable musician with no significant Tier1 coverage. Fails WP:GNG, WP:SINGER Sonofstar (talk) 17:44, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Sonofstar (talk) 17:44, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Sonofstar (talk) 17:44, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. Sonofstar (talk) 17:44, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

Delete: I was about sending this to AFD myself. This is the archetypal case of TOOSOON Celestina007 (talk) 17:48, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ontario-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:51, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

Delete the sources given are obviously paid promotion.--- Possibly (talk) 18:07, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
Delete does not meet notability. Lesliechin1 (talk) 18:51, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
Delete fails GNG, maybe someday but for now TOOSOON JW 1961^Talk 20:38, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
Delete - WP:TOOSOON, currently fails WP:MUSICBIO. I'm seeing lack of significant coverage in multiple reliable sources that are independent of the subject. --Ashleyyoursmile! 06:15, 1 May 2021 (UTC)
Delete. Musicians are not automatically entitled to have Wikipedia articles just because their music technically metaverifies its own existence on Spotify — she has to actually pass a criterion in WP:NMUSIC, and she actually has to have reliable source coverage in media about those accomplishments, to clear the bar. But the four "press" links are blogs, not reliable or notability-making publications. I wish her good luck building her career, and obviously an article can be recreated about her if and when she's achieved something more noteworthy than just the existence of a song — but right now is WP:TOOSOON. We are not a free public relations platform for aspiring future stars to publicize themselves in advance of actually accomplishing anything noteworthy. Bearcat (talk) 16:16, 1 May 2021 (UTC)
Delete: No reliable sources, no evidence of notability. Fails GNG & SINGER. TheDreamBoat (talk) 14:47, 4 May 2021 (UTC)
Delete. No RS helping this subject to meet GNG or WP:MUSICBIO. Fails the latter miserably. --Kbabej (talk) 23:30, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

Muntazir Ahmad[edit]

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

Non-notable subject with only primary sources as references. No multiple reliable secondary sources online. nearlyevil665 14:41, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. nearlyevil665 14:41, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. nearlyevil665 14:41, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

Delete Only two significant coverages as in [25] and [26], both are local news papers and not seem independent and reliable. Other references has trivial mentions. Fails WP:SIGCOV and WP:BASIC. Chirota (talk) 00:28, 1 May 2021 (UTC)

I have read news about Muntazir Ahmad. I am busy in a my job for now. next weekend I will do more research and if I found more reliable resources, I will add in this article.

I have watched the show India's Citizen Squad on discovery channel and also on discovery app [27] . I loved the show and the performance of Muntazir, Pallavi and Sonu. I searched google for their names and got some news for Muntazir so I thought he should be included on Wikipedia as he is the first person for his state(Jammu and Kashmir, India) to be selected for a reality show on Discovery Channel.

I am new to Wikipedia so I request you to suggest me what to do next.

If you think this article should be deleted please proceed.

My personal opinion is to include him on Wikipedia rest is on the community. Ermunu (talk) 13:06, 4 May 2021 (UTC)

Redirect to India's Citizen Squad, clearly does not meet WP:GNG, but a redirect to the reality show is harmless. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 03:34, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

Complexly[edit]

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

As much as it pains me to attempt to take an article about the brothers green out to pasture, this one doesn't seem to pass WP:GNG. It cites no independent sources, and none seem to be available and provide significant coverage independent of the CEOs or their subsidiary companies– things like DFTBA Records, the Project for Awesome, and VidCon are pretty much independently notable. A shell company to make all of these isn't going to garner much coverage, and it doesn't. If someone can provide a WP:THREE to save this, though, it'd be welcomed. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/them) 08:42, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/them) 08:42, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/them) 08:42, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/them) 08:42, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Indiana-related deletion discussions. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/them) 08:42, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Montana-related deletion discussions. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/them) 08:42, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for raising the alarm on the lack of independent sources; as the creator an primary maintainer of this one I should have been keeping a closer eye. I feel confident I can find some external sources on this, even though it is an odd animal; its CEOs and projects are far more notable than the firm itself. As the framework behind those, though, I feel it deserves to bee here. Updates to come! Radagast (talk) 01:59, 1 May 2021 (UTC)
- Well, I've added some reliable sources on their connections to outside institutions. It's certainly true that the firm flies under the media radar as just 'the Green brothers' projects'; it's a tricky hunt. Radagast (talk) 00:44, 2 May 2021 (UTC)
Delete given that the article fails WP:NCORP (sources are mostly YouTube/Tumblr...). Do ping me if the article is rewritten (as promised above), and I'll reconsider my vote. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:45, 1 May 2021 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 12:39, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

Dylan and Dakota Gonzalez[edit]

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

Non-notable persons with a ton of primary sources and coverage restricted to local media, interviews and primary sources. nearlyevil665 05:41, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. nearlyevil665 05:41, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

Speedy delete: per CSD G4 Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dylan and Dakota Gonzalez CommanderWaterford (talk) 07:58, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

@CommanderWaterford: I'm not sure what you're saying here; that's a link to this discussion? Was there another you were trying to point to? Kuru (talk) 18:27, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

@Kuru ? The Article should be speedey deleted per CSD G4, recreation of previous via AfD deleted Article. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dylan and Dakota Gonzalez CommanderWaterford (talk) 18:30, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

My apologies if I was unclear. G4 is for quickly removing articles that have previously been deleted as part of a formal deletion discussion. The link you're providing is to this page. We would need a link to a prior discussion to act upon. I don't see anything obvious in the history. Kuru (talk) 20:20, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Kansas-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:13, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

no to speedy We need a full discussion on this. The reason behind the proposed speedy is unclear and circular, which may be an error or something more. So let's let the discussion run its course.--Paul McDonald (talk) 01:04, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: WP:CSD#G4 does not apply, as it was only deleted via PROD. However, this makes the page ineligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 06:55, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

Delete per logic at WP:UNOPPOSED.--Paul McDonald (talk) 21:03, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
Delete as per nom. Fails WP:GNG. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 03:30, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

Supriya Sharma[edit]

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

Does not appear to meet WP:GNG. Presented sources do not cover the subject in-depth. The article is written in newstyle. Hitro talk 07:08, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Hitro talk 07:08, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Hitro talk 07:08, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. Hitro talk 07:08, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. Hitro talk 07:08, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

merge with Health Canada, the individual is not notable but the role of Health Canada in the COVID 19 pandemic is. --hroest 16:20, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 08:00, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

Comment We see her on the news every so often, I'm not sure this makes her notable. I think it's more of a public relations job than an actual ministerial-level job. Oaktree b (talk) 11:52, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

Steve Slaunwhite[edit]

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

Does not appear to be notable as an author or copywriter and coverage is limited to self published and other non reliable sources. No significant, in depth coverage of his books and I cannot find evidence that his award is a notable one. Deleted at AfD in 2006 Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Steve Slaunwhite and although that was an entirely different version and since this was created in good faith in 2009, figured AfD v. PROD makes sense. StarM 14:07, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. StarM 14:07, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. StarM 14:07, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. StarM 14:07, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Nova Scotia-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:35, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

Delete. Nothing stated in the article is "inherently" notable enough to guarantee him inclusion in Wikipedia just because he exists, but the sourcing is not getting him over WP:GNG. Five of the ten footnotes are just his own work metaverifying its own existence, which is not how you make a writer notable — you get a writer over WP:AUTHOR by showing that his books have been the subjects of media coverage, such as book reviews or news articles about them winning notable literary awards, not just by citing their existence to themselves. But once you chop the five footnotes where the subject was the author of the source, you're left with a self-published press release from his own organization, an award self-cited to the awarding organization's own self-published website about itself rather than media coverage to establish the notability of said award, user-generated reader reviews on Amazon, and a self-published press release from one of his publishers, none of which are support for notability either. There's just one footnote here that counts for anything, by being a real book review published in a real newspaper — but it still takes a hell of a lot more than just one of those to get a person over the bar. I also strongly suspect some form of conflict of interest editing, since the article was created by an WP:SPA whose only edits to any other article but this have involved creating new wikilinks to this article. Bearcat (talk) 16:05, 1 May 2021 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 12:46, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

Stan Freese[edit]

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

Virtually unsourced BLP dating back to 2007 (!), with likely COI editing by mystery IP editors. I tried searching for sources, but only found a couple of old articles in local papers, nothing even approaching sigcov. I did think of cutting down the content to only that which can be supported by such sources, but fundamentally the problem remains that having worked for Disney for 40 years and playing an instrument simply doesn't suffice for an article. Fails WP:GNG / WP:BIO. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 13:14, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. DoubleGrazing (talk) 13:14, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. DoubleGrazing (talk) 13:14, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. DoubleGrazing (talk) 13:14, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. DoubleGrazing (talk) 13:14, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

Comment/Keep Agreed, this one needs citations. Sources found include Forbes and the Minnesota Post, Orange County register. He seems to be a legend in the field. Oaktree b (talk) 18:24, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
- If memory serves, the Forbes piece was a contributor ('Sites') one, so not RS. And being a 'legend in the field' is great, if you can somehow substantiate that, which the article as it currently stands fails to do. But anyhoo, if your searches find more and/or better sources than mine did, I'm more than happy to stand corrected; I just thought it's time to put an end to this flagrant disregard of referencing guidelines. --DoubleGrazing (talk) 18:53, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Comment Ok so follow me here; he's in the Minnesota Musician Hall of fame, elected 1995. https://mnmusichalloffame.org/inductees/, LA Times article https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1997-aug-25-me-25789-story.html, Disney blog article https://disneyparks.disney.go.com/blog/2016/03/the-beat-will-go-on-for-retiring-disneyland-resort-cast-member-stan-freese/, Orange County Register, https://www.ocregister.com/2016/04/04/45-year-career-at-disney-started-and-ended-playing-the-tuba/, OC Weekly magazine https://www.ocweekly.com/stan-freese-that-guy-with-the-speedo-playing-the-tuba-who-is-way-more-punk-than-anyone-else-6589312/, Pioneer Press, https://www.twincities.com/2016/04/06/b-board-hows-this-for-a-dusty-old-prank-did-you-bag-your-phone-on-april-fools-day/. One mention in the Journal of Performing Arts Leadership, https://www.academia.edu/download/44972292/jpalhe_volume6.pdf#page=15... I think we've got enough for notability. Oaktree b (talk) 20:48, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:13, 4 May 2021 (UTC)

Keep as enough substantial reliable sources coverage has been identified in this discussion to show a pass of WP:GNG so that deletion is unnecessary in my view, Atlantic306 (talk) 01:24, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

Hans Kollwitz[edit]

epidemiological:(Find sources: Google (books · news · newspapers · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · NYT · TWL) I myself created the page, now nominating it for deletion as in the German Wiki, I couldn't find verifiable sources to his interesting facts of life, only to his losses during the both World Wars. My apologies if I did a mess trying to contribute CoryGlee (talk) 10:58, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2021 April 27. —cyberbot I_{Talk to my owner:Online} 11:19, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

*Speedy Delete per WP:G7 (single substantial author, User:CoryGlee requesting deletion), concur this is a WP:NOTINHERITED situation (from Käthe Kollwitz. Alternatively, a Redirect (with possibly a very selective merge) could be made to Käthe Kollwitz.--Eostrix (🦉 hoot hoot🦉) 11:44, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

Struck as G7 probably does not apply when other users object to author-requested deletion (and will surely not apply if any of them makes a substantail edit). I am unconvinced that Hans is independently notable from his mother (e.g. does this rise to Christopher Tolkien (son of J. R. R. Tolkien, known for work on his father works), but this requires deeper parsing of the German sources.--Eostrix (🦉 hoot hoot🦉) 02:18, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 11:51, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 11:51, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 11:52, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 11:52, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

Keep Kollwitz was notable as an author as a teenager. His epidemiological writings were published as well. We have a well referenced article on the German Wiki. [28] No Swan So Fine (talk) 12:14, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 12:52, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

Keep I don’t think this is the most clear cut case but looking at the German article and the subject’s role as editor of works relating to his mother, with abundant references, I struggle to see how he wouldn’t be a GNG pass. Mccapra (talk) 18:43, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

Suhaib Saqib[edit]

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

Non-notable person, fails WP:GNG, WP:TOOSOON. Störm (talk) 20:04, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 21:30, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 21:30, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

Delete One trivial mention, a radio interview, and 3 references which don't work. It fails to demonstrate WP:GNG. Nexus000 (talk) 02:55, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:48, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

Delete I've found couple of mentions in IRS, but in my opinion it's not enough to pass WP:GNG. it's WP:TOOSOON for now. Less Unless (talk) 12:51, 4 May 2021 (UTC)

Francis Fox of St Germans[edit]

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

Wikipedia is not a genealogy site. Fails WP:GNG. Penale52 (talk) 17:23, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:34, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:34, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

Delete - sorry, Friend Fox, but I don't think of thee as meeting our standards of notability. This article contains a lot of stuff from a self-published genealogy, and even gossip from a descendant of the subject. --Orange Mike | Talk 03:39, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Comment. I was bot notified about this but my involvement was only administrative; it was created as the result of a CFD eleven years ago. The creator of that category, HaWe (talk · contribs), is inactive; the nominator should review the edit history of this page to see if there is anyone who may actually have an interest in it. postdlf (talk) 14:31, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Comment I am an interested descendant, and found this to be a helpful summary of information I hadn't managed to find elsewhere, but I can see it probably doesn't meet usual standards of notability Cesyavon (talk) 14:43, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 00:03, 4 May 2021 (UTC)

Delete - No evidence of significant coverage in reliable secondary sources. -Indy beetle (talk) 07:12, 4 May 2021 (UTC)

Cesar Apolinario[edit]

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

Does not prove notability and completely unsourced. There are no online sources except for his death, and they are all from local newspapers or from his network's news. De-PROD'd by the article's author alongside the addition of 1200 bytes of self-promotion. Anarchyte (talk • work) 10:55, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Anarchyte (talk • work) 10:55, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 11:06, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Journalism-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 11:06, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Philippines-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 11:06, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

Delete: Barely found anything about him aside from his death, an indication of WP:BLP1E. I'm willing to change my vote if anyone can provide sources about him which are not related to his death. ASTIG😎 _{(ICE T • ICE CUBE)} 10:00, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 13:57, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

Delete per nom. Not notable. —hueman1 (talk • contributions) 14:44, 4 May 2021 (UTC)

Sarah Law[edit]

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

Fails WP:GNG Previously deleted Articuno appears (talk) 09:28, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Articuno appears (talk) 09:28, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 09:54, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Scotland-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 09:54, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

Comment: the previously "WP:A7-d" article (in 2016) was about a different person of a similar name. Pete AU aka --Shirt58 (talk) 10:21, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Rugby union-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 10:23, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 10:24, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

Comment - there are articles about her in Scrum Magazine but I can't access them. They may well have significant coverage. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 10:36, 26 April 2021 (UTC)
Weak keep Does fail WP:NRU but there is a lot of coverage, and I imagine some of the coverage in Scrum Magazine would constitute SIGCOV as they tend to do more than just match reports and announcements. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 11:44, 26 April 2021 (UTC)
Weak keep Has some coverage to qualify for GNG. Purosinaloense T/K 12:21, 26 April 2021 (UTC)
Comment recent article (if it is the same person) compares her to a chess player in control of her team ^[1] Kaybeesquared (talk) 15:45, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 20:20, 4 May 2021 (UTC)

Keep - the coverage in Scotsman and Six Nations Rugby is just about enough for WP:GNG in my opinion. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 20:59, 4 May 2021 (UTC)
Keep - enough coverage to pass WP:GNG. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 03:23, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

Mark Nielsen (CEO)[edit]

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

Fails WP:GNG lacks reliable sources Articuno appears (talk) 09:27, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

Delete. Insufficient independent reliable sources to show notability. References give in the main just passing references to him. QuiteUnusual (talk) 10:03, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Articuno appears (talk) 09:27, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 09:54, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 09:54, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

Keep Has indepth coverage in reliable Australian websites and news magazines. As per WP:THREE, these 3 sources talks indepth about the subject. [29] [30][31]. I am also adding few more additional sources [32], [33], [34], [35], [36], [37] etc. Caponcrush (talk) 11:28, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

These aren't journalistic articles about him, they are a promotional piece by the magazine that gave him an award, and a piece where he is quoted on a different subject - i.e., it is not about him. QuiteUnusual (talk) 16:51, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

Weak keep Seems to have some indepth coverage to qualify for GNG. Purosinaloense T/K 12:22, 26 April 2021 (UTC)
Keep Media Week and CEO Magazine have in-depth coverage. Business Insider and NY Post are very notable publications. He passes WP:GNG.Webmaster862 (talk) 05:11, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Barkeep49 (talk) 02:53, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

Adam All[edit]

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

Fails WP:GNG lacks sufficient coverage Articuno appears (talk) 09:20, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Articuno appears (talk) 09:20, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. CommanderWaterford (talk) 09:33, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 10:13, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

Keep: Significant coverage by sources already used in article, e.g. [38], [39] and [40]. 15 (talk) 14:49, 26 April 2021 (UTC)
Keep (for now): Don't WP:BITE too quickly. See where it goes and if it remains untouched by the middle of May then I wouldn't be so averse to deletion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Plifal (talk • contribs)
Delete No in-depth coverage. Fails WP:GNG. KidAd • SPEAK 22:01, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Extraordinary Writ (talk) 05:26, 4 May 2021 (UTC)

Chief Alex Ajipe[edit]

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

Article about a business person that fails WP:SIGCOV. Possible WP:PROMO and WP:SPAM, most of the sources are just passing mentions. TheChronium (talk) 21:16, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. TheChronium (talk) 21:16, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. TheChronium (talk) 21:16, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Nigeria-related deletion discussions. TheChronium (talk) 21:16, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

Delete — Per rationale by TheChronium. Celestina007 (talk) 17:52, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 00:42, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

Ron Cross (cricketer)[edit]

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

The subject appears to fail GNG. He hasn't played cricket at the highest domestic level and hasn't umpired at the highest domestic level. His military endeavours, while admirable, don't satisfy GNG for military personnel. His involvement with club cricket doesn't satisfy CRIN. His 37 years at Haslar Hospital also don't satisfy any inclusion criteria. Searches for sources seem to be routine coverage surrounding his death in local newspapers so lacks SIGCOV. Overall fails GNG, CRIN and military personnel inclusion. StickyWicket (talk) 20:48, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. StickyWicket (talk) 20:48, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. StickyWicket (talk) 20:48, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. StickyWicket (talk) 20:48, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Cricket-related deletion discussions. StickyWicket (talk) 20:48, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

Delete Don't think there is enough material to pass WP:GNG. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 21:13, 25 April 2021 (UTC)
Keep meets WP:GNG (Part of Wisden Club Cricket Hall of Fame and recipient of Legion of Honour). Störm (talk) 23:59, 25 April 2021 (UTC)
Delete. I'm not sure about the Wisden Club Cricket Hall of Fame - it's an initiative of the Wisden Cricket Monthly magazine rather than the far more prestigious Almanack. My first impression was that the Legion of Honour would confer notability and I was about to vote Keep, but looking at its Wikipedia article I see: "American and British veterans who served in either World War on French soil, or during the 1944 campaigns to liberate France, may be eligible for appointment as Chevalier of the Legion of Honour, provided they were still living when the honour was approved." So hundreds of thousands must have been eligible to have received it, and it's arguably less significant than his MBE. JH (talk page) 08:44, 26 April 2021 (UTC)
Weak delete There's a lot of routine coverage on him, mainly about his involvement in D-Day and his involvement in club cricket in Hampshire. The Wisden coverage is the closest thing we get to SIGCOV, and again it's just one source. Weak delete for now unless more can be found. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 09:37, 26 April 2021 (UTC)
Delete lacks SIGCOV in multiple RS to meet WP:GNG or any other notability guideline. Mztourist (talk) 04:08, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Delete per nom and JH. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 07:38, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Neutral The four sources in the article (from three independent RSs) all constitute WP:SIGCOV, and there is enough content in them to build a reasonably decent-sized article. As such my !vote would be to keep, but I'm not really seeing why he warrants an article here. We don't have articles for everyone awarded the MBE or Legion d’Honneur, and being well-known in local cricketing circles doesn't carry much weight either. _wjemather^{please leave a message...} 11:43, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Strong Keep The guy has a MBE and there is plenty of coverage, reams of it. More than enough to pass WP:SIGCOV. I suspect if there is sufficient deep search, much more will surface including reports at the National Archive at Kew. The whole is orientated towards his cricket career, but it should have a decent sized block on his military career. scope_creep^Talk 18:33, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Delete per nom. Doesn't satisfy WP:CRIN or WP:NCRICKET.— A.A Prinon ^Conversation 15:18, 28 April 2021 (UTC)
Delete on cricketing/GNG grounds, not too sure about military grounds though. SportingFlyer T·C 19:57, 4 May 2021 (UTC)

Quintus Flavius Egnatius Placidus Severus[edit]

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

Fails WP:NOTGENEALOGY, no indication of notability (what offices he held, what he did that makes him stand out), and lacks significant WP:COVERAGE in sources. The creator was known for creating articles of the sort indiscriminately, and is long since banned apparently because of it. 11 years later and nobody has even bothered to place the article in a Wikiproject or relevant categories. Avilich (talk) 17:36, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Avilich (talk) 17:36, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Italy-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 03:08, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 03:08, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 03:08, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

Comment: Subject was co-head (vicar) of the diocese of Italy in 365. Does this qualify him for WP:NPOL? 15 (talk) 19:54, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
NPOL: "Just being an elected local official, or an unelected candidate for political office, does not guarantee notability". We only know him as a footnote of sorts, no WP:COVERAGE of any actual activity of his. Avilich (talk) 15:55, 1 May 2021 (UTC)

Can you provide s source for that? Peterkingiron (talk) 15:29, 2 May 2021 (UTC)
- Peterkingiron, p. 239 of the source at the bottom of the article ([41] not open access). 15 (talk) 15:50, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

That source (Settipani) isn't academic, it's a work on genealogy of very questionable reliability. The only primary source for Severus is a compilation of 4th-century AD laws which only mentions the man in passing. I should also mention that the full name, "Quintus Flavius Egnatius Placidus Severus", seems to be partly made up by Settipani. Avilich (talk) 18:43, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

Delete. As written, the article uses the noun "politician" as his occupational label in the first sentence, but then fails to say a single word about how he was a politician — it otherwise focuses entirely on his family genealogy, without any reliable sources or any discernible notability claim. As for whether being vicar of a diocese would get him over WP:NPOL or not, I'd have to say no — it might get him over our notability criteria for religious figures if there were actual reliable sources present that counted toward WP:GNG, but it's not an "inherently" notable political role that would exempt him from having to have any sources. Bearcat (talk) 15:48, 1 May 2021 (UTC)
Weak keep - If 15's information is correct, he should be notable. The vicarius was effectively a provincial governor, or rather one rank above that, governing a Roman diocese consisting of several provinces, in principle 1/12 of the Roman Empire. This is not a question of the kind of diocese that has a bishop. Being a senator in a period when the senate had little power would certainly be NN. NPOL is a useful guideline, but applies primarily to elected officials, not appointed ones. "Vicar" means a deputy. In the church sense, the person is the deputy of the rector. In this case, it means the emperor's deputy for ruling Italy. If that is what he was, we should no more delete him than we would the governor of North Dakota or Georgia. Peterkingiron (talk) 15:33, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

We don't or shouldn't have single-sentence articles which are just X person was governor of Y place and nothing more. Whether he was elected or not is irrelevant, since all high officials of the empire were appointed. Most vicars known to us are sparsely documented nobodies. Don't make this more complicated than it is. Avilich (talk) 17:00, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 07:41, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

Delete I do dislike the way this kind of article creates pages of online cruft based on no sourcing whatsoever. Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 11:49, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

Mark Tinkler (baritone)[edit]

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

I don't think any of the operatic achievements amount to specific musical/artistic notability, and as for general notability, the only two sources cited (admittedly RS) are interviews, and a search finds nothing better, hence fails WP:GNG as well. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 16:20, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. DoubleGrazing (talk) 16:20, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. DoubleGrazing (talk) 16:20, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. DoubleGrazing (talk) 16:20, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. DoubleGrazing (talk) 16:20, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

Weak keep there is enough prose and independence in the Herald source here to count as substantial coverage as the publication has a reputation for fact-checking but more good coverage is needed, imv Atlantic306 (talk) 00:00, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 01:18, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

Wigton Davy[edit]

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

No indication of satisfying WP:GNG. References do not mention the subject. David.moreno72 02:50, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

Wigton Davy should remain at least as a stub for the time being, if it is added to with suitably referenced material in line with WP:BIO in an appropriate time frame, the speedy deletion request should be removed. (Dippiljemmy (talk) 05:11, 25 April 2021 (UTC))

Delete the sources do not, indeed, mention the subject, leaving the article as pure OR. Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 09:24, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 10:25, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 10:25, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 10:05, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ireland-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 13:09, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

Subhankar Bhar[edit]

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

Non-notable. The single source cited only mentions the person once in passing, and even then only verifies that he worked on that particular film; otherwise completely unsupported. Search finds nothing even resembling RS sigcov. Fails WP:GNG / WP:FILMMAKER.

The article has been published and draftified twice before, but the creator insists on bringing this out, so it may be worth salting if this AfD results in deletion. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:20, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:20, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:20, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:20, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

Delete effectively unsourced, fails WP:GNG. Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 09:02, 25 April 2021 (UTC)
Weak keep as has received ~~several~~ two awards, including Films and Frames Digital Film Awards & West Bengal Film Journalists' Association Awards and was nominated twice for a Filmfare Award for his cinematography in Kedara and Maacher Jhol ([42][43][44]) and seems to pass WP:ANYBIO#1.--Umakant Bhalerao (talk) 14:53, 25 April 2021 (UTC)
- Comment The first link you've provided says he was nominated; where does it say he actually won? And I would argue that neither ‘Digital Film Awards, Bangla’ nor 'West Bengal Film Journalists' Association Awards' count as especially major accolades, although I could be wrong. In any case, WP:FILMMAKER doesn't list awards as a notability criterion. --DoubleGrazing (talk) 15:47, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

Oops! i did not notice that earlier. From what i gather, he was nominated twice for the Filmfare (2018 & 2020) but did not win it. One of the other two awards he was nominated for and eventually won (West Bengal Film Journalists' Association Awards) appears to be a major accolade. Not sure about Films and Frames Digital Film Awards and would like others to present their point of views.--Umakant Bhalerao (talk) 10:46, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

Delete:Not supported by reliable sources to establish GNG. Kichu🐘 ^{Need any help?} 18:17, 27 April 2021 (UTC) Blocked sockpuppet.--Goldsztajn (talk) 06:16, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Missvain (talk) 19:15, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

Kris Johnson (video game developer)[edit]

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

Does not meet WP:NBIO- coverage is largely focussing on the games rather than the individual. MrsSnoozyTurtle (talk) 07:21, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 08:08, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New Jersey-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 08:08, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 08:09, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

Oppose deletion - Kris Johnson is a video game pioneer who played a notable role in both the gaming industry and the technology/startup landscape within Utah. The article was intended to convey this information and was modeled after other biographies found on Wikipedia for similarly important industry personalities (e.g., Will Harvey). The article describes Mr. Johnson’s history and contains numerous citations, not to mention cross links to several other Wikipedia pages that mention him by name. He is a noteworthy figure in the gaming industry. Contrary to the reason cited for deletion, the article mostly contains information on his background and accomplishments, not just his game creations. The article only references the games and aside from a few high points does not describe them in detail as many have their own Wikipedia articles. According to Wikipedia’s notability (person) policy/page, the topic of a biography should be “worthy of notice” who is “significant, interesting, or unusual enough to deserve attention.” For “creative professionals” like Johnson, a person “is likely to be notable” if “the person has created or played a major role in co-creating a significant or well-known work or collective body of work” and such work has been the subject of multiple independent articles or reviews. Johnson’s body of work in the video game industry meets this criteria as can be seen in the dozens of published reviews cited in the Wikipedia articles for his games. His body of work renders him notable and deserving of an article. Thank you for your consideration. Sandpiper259 (talk) 08:40, 23 April 2021

Keep - Article seems to have appropriate references. HumanBodyPiloter5 (talk) 19:04, 24 April 2021 (UTC)
@HumanBodyPiloter5: Have you checked the sources? They are clearly not appropriate. IceWelder [✉] 09:52, 25 April 2021 (UTC)
@IceWelder: References have been revised to include more citations directly linking Johnson to his companies and games, including his role as lead programmer. I could also cite digital copies of user manuals for certain games, which list Johnson as the programmer in the credits, but thus far have not done so as I haven’t seen this type of primary source used in articles for other game developers. Sandpiper259 (talk)19:00, 26 April 2021

Sandpiper259: Please be aware that WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS is not an accepted argument in deletion discussions. Regards, MrsSnoozyTurtle (talk) 09:50, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

MrsSnoozyTurtle: Thank you for the clarification. Reference has been added for award-winning game cited. Specifics for most of the other games listed have been left to their individual and linked Wiki articles as suggested was appropriate in your article deletion request. Regards, Sandpiper259 (talk) 08:10 27 April 2021

Delete per nom. Almost all sources (reliability concerns aside) do not even mention Johnson. In most cases, there is a random source that marginally talks about a topic (e.g. Animal Jam - Play Wild! mentioned in connection to an award) that is used to make a claim about Johnson (e.g. that he directed the game and a related one) although the source says no such thing. Consider this fragment: "In 1999, Johnson founded Cobalt Interactive to focus on the confluence of advertising, gaming, and education. Cobalt produced Cap’n Crunch’s Crunchling Adventure for Quaker Oats Company, which was enthusiastically received ..." - the cited sources are a user-written gameplay overview of the game mentioned and a CD rip of another game. Neither source mentions Johnson's role, Cobalt Interactive's founding year, or any sort of reception.

The only sources that actually discuss Johnson are Dreamcast Live and Retro Gamer. The former is an interview (so it does not add not notability) with questionable reliability that is mostly about the game Red Arena. Furthermore, the article cites this interview for claims it does not contains, e.g. that Johnson was born in New Jersey and grew up in various states - the interview says nothing in this regard. I couldn't verify some elements from the Retro Gamer sources either, such as that Johnson designed a game called Junkman in 1984. The majority of the Retro Gamer-sourced content is about Beyond Games rather than Johnson.

Boiling the article down to the content that is actually about Johnson (not his company or its games) and is verifiable would, at best, leave the single-digit number of sentences that he studied at the University of Utah and founded Beyond Games in 1991. I concur with the nomination that the article fails WP:NBIO (or WP:GNG in general) and should be deleted. The author, Sandpiper259, claims above that Johnson is a significant figure in the field but did not provide any reliable sources that verify this. IceWelder [✉] 09:52, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

@IceWelder: As noted above, references have been expanded to better link Johnson to his work. The article has also been redacted and revised in an attempt to address issues raised in your discussion. Sandpiper259 (talk) 08:15, 27 April 2021

@Sandpiper259: A breakdown of the new sources:

The Salt Lake Tribune (1) – Interview with Johnson about Beyond Games; no coverage about him apart from his age
GameSpy – Company-provided overview for Beyond Games (primary source by proxy); Johnson is only name-dropped once
MMORPG.com – Unreliable source; interview; Johnson is only name-dropped once
Infinitgamer – Proxy of the Beyond Games Wikipedia article (tertiary source)
AtariAge – Game manual (primary source)
beyondgames.com – Company website (primary source)
VentureBeat – Johnson is only name-dropped once
The Salt Lake Tribune (2) – Johnson is only name-dropped once (twice if you include the image caption)

The points from my above analysis remain valid: There is no significant coverage of Johnson himself and the sources are inappropriately used for original research/synthesis. You added more sources, including unreliable ones, but the few that are reliable (SL Tribune and VentureBeat) only mention Johnson once or twice in connection to Beyond Games/Smart Bomb/WildWorks. They do not contain any coverage about him. The absolute number of name drops is irrelevant if no coverage about Johnson comes with them. IceWelder [✉] 16:00, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

@IceWelder: In the gaming landscape, the sources cited are credible, including Mobygames which was added after your review. Regardless, the point of notability here is not fame and the number of press references (though he did warrant interviews and photographs in newspaper and magazine publications). In fact, being famous or popular is “secondary” to notability according to Wikipedia policy. Rather, Johnson’s article is premised on his body of work and the relevance of his games, which include award-winners and well-know franchises. As pointed out in my entry above, notability for creative professionals derives from the attention received in the form of articles and reviews for their works, not necessarily for articles specifically focused on the professionals themselves. Please see WP:NBIO. Johnson’s gameography certainly satisfies this requirement and the content and references in his Wiki article (including the Retro Gamer and Dreamcast pieces you discussed) show that he was the vital force behind these games and worthy of attention. Please see the linked Wiki articles on the games for more information. Sandpiper259 (talk) 10:15, 27 April 2021

MobyGames is not "credible", it is a database maintained by users. Many of the sources used are not credible, as detailed above. Please see WP:VG/RS for examples of known reliable sources. You are correct that 'fame' is secondary to notability, meaning that notability weighs higher. Based on the sources provided, Johnson lacks notability as there is barely any coverage about him. The interviews with him are always based around Beyond Games – who else would you interview for this but the founder/owner?

The games are not attributed to Johnson as an individual, rather to Beyond Games/WildWorks as a company. Winning awards from one or two publications is barely enough to justify an article for the product that won it (although these are usually notable by other means). One person behind such games does not inherit that notability (please also read WP:INHERIT as an explainer). You are now referring to WP:CREATIVE (presumably #3), but the reliable sources in the article fail to show that Johnson is known as a driving force for most (if any) of the games listed. The gameography is simply the combination of those of Beyond/WildWorks and Cobalt. Some of these games even credit him in a strictly business role. IceWelder [✉] 18:32, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

@IceWelder: First, Wiki policy specifically says that notability for creative professionals can result from co-creations, which by definition exists with media forms like movies and video games. That said, three of Johnson’s most noted works in the article - Battle Wheels, Animal Jam, and Crunchling Adventure - have citations that explicitly reference Johnson as the creator or programmer - a user manual, a current CEO interview, and a newspaper article. As for your dismissive reference to the awards, please check the linked game articles for more details as they’re no longer cited specifically in this article. You’ll find that the awards, like the Google Play Award in 2017, are important ones to children’s games. Moreover, an Innovation Award bestowed by the Consumer Electronics Show, arguably the most influential electronics show in the world, is important. As for the interviews, you said it best: Johnson was the founder/owner. So, I’m not sure how you can say that he could fill this role and be the one best suited for interviews but not the one who was “a driving force for most (if any) of the games listed.” This seems inconsistent and unsupportable, especially when discussing a young programmer at his startup and when the interviews themselves delve into his personal background in gaming and programming. Sandpiper259 (talk) 12:30, 27 April 2021

WP:CREATIVE #3:

The person has created or played a major role in co-creating a significant or well-known work or collective body of work. In addition, such work must have been the primary subject ... of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews.

(emphasis added)

This 'major role' needs to be covered in independent, reliable, secondary sources. Interviews and game manuals are not independent, especially when the interview source is not reliable. The MMORPG source still does not refer to Johnson as the game director for Animal Jam (just as 'studio director' a/k/a CEO). Additionally, Johnson still needs to pass WP:GNG, which requires:

"Significant coverage" addresses the topic directly and in detail, so that no original research is needed to extract the content. Significant coverage is more than a trivial mention, ...

(emphasis added)

This is not the case. I remain with my above analysis; if the content improperly sourced or only relating to the company was removed, little content would actually remain. Since we're somewhat going in circles, I would rather wait for second opinions from other experienced users than discuss this further. IceWelder [✉] 20:16, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

@IceWelder: Agreed regarding further community input. I believe that Johnson’s “major role” has been established given his position as CEO/Founder/Programmer in these companies and game titles. Likewise, his work has been covered by multiple independent articles and reviews. As for Studio Director, this is a title separate from CEO and akin to a film director - the pivotal creative and strategic force behind executing a production. Finally, the referenced articles/interviews are several and contain information about both Johnson’s games and background (some of which was removed pursuant to this discussion thread). I appreciate your input and hope it has resulted in a stronger article. Thank you for your comments. Sandpiper259 (talk) 14:00, 27 April 2021

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting per participant request.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Missvain (talk) 18:43, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

Delete. IceWelder's analysis is spot on. We're lacking significant coverage in multiple reliable, independent sources (?) specific to Johnson's career and influence. Interviews from otherwise unreliable sources have no bearing on notability discussions. I considered a redirect as an alternative to deletion but I don't think either one of the two linked companies is a better target than the other, especially since they have nothing to say about his role and have weak sourcing on their own. (not watching, please {{ping}}) czar 07:30, 4 May 2021 (UTC)
Delete - Seeing some name drops in articles that talk about the companies he works with, but there is a lack of significant coverage of him. -Indy beetle (talk) 07:34, 4 May 2021 (UTC)

Czar and Indy beetle: Your comments repeat those of Icewelder with dubious challenges to the source materials. Moreover, they do not address the topic of notability for creative professionals. As such, please see my comments above. Also, please consider reviewing the reference materials more thoroughly as I believe their contents and credibility have been mischaracterized. Sandpiper259 (talk) 08:00 04 May 2021 — Preceding undated comment added 15:12, 4 May 2021 (UTC)

François Bergeron[edit]

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

Fails WP:GNG, non notable sound designer Purosinaloense T/K 06:15, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Purosinaloense T/K 06:15, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

Keep A notable sound desginer with coverage in WP:RS incuding NYTimes, Entrepreneur, CNN, Le Journal de Montréal, San Antonio Express-News and more. Passes WP:GNG. Namkongville (talk) 06:22, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

Can't judge the NYT article, but all other sources are pretty by-the-book passing mentions or, in the case of CNN Money, a short, self-authored promo piece. Not much to write home about, and certainly not enough for GNG. AngryHarpy‍^talk 06:36, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

@Namkongville: The New York Times source says of him: "sound by Francois Bergeron". That's all it says about him.

Entrepreneur is paywalled, but the part I can see says "The results are breathtaking, but for founders... François Bergeron, 42..." and that's it.

Le Journal de Montreal says "Il a demandé à François Bergeron (un autre Québécois, concepteur sonore du spectacle) de lui trouver un rire de Ginette Reno», raconte le comédien, en riant.", which is a passing mention about someone asking him to find a singer like Ginette Reno. I'll stop there because I am pretty sure you might have overlooked reading these sources.--- Possibly (talk) 06:41, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

I have voted keep on basis of the New York Times and other supporting sources. If NYTimes refers to him as a sound designer that's pretty convincing to me. Namkongville (talk) 06:57, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

@Namkongville: I guess you are easily convinced then: it's literally four words in the NY Times. I would suggest reading WP:SIGCOV, the part about how to tell the difference between a trivial source and significant coverage.--- Possibly (talk) 07:32, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

Delete Notability is not inherited from the Cirque de Soleil; As demonstrated above, the coverage is largely trivial. --- Possibly (talk) 06:41, 23 April 2021 (UTC)
Keep Has designed sound for Walt Disney and notable shows too like Bad Hair Day (film), La Nouba and is being overed as a sound designer in well known sites and newspapers.
- https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1997-nov-13-ca-53095-story.html
- https://www.nytimes.com/1998/11/24/theater/theater-review-ticktock-the-flying-boy-and-his-shadow.html
- https://www.entrepreneur.com/article/184514
- https://www.livedesignonline.com/sound-gypsies
- https://www.arabianbusiness.com/under-big-top-13621.html
- https://www.talkinbroadway.com/page/regional/la/la115.html
- https://tvfilm.newyorkfestivals.com/Winners/WinnerDetails/539007 and many more Pryorbede (talk) 07:31, 23 April 2021 (UTC)
I don't think any of this helps establish notability in any meaningful sense. Going through them:
- Passing mention
- Passing mention
- Paywall, can't access
- Mostly quotes, not independent; no byline
- Passing mention
- Passing mention
- Not coverage. Blablubbs|talk 20:46, 2 May 2021 (UTC)
Delete: per nom, trivial coverage, fails WP:GNG CommanderWaterford (talk) 07:32, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 08:12, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 08:12, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

Keep Passes WP:GNG as per above sources and for receiving Sound Designer of the Year award. DmitriRomanovJr (talk) 10:27, 23 April 2021 (UTC)
Keep Covered in multiple independent sources passes WP:GNG and WP:BASIC. CeltJungleSnake (talk) 08:16, 24 April 2021 (UTC)
Delete - not nearly enough in-depth coverage to pass WP:GNG, simply mentions. Winning a minor "Sound Designer of the Year" award hardly qualifies him. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 21:15, 24 April 2021 (UTC)
Weak keep seems to barley passing GNG. RockOften (talk) 12:08, 26 April 2021 (UTC)
Delete Whether an article is published in Joe Bumbo's Sound Editing Blog or the NYT, a selection of simple name drops does not constitute meaningful or significant coverage. Likewise, a 1996 award from some magazine with a five-year-old notability tag on its article does not grant anyone a free pass on notability. AngryHarpy‍^talk 12:30, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

Has indepth coverage in [45] and his notable roles in [46] and was part of notable shows like Quidam which makes him satisfy WP:MUSIC requirements. Pryorbede (talk) 17:10, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

Keep As sound designer he should be evaluated under WP:MUSICBIO. He meets criterion #10 "Has performed music for a work of media that is notable,..", Possibly if the Cirque Du Solel has toured 2 or more countries, he may meet crierion #4 as well. Webmaster862 (talk) 05:04, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

He is not a musician. Bergeron is a sound designer.To meet WP:MUSICBIO, you need to be able to play an instrument of some sort, you know, to make music. --- Possibly (talk) 14:51, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

He has designed and contributed to notable projects like Quidam which should be enough to pass WP:MUSIC. Pryorbede (talk) 17:15, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

Pryorbede created their account April 7. On April 23 they created this article, 20 minutes after their first edit. --- Possibly (talk) 16:54, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

It took me 2 hours to create this page. I was preparing the wiki code in my sandbox. Possibly, You are an experienced editor with around 60000+ edits. I am not a pro editor like you still learning but I aim to become a pro like you. Pryorbede (talk) 18:39, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

Keep - He qualifies for WP:NMUSIC as was the sound designer for notable shows like La Nouba and Quidam. This article could use some cleanup though. Riteboke (talk) 07:15, 28 April 2021 (UTC)
Keep Ditto on all the keep reasons above, especially for music category. Star7924 (talk) 18:40, 28 April 2021 (UTC)
Delete per my source analysis above. Him meeting MUSICBIO would a) also have to be demonstrated in reliable sources and b) require that it is established that MUSICBIO covers sound designers, which does not seem to be in the spirit of the guideline; the assertion that some SNG is met is not a substitute for actual coverage, which has not been provided. I will also note in passing that some of the activity surrounding this saga reminds me of Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/SpareSeiko. --Blablubbs|talk 20:49, 2 May 2021 (UTC)
Comment: He meets WP:MUSICBIO, Sound designing is the base of Music. I have created all current pages basis on that criteria. I have read this thoroughly and then after I created the pages. As per WP:MUSICBIO criteria, #10 indicates "Has performed music for a work of media that is notable, e.g., a theme for a network television show, performance in a television show or notable film, inclusion on a notable compilation album, etc." Francois created themes and was a sound designer for many notable shows like Quidam. Similarly, I created another article on basis of this guideline for the sound designer Jonathan Deans. As per this criteria he should pass for WP:MUSICBIO. Pryorbede (talk) 03:32, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

In addition I can see multiple article created on the basis of same guideline, some examples are Dwarak Warrier, Gregory King (sound designer), John S. Bowen (sound designer) and as well as many others. Which follows same criteria for WP:MUSICBIO. I would request the closing admin that on the basis of WP:MUSICBIO criteria #10 François Bergeron and all other mentioned pages qualifies for WP:MUSIC. Pryorbede (talk) 03:46, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Missvain (talk) 18:45, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

This claim that sound designers, who aren't musicians, can meet MUSICBIO is quite innovative, but I am not buying it. The spirit of MUSICBIO addresses musicians, not designers of circus sound environments. Also, we do not typically compare other articles in deletion discussions, since they are of varying quality. It's very rare that you get an example that is a good comparison. See WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS.--- Possibly (talk) 04:51, 4 May 2021 (UTC)

Scott Willis (news producer)[edit]

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

Non-notable news producer. Does not meet GNG. Natg 19 (talk) 16:33, 22 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Natg 19 (talk) 16:33, 22 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of News media-related deletion discussions. Natg 19 (talk) 16:33, 22 April 2021 (UTC)

Delete. It's a common name so searching was a little tricky, but I was unable to find anything at all. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 16:42, 22 April 2021 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:27, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

Soumik Haldar[edit]

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

Pure promotional piece, minimal sources in the article, not much more found via search. Lots of name-dropping in the article, giving it a very promotional feel (since removed). Not enough to show notability. Ravensfire (talk) 03:27, 22 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Ravensfire (talk) 03:27, 22 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Ravensfire (talk) 03:27, 22 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Ravensfire (talk) 03:27, 22 April 2021 (UTC)

Keep: The article may be promotional. But AFD is not cleanup. This is one of the most reputed cinematographers in Tollywood (Even though, Im hearing this name for first time since Im actually from Kerala). Since the subject has worked as a cinematographer in plenty of Bengali movies over the last two decades, I did a detailed and thorough WP:BEFORE and got this[47] and this [48]. But these two are not sufficient alone to establish GNG. So I went more deeper and got this[49] one from TOI, which is giving good coverage to the subject. It covers his entire career as a DOP since its beginning in the 90's to the present. The title itself says; Meet the popular lensmen of Tollywood. I also did a WP:Before in Bengali using google translator and got this[50] which is also giving enough sigcov to the subject. The person has worked as a DOP in more than 50 movies if Im right. So all these makes subject easily passes WP:FILMMAKER or WP:ARTIST.Kichu🐘 ^{Need any help?} 05:13, 22 April 2021 (UTC) Blocked sockpuppet.--Goldsztajn (talk) 06:19, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
- Kashmorwiki, TOI is not an ideal source for showing notability with their The_Times_of_India#Paid_news. There is no way to identify what's paid and not paid, and there are a lot of puff pieces around anyone in film/tv industry (and of course politics in election time). The news18 sources is promising, but it's an interview which isn't the best for showing notability. I get the body of work they've done is significant, but there is so little else to go on. Ravensfire (talk) 12:43, 22 April 2021 (UTC)
  - Ravensfire, I already knew the issue with TOI. But this person is one of the most reputed DOP in the Bengali film industry, who has worked in more than 50 films. So he automatically passes WP:FILMMAKER. I cannot also say this source is paid one. Its quite natural that film personalities like this would get coverage from multiple sources. And after analysing the TOI source, I dont think its paid one. It is looking fine to me. Kichu🐘 ^{Need any help?} 13:04, 22 April 2021 (UTC) Blocked sockpuppet.--Goldsztajn (talk) 06:19, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 03:34, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

Alexandra Wallace[edit]

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

Non-notable news producer. Unclear if her list of honors (for news broadcasting) confer notability or not. The only RS I could find about her was [51]; other sources seem to be WP:ROUTINE press releases. Natg 19 (talk) 20:46, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Natg 19 (talk) 20:46, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Natg 19 (talk) 20:46, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of News media-related deletion discussions. Natg 19 (talk) 20:46, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Natg 19 (talk) 20:56, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. Natg 19 (talk) 20:56, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Keep. Meets GNG. Sources:

Steinberg, Jacques (17 May 2007). "New Producer at 'Nightly News' Seeks to Regain NBC Dominance". The New York Times.
Stelter, Brian (12 November 2012). "NBC Moves to Shake Up 'Today' Leadership". Media Decoder. The New York Times.
Guthrie, Marisa (12 November 2012). "'Today' Show Shakeup: Alexandra Wallace to Replace Jim Bell as Top Producer". The Hollywood Reporter.
Steinberg, Brian (24 July 2015). "Alex Wallace, One of NBC's Most Senior News Executives, Departs". Variety.

{{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 23:53, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

In my opinion, the only source of those listed above that shows "significant coverage" about her is the first one (which I also found). The rest are WP:ROUTINE coverage about changes at NBC, and do not discuss her in depth. Natg 19 (talk) 23:57, 21 April 2021 (UTC)
- Hiring/departing articles can be routine, but I don't think that's the case here at all. They're not just short announcements that give a name from a press release; they're full bylined articles from media reporters like Brian Stelter that explore the context and impact of the moves. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 01:12, 22 April 2021 (UTC)

Delete Anemic WP:PROMO piece. Wikipedia is not a resume or LinkedIn page. KidAd • SPEAK 04:36, 23 April 2021 (UTC)
- WP:Deletion is not cleanup. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 19:02, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Weak keep While there is significant coverage out there, unfortunately the article reads like a puff piece that someone close to her probably wrote. Trillfendi (talk) 14:49, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kichu🐘 ^{Need any help?} 08:49, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

Delete Corporate executive, not notable. NBC is not a source, LinkedIn is not a source, those Emmys aren't sourced. Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 09:48, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
- If you look above, you will see that the keep argument does not rely on NBC or on LinkedIn. The closer is not likely to give your !vote weight unless you at least attempt to refute the actual case being made for notability, not some imagined strawman. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 19:05, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

Those sources aren't in the page. As it stands, it's a WP:GNG fail. Even with the sources, as noted above. the coverage is routine and not substantively about Wallace who I believe still fails WP:GNG. Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 15:10, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

Your understanding of notability is incorrect. It is a property of a subject and not of a Wikipedia article, so the fact that no one has added all the sources to the article yet is irrelevant. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 15:39, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

This is all veering a tad close to personal. What the closer will or won't do is up to the closer. My understanding of GNG is just fine, thanks. The article as it stands doesn't meet GNG and neither does the subject. That's the point here, without getting pointy. Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 16:48, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

Saurabh Uboweja[edit]

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

Fails WP:GNG. Notability can't be inherited. I am on the fence for notability of the company as well. Written like an advertisement. Being a visiting fac also doesn't help him qualify WP:Academic. The creator has significant edits to subject's company BOD (consulting firm).Nomadicghumakkad (talk) 16:52, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Nomadicghumakkad (talk) 16:52, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 16:55, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:53, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Delete: Does not merit to have an article of himself. No independent significant coverage from multiple sources thus failing GNG. Kichu🐘 ^{Need any help?} 23:25, 21 April 2021 (UTC) Blocked sockpuppet --Goldsztajn (talk) 09:40, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:38, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

Jacob Gold[edit]

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

No indication of being notable. Fails WP:SIGCOV. Sock. scope_creep^Talk 07:51, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. jp×g 08:24, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. jp×g 08:24, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. jp×g 08:24, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. jp×g 08:24, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Finance-related deletion discussions. jp×g 08:24, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Keep per the sources currently in the article. I get the skepticism of the reliability of sources on fake business gurus in recent years (especially with paid pieces on magazines like Forbes and Fortune), and I wanted to say delete just for that stupid author name alone. However, looking at the sources currently in the article, I really don't get why the nominator thought there was no significant coverage. He has a full article on him in The Wall Street Journal, and he has been interviewed for his financial experiences and advice in sources like the Time, CNN, MSNBC, and US News. Searching on Google News also gives me this Patch article listing him as one of the worst New York City landlords of 2016, a New York Times article interviewing him, another Wall Street Journal, another one, and the fact that one of his books got published by Wiley is also pretty significant. I know, with that last one, WP:Notability is not inherited. But, look at that mixed with the other evidence I provided. If that first WSJ profile I mentioned happens to be a paid piece (where I don't know if it is, hopefully not), I'll change my decision to a moderate keep. 👨x🐱 (talk) 13:21, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

The first one is fairly decent, but the rest are very weak. One looks like a paid profile, another one is a statement-based, passing mention, the bad landlord is a passing mention. All in all, they are pretty weak in terms of depth. Certainly, coverage i'd say, but the seems on the surface fairly weak, more so because of the link with his dad, has received it. See what happens. Could be wrong. scope_creep^Talk 15:25, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Honestly, some of these sources do actually interview him for opinions and advice. I wouldn't consider those just passing mentions. 👨x🐱 (talk) 15:33, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Keep Between the NY Times profile piece, multiple non-self-published books, and then many many articles where te subject is interviewed by various journalists as parts of broader financial articles, this subject seems notable. Most importantly, going by the spirit of GNG (remember when guidelines had a purpose?) it seems reasonable to conclude for rhese reasons that enough sources can be reasonably presumed to exist to build a decent article. Hyperion35 (talk) 22:37, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

A lot of presumptions in there without an actual examination of references. Where are the book reviews to satisfy WP:AUTHOR? The coverage is minor and insufficient to satisfy WP:SIGCOV. Interviews and profiles don't cut it and are dependent. scope_creep^Talk 23:20, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

What is there seems to go back into the 1970's. That is worth a look. Sustained coverage over years is certainly notable. scope_creep^Talk 17:26, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

Delete. The WSJ profile is a solid source but all the other sources that I have looked at (the sources in the article and the sources mentioned above, including the NYT piece) are too weak. They quote his opinions about something but don't really cover him "directly and in detail" as WP:GNG requires. For satisfying WP:GNG or WP:BIO I'd want to see a few more sources with the kind of direct coverage that the WSJ source provides. Nsk92 (talk) 18:50, 23 April 2021 (UTC)
- The fact that he's interviewed by sources like CNN for financial info at all, I would say, makes him notable, but I could understand the concern about coverage not being about himself. 👨x🐱 (talk) 00:31, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 18:38, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

Jake Wood (veteran)[edit]

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

Can't see why this guy is notable. Fails WP:BIO scope_creep^Talk 08:08, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. jp×g 08:23, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. jp×g 08:23, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. jp×g 08:23, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Delete also WP:AUTHOR. Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 13:08, 21 April 2021 (UTC)
Keep AFAIK the book Charlie Mike is published by Simon and Schuster and is "50%" about him and his Team Rubicon work. I would have thought that, when added to the other sources, was more than enough to meet GNG. No doubt the book has more personal info as well as details on the Team Rubicon stuff. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 08:56, 22 April 2021 (UTC)

Where is the reviews? scope_creep^Talk 21:23, 22 April 2021 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 12:28, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

Keep Jake Wood and William McNulty co-founded Team Rubicon. He and his non-profit has received considerable media coverage. Asher Heimermann (talk)

@Asher Heimermann: There are no notability policies on Wikipedia that says if you found an NGO or a company then you are notable. I founded an NGO or more explicitly a charity once, am I notable? Could be by your rules, but of course, I'm not and neither is this person. Where is the reference to support it? Three per WP:THREE would do it. scope_creep^Talk 13:31, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

He might have a couple of honourary degrees. If you could find them, it would be ideal. scope_creep^Talk 13:33, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

Keep I agree that there is enough coverage about this individual to show notability, together with the awards and the founding of a notable organization. Added mention to his newest book, and reviews of the book about him. Alan Islas (talk) 05:32, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

TeslaBjorn[edit]

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

Only claim to notability of this subject seems to be that he was "part of a team that set the new record at 2,781 km in 24 hours .." and that he won a Tesla Model X and a couple of other Teslas. Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 06:38, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. jp×g 07:29, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Entertainment-related deletion discussions. jp×g 07:29, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Popular culture-related deletion discussions. jp×g 07:29, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. jp×g 07:29, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

"This subject" is actually named Bjørn Nyland, but due to the article on 1980s Bjørn Nyland (skater), the article is at Teslabjorn, which is the name of his live stream YT channel "TeslabjornLive24". The real channel is "Bjørn Nyland", so the article should be moved to Bjørn Nyland (YouTuber). For over seven years, Nyland covers Electric cars in an entertaining and informative way, which is recognized by e.g. InsideEVs here, by CleanTechnica here. Nyland belongs to Category:Motoring journalists or similar. Is it a coincidence that "the subject" who wants the article on a well-respected Electric Vehicle proponent to be deleted happens to work in the oil industry in Saudi Arabia since 2012? Matthead Discuß 10:33, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 07:17, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

Keep, and rename Bjørn Nyland (YouTuber). Article sourcing also needs some WP:TNT. Regularly featured in InsideEVs[52], CleanTechnica[53], Electrek[54], Autoevolution[55], and Teslarati[56]. I also found some articles in Ars Technica[57] and Tech Crunch[58]. SailingInABathTub (talk) 19:23, 28 April 2021 (UTC)
Keep, as creator. Article moved to Bjørn Nyland (YouTuber) as suggested. Also added some references. Matthead Discuß 11:05, 1 May 2021 (UTC)
Keep. A simple Google search for Bjørn Nyland [59] will reveal that the proponent's assertion ("Only claim to notability...") is incorrect. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.189.56.64 (talk) 11:47, 1 May 2021 (UTC)
- Are you referring to the same primary sources now than what are used in the article? Videos by the subject, their instagram, ... what shows up at the front page of that search is not showing notability. It is the same type of material that I saw in the article. Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 05:40, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

Are you denying that InsideEVs, Electrive.com are on the first page of the search results, and a whole lot of other webpages on the others pages? Like The incredible story of an EV evangelist who won 4 Teslas? Or is your self-proclaimed "Since the beginning of 2012 I am living in Saudi Arabia" to blame, Censorship_in_Saudi_Arabia#The_Internet filtering out valid sources? Matthead Discuß 09:50, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

Matthead, please desist with your personal attacks that have no basis in anything. The only link is indeed the link from InsideEVs, the other 9 are utterly unreliable, self published material. I however do not go by Google searches for notability, I go by what was in the version I saw, which are 7 youtube videos by the subject, his facebook, and quite some references which are not Bjorn's work that are referenced. You are free to upgrade the references (and there are now more, but also even more facebook and youtube links). Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 10:28, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

I find it puzzling that reference is made to "what shows up at the front page of that search" [my emphasis]. The search is stated to return 366'000 results; some of these will be other Nylands (not least a famous skater), but it doesn't make sense to draw conclusions from only the first page.

I dug in a little deeper and did a quick sweep across the European language map. I found references (mostly online, but some also in parallel print) to Bjørn Nyland in Norwegian, Swedish, Finnish, Danish, English, Dutch, German, Polish, French, Portuguese, Spanish, Italian, Croatian, Hungarian, Romanian, and Russian. There are more further afield, including Arabic, and of course many in Thai. I probably overlooked some, and one can probably easily nitpick about some of them, but overall there is no doubt that Bjørn Nyland is a well known, widely quoted and observed, and highly respected authority on electric vehicles. According to Wikipedia's published notability guidelines [60] "People are presumed notable if they have received significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject." I believe this criterium is amply fulfilled for Bjørn Nyland.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.189.56.64 (talk • contribs)

@80.189.56.64:, yes, it is easy to find documents. Many searches on Google result in a lot of results. But Google does sort the results to a certain extend, based on their optimization of results and resulting in a list sorted by what people are mostly looking for on a subject on Google. If the first 10 are 9 times blogs / social media / youtube channels / etc. and one article then that means that that is what is mostly used through Google. The article that I proposed for deletion had 9 out of 14 to youtube/facebook, now it is 11 out of 23 (plus 5 search results). There may be more results on next Google pages, but a) they are already deemed less important by Google, and b) they are not used as references if they pass our bar of WP:RS. --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 08:05, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

Note To expand, in this version references 1-4 are own material, reference 5 references "After German Youtuber Horst Lüning and his son have covered 2,424km" is not giving notability to TeslaBjorn, reference 6 references "in June 2016, Lüning in 2018 joined an Austrian G-Electric team", which hardly is a claim to notability of the subject if you are part of a team. Reference 7 is for "Nyland set this record using the IONITY 350kW quick chargers Demminer Land", which I agree is a claim to TeslaBjorn's notability, references 8 and 9 are for the network, not for TeslaBjorn's work. References 10 and 11 are for winning prizes (and unless a prize is of high significance/notability, winning a prize alone is not a claim to notability). That is one reference left over in that version.

In the current version (which has added references for a number of youtube videos, and another reference to their facebook feed) there is a set of references added between reference 4 and 5 of the previous (the first another SPS youtube): https://insideevs.com/search/?q=Bjorn+Nyland https://cleantechnica.com/?s=Bjorn+Nyland https://electrek.co/?s=Bjorn+Nyland https://www.autoevolution.com/search.php?s=Bjorn+Nyland https://www.teslarati.com/?s=Bjorn+Nyland . All 5 are search results without proper claim how they show notability. That you are being mentioned in a journal or magazine, that you published in a renowned journal, that you won some random prize, are not claims to notability. Then we have a proper new claim 'Nylands 18 hours long effort in 2015 to slowly hypermile his Model S to a "Record-Breaking 452.8 Miles On A Single Charge"' with references which is adding to the claim to notability. The rest of the references are already discussed in the previous paragraph. So now we have 2 claims to notability. --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 07:00, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

It seems to me that deletion is being proposed because the references listed in the page could be improved upon. In this case I think it would be more productive to suggest improving the references; few things will be perfect from square one.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.189.56.64 (talk • contribs)
- @80.189.56.64: Yes, and I will gladly withdraw the nomination if in these handful of days the article really shows a significant relative increase in proper claims of notability. From 1 to 2 claims and for the rest a massive expand on primary sources without secondary support is not going to cut that deal, nor does a 'go look on Google'. --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 08:05, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

Leslie Butler (musician)[edit]

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

BLP referenced only to Discogs (user-generated content, not a WP:RS) and an article about his brother. 59 results on Google News exist for "Leslie Butler", most of which seem to be quoting an agriculture professor of the same name. None mention him. Google results do not turn up anything remotely useful either. I will withdraw this nomination if someone can find something I couldn't. jp×g 02:48, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. jp×g 03:41, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. jp×g 03:41, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Caribbean-related deletion discussions. jp×g 03:41, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Keep various sources in books. "jazz + Leslie Butler" quickly produced several books and articles. Although it has to be said clearly in younger brother's shadow. In ictu oculi (talk) 12:23, 21 April 2021 (UTC)
Delete A Google search of "jazz leslie butler" and various permutations of that returns little more than retailers and a few passing mentions in pieces about jazz scenes. Google books is a null outside copyright catalogues. Fails WP:MUSICBIO; [WP:GNG]] and pretty much every notability test there is. Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 13:56, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 12:34, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

Delete, some trivial references, but fails WP:NMUSIC and WP:NBIO. SailingInABathTub (talk) 13:53, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

Patrik Enblad[edit]

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

Unsourced single-sentence BLP. Previous PROD was removed because the article had a single external link; unfortunately, this link is to a primary source, the (now defunct) bank's website. I could not find anything about this guy online, aside from passing mentions in articles like this one. I do not think he meets WP:GNG, or that significant coverage exists to have even a single-sentence stub about him. If someone can find good sources where I have failed, I will withdraw this nomination. jp×g 03:10, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. jp×g 03:10, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. jp×g 03:10, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Finance-related deletion discussions. jp×g 03:10, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. jp×g 03:10, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Economics-related deletion discussions. jp×g 03:10, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sweden-related deletion discussions. jp×g 03:10, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

~~Delete per nom. Like the nominator, I have been unable to find any independent and reliable reporting on the man, let alone significant coverage. MarginalCost (talk) 04:41, 21 April 2021 (UTC)~~ Neutral for now pending further source analysis. See comments below. MarginalCost (talk) 17:40, 23 April 2021 (UTC)
Delete per nom. Fails WP:GNG Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 13:56, 21 April 2021 (UTC)
Keep. There are a couple of decent articles in for example Dagens Industri, available through w:sv:Mediearkivet, going beyond routine coverage. I've expanded the article and added sources. I didn't know much about Enblad before I started digging, but the articles I found easily convinced me of his notability. He's been at the heart of several important cases and deals in Sweden, not least during his tenure at HQ, and is apparently one of the main subjects of at least one (non-fiction) book, Den stora bankhärvan by Carolina Neurath, about the scandals at HQ. I haven't read it, but I found this article in Resumé (magazine) naming him "one of the main characters" so I'm sure there's plenty more to add in addition to what I've found. /Julle (talk) 14:56, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Ping JPxG, Alexandermcnabb and MarginalCost, if you'd want to take a new look at it. /Julle (talk) 14:59, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Julle There's more, I agree, but I don't think it slips him past WP:GNG unless there's significant news coverage of the attempted bank takeover with him noted as a key player. My Swedish isn't up to the search (and it might be he belongs in Swedish WP but not enwiki). Being a litigious suit who doesn't like journalists doesn't, sadly, make him notable. Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 04:53, 22 April 2021 (UTC)

The ligitation, of course, is not relevant here, so there's no need to refure it as an argument for inclusion – it's the fact that he's one of the main subjects of a book by a respected journalist that was the point of that link. /Julle (talk) 12:23, 22 April 2021 (UTC)

Also, I would consider the Dagens Industri articles enough to pass GNG. /Julle (talk) 13:45, 22 April 2021 (UTC)

Julle, these are indeed sources I didn't find before. Like Alexander, I am not completely sure they meet GNG. (Though, as a corrective to Alexander, I would say that Sources do not have to be available online or written in English, even on the English Wikipedia.) Going off the current article footnotes, sources 1 and 3 are behind a paywall, and my local library database doesn't have them. I am not totally convinced they are more than routine coverage, which DI has a lot of. Can you specify what exactly is in these articles about the man beyond just announcements of position changes and share sales? Footnote 4 is just routine coverage. Footnote 2 is a little stranger, with some mix of anonymous gossip and quotes from Enblad himself, which doesn't seem enough to me. The book, if published, could be significant, but I can't seem to determine if it was ever published. The article, from 2011, says it was due to be published 3 months later (August 2011 presumably), but I can't seem to find it on Amazon, WorldCat, or other general searches.

Nonetheless, I am now not at all confident in my delete vote, so I am changing to neutral for now. MarginalCost (talk) 17:40, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

I'll try to take another look at the DI articles later to address your question (I don't have access to them right now, as I need to be logged in to Mediearkivet) but regarding the book it was published in 2011, by Norstedts. /Julle (talk) 17:47, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

Delete 4 sources still not enough IMO to meet notability. Webmaster862 (talk) 05:15, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Number of sources is irrelevant (except perhaps the barest minimum of two to meet definition of "multiple" in GNG), quality of available sources still under discussion with consensus still developing.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 18:45, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

Keep - I agree with Julle’s assessment that the sources are good and pushes this article to WP:GNG. That the number of sources would not indicate notability is a rationale I do not buy.BabbaQ (talk) 23:17, 1 May 2021 (UTC)

Venkat Renganathan[edit]

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

On doing a WP:Before, I only got sources which mention about the subject for his notable role in the television series Pandiyan Stores. No other useful sources were found giving enough sigcov to the subject. Fails GNG Kichu🐘 ^{Need any help?} 02:39, 21 April 2021 (UTC) Blocked sockpuppet --Goldsztajn (talk) 12:12, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Kichu🐘 ^{Need any help?} 02:39, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Kichu🐘 ^{Need any help?} 02:39, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Kichu🐘 ^{Need any help?} 02:39, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 07:19, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 08:00, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

Eric Kalala[edit]

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

No indication of being notable. Fails WP:SIGCOV. scope_creep^Talk 11:39, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 11:45, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Democratic Republic of the Congo-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 11:45, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Keep - easily passes WP:GNG. In addition to already added references, see [61], [62], [63], [64], [65], [66], [67], [68], [69], [70]. Nominator clearly hasn't done WP:BEFORE search. I guess there is a lot of local language coverage in addition to English/French sources which I added. Störm (talk) 16:00, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

They are all the same reference, apart from the third one. They are routine annoucements for position of CEO and are effectively press-release or come from a single press-release, as the information is the same in every one. The third reference is a story of a funeral and seems to be a passing mention and is a deopendent source. Non of them are suitable to prove WP:SIGCOV nor WP:BIO. scope_creep^Talk 16:02, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Some reason my comment was reverted. scope_creep^Talk 16:02, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Also, see Wikipedia:Systemic bias. It is perfectly possible to assume that there is coverage in offline sources and for country like Congo it is hard to find coverage online. Störm (talk) 16:07, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Comment

Ref 6 is the funeral and is a dependent source.

Ref 7 the same annoucement for CEO.

Ref 8 the same announcement but a bigger article

Ref 9 the same annoucement and a dependent source.

Ref 10 An interview.

Last ref is an interview for a profile entry.

So not a single WP:SECONDARY amongst the lot of them. Three inteviews and several annoucements of work, for a man doing his job. Fails WP:SIGCOV and WP:BIO. scope_creep^Talk 16:10, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. EpicPupper 18:27, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Africa-related deletion discussions. EpicPupper 18:27, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Comment The four references currently in the article, are the same announcement, in French and English. scope_creep^Talk 23:36, 21 April 2021 (UTC)
Keep: Other articles and revelant citations that discusses Eric Kalala's work have been included. Comment transcribed from top to bottom. Added by User:NolwaziBam 21:42, 25 April 2021‎ (UTC) Sig added scope_creep^Talk 21:36, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Natg 19 (talk) 02:05, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

Two citations have been added. One is a passing mention and small interview that is not specifically about him. They are very poor references. scope_creep^Talk 21:04, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

Lean delete. I agree that this is a pretty marginal case, but I note that WP:GNG only states that significant coverage is "presumed" to be adequate for notability. I have read most of the articles cited by Storm which are fairly detailed but do little more than attest his holding a number of roles within a mid-to-large size company in a fairly niche industry. What actual substance does that leave us for a biography that would not simply be a WP:CFORK of Bolloré Africa Logistics? Has he actually done or said anything notable while in these roles? His degrees and family background are not, I think, sufficiently important to justify a stand-alone article. And the Congo, by the way, is not a landlocked country as the article claims... —Brigade Piron (talk) 10:47, 3 May 2021 (UTC)
Weak Keep per GNG, coverage is there, just not a ton of stuff he's really done. I find the CSB argument for explaining lack of further sources ill-informed at best, considering how much of the important Congolese media is online these days and the whole trove of online media outlets that could be checked at Wikipedia:WikiProject Democratic Republic of the Congo#Library. -Indy beetle (talk) 14:43, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

Ramya Raj[edit]

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

The subject fails WP:NACTOR. In my opinion, it just a promotional page as the subject participated in the recently aired reality tv show Cooku with Comali. The page was recently deleted by WP:PROD. I request to create an afd discussion for this article. Romil.Choudary (talk) 19:35, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Created with comment left at Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion by IP. ~ GB fan 20:28, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 21:16, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 21:16, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 21:16, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2021 April 19. —cyberbot I_{Talk to my owner:Online} 14:00, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. EpicPupper 18:23, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Asia-related deletion discussions. EpicPupper 18:24, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Keep She acted in four movies out of which acted in major roles in Thee (2009 film) and Naanayam. So passes WP:NACTOR for which the actress need at least two major roles. Kirtos67 (talk) 22:20, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Natg 19 (talk) 02:03, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 08:08, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

Dimitri Ratnayake[edit]

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

Non-notable cricketer, fails WP:GNG. Störm (talk) 17:40, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Delete. Found nothing in searches, and databases are not WP:SIGCOV 👨x🐱 (talk) 18:05, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 18:08, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Cricket-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 18:08, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sri Lanka-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 18:08, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Asia-related deletion discussions. EpicPupper 18:10, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions. EpicPupper 18:10, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. EpicPupper 18:10, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Delete 7 matches but only for uni sides, only really database results in a search, nothing that could be considered GNG coverage. There may be some stuff about him in Wisden but I'm not sure. Games were for 2 different uni sides so there's no good redirect here. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 18:55, 19 April 2021 (UTC)
Keep First class cricketer. Tintin 02:00, 21 April 2021 (UTC)
Keep per Tintin. WP:CRIN clearly says that any player playing any domestic match are considered notable. And there are reliable sources like ESPN Cricinfo, Wisden and CricketArchive that says that player is notable. I don't know why Storm is nominating suitable cricket articles for deletion in a mass. — Preceding unsigned comment added by A.A Prinon (talk • contribs) 02:40, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kichu🐘 ^{Need any help?} 15:26, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

Delete fails WP:GNG, which, yes, WP:CRIN must genuflect to. SportingFlyer T·C 20:39, 4 May 2021 (UTC)
Keep. 7 matches at FC level. StickyWicket (talk) 14:51, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
Comment. It would appear his name is spelled without the first "i", i.e. Dmitri [71], so suggest moving to Dmitri Ratnayake if kept. Found one source from when he was at school, but not much else. _wjemather^{please leave a message...} 15:46, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

Harveer Gandam[edit]

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

Non-notable cricketer, fails WP:GNG. Störm (talk) 18:01, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 18:07, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Cricket-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 18:07, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 18:07, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Europe-related deletion discussions. EpicPupper 18:08, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. EpicPupper 18:08, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions. EpicPupper 18:09, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Weak Delete as I did find a teensy bit of media coverage of his sports performances, but otherwise the only other sources are data profiles cited in the article. None of this is WP:SIGCOV 👨x🐱 (talk) 18:17, 19 April 2021 (UTC)
Redirect to List of Loughborough MCCU players Only matches for uni sides. There is this but not enough for GNG. Redirect is a suitable WP:ATD and probably should have been BOLDly redirected to save the AfD. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 18:48, 19 April 2021 (UTC)
Keep. First class cricketer. If there are questions on notability, the AfD creator should perhaps read about it WP:CRIC and discuss there. Tintin 17:28, 22 April 2021 (UTC)
NCRIC offers only a weak presumption of notability (the suitability of the subject for a standalone article due to likely existence of coverage meeting GNG requirements). When challenged at AFD, it must be shown that that presumption was correct and that GNG has been met. It is not sufficient to simply restate that the SNG has been met, although even that is tenuous here since his participation is limited to non-competitive matches for a university side, not a first-class county, in an era when they were regarded by the counties as little more than practice games and an opportunity for padding averages. _wjemather^{please leave a message...} 19:41, 24 April 2021 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kichu🐘 ^{Need any help?} 15:25, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

Foxhall A. Parker Sr.[edit]

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

U.S. Navy Commodore (United States) who commanded USS Constitution for a year or so in 1842. Also apparently commanded the Home Squadron in 1851. Page has only one ref and has been tagged refimprove since 2008. While there are a few sources I don't believe they amount to SIGCOV in multiple RS necessary to meet WP:GNG. Mztourist (talk) 05:59, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. Mztourist (talk) 06:01, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Virginia-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 13:57, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Delete Let's be clear. The one source is a 123 year old book on the history of the family he was a part of. I am not sure such a work, even published 5 years ago, would be considered a reliable source to document things that were an actual clain to notability. Not everyone who was the chief officer for the USS Constitution is default notable, and that is where we would have to set it at to find Parker as notable.John Pack Lambert (talk) 19:01, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the Article Rescue Squadron's list of content for rescue consideration. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 10:23, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Keep. As commodore commanding the Home Squadron, one of the main divisions of the US Navy at the time, he would clearly seem to be notable. The fact he held this post is easily confirmed by a Google search. -- Necrothesp (talk) 12:45, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

The fact that he held the post is not disputed, nor is it inherently notable. Mztourist (talk) 04:36, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 13:58, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 15:34, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. EpicPupper 18:25, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Keep He was Commander-in-Chief of the East India Squadron (just added) which was all US Navy forces in the Far East, Commander of the USS Constitution, and commanded the Home Squadron. These are all historic and major positions. The article is also now well sourced. -- GreenC 21:42, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

The fact that he commanded the Home Squadron or East India Squadron doesn't establish notability. Where is "historic and major positions" a notability guideline? Only SIGCOV in multiple RS establishes notability.Mztourist (talk) 04:18, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

~~Weak delete~~ In my WP:Before I'm struggling to find anything beyond directory naval listings and mentions of his relations to his more well-known sons. The sources given here are mostly about his family. We know when he held certain ranks and commands, but there's not much info on if he really did anything of note during his service. If we could find another source more focused on him and his career akin to the USS Constitution Museum entry I'd be inclined to change my mind. -Indy beetle (talk) 10:34, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

Indy beetle: additional sources and information added, including: one of two signatories of the historic Treaty of Wanghia which was historically the first Sino-American pact; his role in releasing hostages from Cuba; his role in a dispute with the British that almost led to a Anglo-American conflict; advised the German government on how to organize their navy. A Google Books search on "East India Squadron foxhall" came back with nearly a dozen pages of results and there might be more with similar key terms like "greytown foxhall", etc.. -- GreenC 16:32, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Per the provision of more sources I think this passes GNG so I'm switching my vote to Keep. -Indy beetle (talk) 05:08, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

Keep per WP:HEY, WP:BASIC due to the multiple independent and reliable sources now in the article, and WP:ANYBIO #3, he has an entry in the Encyclopedia of Virginia Biography. Beccaynr (talk) 01:15, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

Is the Encyclopedia of Virginia Biography the "country's standard national biographical dictionary" as required by ANYBIO #3? Mztourist (talk) 05:09, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

I was thinking of the Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Millie Lawson Bethell Paxton discussion, where the closing comment was A clear consensus for keep based on the presence of the subject's entry in the Dictionary of Virginia Biography, and some of the discussion was based on WP:ANYBIO and suggested that when there is an entry, it indicates a likelihood of other sources existing; in this case, that has also been established by the sources added to the article. Beccaynr (talk) 05:32, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

Then it seems the closer made a mistake, because a state's biography isn't the "country's standard national biographical dictionary" as required by ANYBIO #3. Mztourist (talk) 15:32, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

It seems possible that the closer was reflecting the rough consensus of the discussion about the significance of the entry and the indication of the likely existence of additional sources. And at the time of the closing, the WP:ANYBIO criteria had not been edited diff to remove the "or similar publication" language - I have not been able to find whether there was any discussion on the change to the criteria and the apparent past consensus about the support an entry in a 'similar publication' can provide for notability, but regardless, the entry appears to be one of multiple independent and reliable sources that support notability per WP:BASIC. Beccaynr (talk) 16:20, 23 April 2021 (UTC) And thank you for calling my attention to the change in the criteria, it is appreciated. Beccaynr (talk) 16:30, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

~~Weak~~ Delete As far as I can tell the article is based on one major RS, which was essentially misquoted both times it was used to discuss Parker's actions in the Caribbean (Long's "Gold Braid and Foreign Relations"). And Long's book doesn't go into any real detail about Parker, who honestly feels more like a spectator each time he's mentioned. Intothatdarkness 14:49, 23 April 2021 (UTC) I took another look at what was cited from Long and am removing weak from my !vote. In my view Parker didn't do anything notable. Intothatdarkness 16:58, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

"the article is based on one major RS" (emphasis added). That source is used 3 times out of 21 citations, or 14% of the article. GNG says nothing about "major" sources. -- GreenC 02:26, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

And it was misquoted at least twice and exaggerated one additional time. And in any case, the references are more namechecks than anything else...the basic gist being Parker was there and didn't screw anything up. The other sources are family history or obituaries. Evaluation of sources matters, and the job of a family history or obituary is to talk up the person in question. The one RS that wasn't an obit or family history piece is, at the end of the day, mainly namechecking. Intothatdarkness 14:06, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

I disagree with your characterization of the sources ("family history or obituaries" except for one is plainly untrue; so is the "namechecks" when is playing a role in events described; and obituaries in RS are perfectly acceptable); and of Foxhall Parker Sr himself ("was there and didn't screw anything up."). For some reason have take an extremely dim view of this article that has extended even to the person himself. -- GreenC 15:06, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

You seem to have missed the point when it comes to obituaries. And Long's mentions of Parker clearly convey his impression of an officer who wasn't especially dynamic but wasn't going to make big mistakes either. Long's quote about Parker during his Havana mission (which was changed) sums it up: "It is hard to say to what extent his appeals contributed...but clearly Parker's arguments could have done no harm." In the end, an average officer of no major notability. Intothatdarkness 16:31, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

I'd also note that if you go back to the actual Army & Navy Journal article Parker's descendant was responding to (27 May, on page 918 of the source listed as reference 7 in the article), it doesn't confirm the offer of flag rank to Parker and notes as an aside that he took with him "several officers of our Navy who had been dismissed for dueling or other offenses not affecting their professional reputations." The same article also mentions an exchange of German naval officers during the same period. Letters to the editor (which is what D. Parker's piece in the ANJ was, after all) aren't always reliable. Intothatdarkness 16:45, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

Delete There's only one major reliable source and the person didn't do anything notable. So, failing someone comes up with WP:THREE (or really two since we have one already) major reliable sources I'm not sure what grounds there are to keep this based on. --Adamant1 (talk) 01:59, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

The article contains multiple reliable sources, some old some new, notability does not expire with age, we don't favor newer sources over older. GNG says nothing about a requirement for major sources. -- GreenC 02:26, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

Where did I say anything about the age of the sources? With the whole "major" thing, the requirements are that they not be trivial. Feel free to use whatever word you want to describe "non-trivial", I could really care less, but I went with major and last time I checked we can do that. --Adamant1 (talk) 04:30, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

WP:BASIC says, If the depth of coverage in any given source is not substantial, then multiple independent sources may be combined to demonstrate notability, and WP:GNG says Significant coverage is more than a trivial mention, but it does not need to be the main topic of the source material, and while the first source in the article is a relatively trivial mention despite including some career information, other sources have more than a trivial mention, including the USS Constitution Museum, which is focused on Parker, Sr., The Virginia Magazine of History and Biography, which includes biographical and career information, the Annual Obituary Notices of Eminent Persons Who Have Died in the United States. For 1857, which includes career information, The Army and Navy Journal, which also includes career information, and the Virginia Encyclopedia of Biography, which also includes career information. Beccaynr (talk) 04:53, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

The key word there is "may be combined", not "should be." Sure it's an option to combine sources so something is notable, but it's not obligatory. Nor is it the correct thing to do in every single instance. Obviously context matters. Outside of that, obituaries are by their nature trivial, especially for anyone in the armed services, and ussconstitutionmuseum.org is not an independent source. --Adamant1 (talk) 06:22, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

My read on the 'may' is that it allows the combination when notability is challenged. The context of this particular obituary is in a collection of 'Eminent' persons, so it seems to support notability, and the USS Constituion Museum was incorporated in 1972 as a private, non-profit and non-government funded interpretive complement to USS Constitution, so it appears to be independent. Beccaynr (talk) 14:19, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

It's a private mesuem for the ship he commanded. They have a vested interested in writing about him a way that will attract people to said mesuem. In no way is that independepent. Anymore then a webpage for a certain featured animal on a zoos website or one about a ride on the page for Disney Land would be. Adamant1 (talk) 18:45, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

I disagree that a regular zoo and especially a Disney Land ride are comparable, because the museum also has a research library, so the information it publishes about Parker, Sr. appears to be based on WP:SCHOLARSHIP. Beccaynr (talk) 23:52, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

Maybe if that page was something put out by someone from said research library as part of a research project/printed journal article then I'd be cool with it because the information would be peer reviewed and attributed to someone. As it is though, its just a random page on a website without any attribution except the museum. So there's zero evidence the information was vetted by the research library let alone came from an expert in field or anything. For all we know some random IT person could have created the page based on some version of a Wikipedia article. That kind of thing happens all the time. There at least has to be some kind of attribution in the meantime to prove otherwise and there isn't. Even if it was though id still argue it isn't independent though anymore the various "research magazines" put out by religious groups like the Seventh Day Adventists or Scientology foundation are. Adamant1 (talk) 03:17, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

Evidence that this is a scholarly institution includes the Impact + Recognition page of the museum's website, e.g. "accredited by the American Alliance of Museums," and affiliated with the Council of American Maritime Museums and the Smithsonian Institution. Beccaynr (talk) 16:21, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

Cool. That's not my argument, it never has been, and I don't appreciate the Strawmaning that it is. Also, it doesn't matter who they are affiliated with. Notability isn't inherited and it's completely ridiculous to say a random anonymous blog post on a website should be used for notability just because whoever runs the website it's hosted on is affiliated with some other organization that is legitimate. Whatever janitorial service cleans the Smithsonian's bathrooms is affiliated with them. That doesn't mean I'd take anything they have to say about 18th century French Impressionism as gospel. Seriously, there should more then that behind your argument to keep an article. Really, if this article was about an actually notable subject everything wouldn't hinge on that one source or you desperately trying to legitimize it in this discussion anyway. Hopefully other "voters" will take of that. --Adamant1 (talk) 01:30, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

To quickly clarify, because I do not wish to WP:BLUDGEON this discussion, I was trying to respond to the suggestion that it might be possible for some random IT person to have created the page based on some version of a Wikipedia article, and I am also not solely relying on the source to support notability, as noted above. And when focusing on the scholarly nature of the institution, I have been thinking of WP:INDEPENDENT, e.g. An "independent" source is one that has no vested interest in the subject. For example, the independent source will not earn any extra money by convincing readers of its viewpoint. A "third-party" source is one that is not directly involved in any transaction related to the subject, but may still have a financial or other vested interest in the outcome. [...] Except when directly specified otherwise in the policy or guideline, it is sufficient for a source to be either independent or third-party, and it is ideal to rely on sources that are both. This is a nonprofit, non-government museum and a research institution, not a random anonymous blog, and it therefore appears to be sufficiently independent and/or third-party to support notability. Beccaynr (talk) 05:40, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

But it's a random anonymous blog post on the website of the institution. Which you seem to be ignoring. Whatever the status of the institution is, it's really second to who wrote the page. I'd love to know how you can ascertain that the page was written by someone with the necessary expertise in the field to be considered an expert or would otherwise be knowledgeable enough on the topic, because there's really no way to know that. It's ridiculous to say that because the "institution" is not anonymous that any given page on their website isn't or that because they are associated with the Smithsonian that every single person all the way from their CEO to their door man is or that they all have the same level of expert knowledge. Like a random cafeteria lady at my local university is just as knowledgeable about history as a Phd history professor is, or even that the librarian chick who organizes the books in the library (and likely writes the random pages on their libraries website) knows as much about Sociology as the people in the sociology department. Let alone that would have same clout anywhere "because hey man, their part of the same institution right?" So a random cafeteria lady or librarian is totally the same as a tenured research professor. Or a random page on the libraries website is exactly the same as a Masters thesis. Whatever. --Adamant1 (talk) 05:58, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kichu🐘 ^{Need any help?} 15:27, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

keep informative, well-sourced article on notable military person per HEY. DiamondRemley39 (talk) 10:37, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Comment on sources The majority of sources for this article are obituaries, some cited multiple times in the same paragraph. The Army & Navy Journal citation tracks back to a letter to the editor written by a descendant of the subject, and thus can't be considered impartial (or even probably RS). The article it was written in response to was a piece in the previous ANJ that made far less sweeping claims and made Parker's assignment sound more routine (and even that piece said "Though we do not find any record of the fact, we are informed by an old officer of our Navy" before discussing Parker's assignment). The RS scholarly sources used make scant mention of the subject (and in my view were misrepresented in earlier versions of the article to enhance Parker's role in events). If you evaluate the sources, and check them for accuracy, it reduces the notability of the subject to the point (in my view) he doesn't pass GNG. Intothatdarkness 13:58, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

Any how you count it, "the majority of sources are obits" is factually not true. It's easy to tell, obits are published around the year someone died, look a the source dates there is one obit the rest are biographical or monologues. And even it were true (which it is not) so what? You are going out of your way to misrepresent the sources with negative opinions and characterizations. First you said there was was one reliable source ("major") now you admit there are multiple "scholarly sources". You say they make "scant" mention, but the sources describe the events he was involved in sufficiently - it would be hard to write an article with "scant" mentions. The Army & Navy Journal is just one citation of many, the letter itself is a WP:PRIMARY (acceptable) but the fact it was re-published in a RS tells us something about the notability of the topic and the letter - this how we determine if a primary source is notable enough for inclusion, mentions in secondary sources. -- GreenC 16:04, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

The letter was published, not republished. It appears only in ANJ. And at the time I made my comment regarding one major RS there was only one in the article. Perhaps if you had backtracked to the original piece in the ANJ you would have understood the context of that letter. And clearly it's possible to write an article of sorts with scant mentions...we're discussing one now. Intothatdarkness 16:32, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

Eric Dinowitz[edit]

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

City-level politicians aren't inherently notable, and I can't find any solid secondary sources (beyond a few mentions in local press of his candidacy and election results, plus the usual social media of course) to satisfy sigcov, hence fails WP:GNG / WP:POLITICIAN. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:48, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:48, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:48, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:48, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:48, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Delete per nom's rationale. Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 09:25, 19 April 2021 (UTC)
Keep. Eric Dinowitz is a sitting member of the New York City Council whose council members have long had Wikipedia articles without issue. I think throwing in an NYC Councilman as "local politician," is not a correct interpretation of the rules.--Mpen320 (talk) 00:58, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
Keep and flag for improvement. This is definitely in dire need of improvement — namely, it has to be referenced to media coverage, not just to Ballotpedia and his own self-published website about himself — but New York City is very much one of the internationally prominent global cities where we absolutely do accept the city council as a notable political office. Bearcat (talk) 03:44, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

Bearcat where in WP:NPOL does it say that there is an exception for local politicians in NYC or other global cities? --hroest 14:38, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

WP:POLOUTCOMES specifies that we keep city councillors in internationally prominent global cities. Category:New York City Council members has over 300 articles on past or present New York City councillors, and even just the membership list in New York City Council reveals that every single other incumbent NYC councillor has an article with the isolated exceptions of a couple who were also just newly elected in March (which means their articles just haven't been started yet, not that they're barred from ever having articles on notability grounds). Chicago, Los Angeles, San Francisco and Toronto, same story: every single incumbent city councillor has an article without exception (although obviously some historical councillors from 50 or 100 years ago have been overlooked). NPOL doesn't have to explicitly reconfirm what POLOUTCOMES already says, especially when what POLOUTCOMES already says is easily backed up by evidence. Bearcat (talk) 14:48, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

Comment I don't see anything in WP:NPOL that says an exception to the rule is to be made for prominent cities, let alone just for NYC. The guideline says "Just being an elected local official [...] does not guarantee notability, although such people can still be notable if they meet the general notability guideline." City politicians are by definition local. I don't see GNG being satisfied. And to say that other NYC politicians may have articles is merely the WP:OSE argument. --DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:10, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

WP:NPOL doesn't have to say it if WP:POLOUTCOMES does. Bearcat (talk) 14:39, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

Delete he got 5000 votes, so he is representing about as many people as a small town mayor. Also, no SIGCOV here, so I agree with DoubleGrazing. It clearly specifies Politicians and judges who have held international, national, or (for countries with federal or similar systems of government) state/province–wide office, or Major local political figures who have received significant press coverage. both of which he fails. --hroest 14:38, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

NPOL is not a question of how many individual votes the person did or didn't get in the process of being elected to a political office — it's a question of whether the body that the person was elected to is a notable one or not, and has nothing to do with how many votes it did or didn't take to get elected to it. Bearcat (talk) 14:56, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

Exactly, that is why it states Politicians and judges who have held international, national, or (for countries with federal or similar systems of government) state/province–wide office, I hope you are not claiming that the NYC city council is a national or international office he got elected to? --hroest 15:15, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

That's NPOL #1, not NPOL #2. NPOL #2 pertains to municipal politicians not covered by NPOL #1, and NPOL #2 is expanded upon in more depth at WP:POLOUTCOMES due to its vagueness and tendency to be interpreted differently by different readers — and POLOUTCOMES explicitly says that while city councillors are not automatically deemed notable in all cities, city councillors are deemed notable in internationally prominent global cities such as New York City, Los Angeles, Chicago, Toronto and London. Bearcat (talk) 15:21, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

Hmm I see, thanks for bringing this up. I also see the point of having an article on each member of the council and not having some missing. I need to think about this some more. However, the outcome guidelines are just guidelines and also state precedent has tended to favor keeping members of the main citywide government of internationally famous metropolitan areas such as Toronto, Chicago, Tokyo, or London., where tended to favor is not the same as saying it makes them automatically notable. Also I think we would still need coverage from WP:RS and not his campaign webpage. --hroest 16:17, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

Comment Not voting either way - I'm not sure GNG is satisfied, but it could be, and I'm not going to do the work to check on this one, at least not right now. I just don't completely agree with the "major city exception" to WP:NPOL - I'd like to make sure WP:GNG is met here. SportingFlyer T·C 20:24, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
Note I have gone ahead and cited more references, from both national and regional news sources, to satisfy WP:RS, as well as added a section about Dinowitz's presence within music to potentially satisfy WP:GNG. I do agree with Bearcat's statement on notability, as there are hundreds of articles on past and present New York City Councilors which have been fine, including predecessors within the 11th Council District, so I wouldn't see any exception to be made to this one. -BriLila (talk) 00:48, 22 April 2021 (UTC)
- Comment Again, WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS is not a valid reason in and of itself. --DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:03, 25 April 2021 (UTC)
  - I have to add that WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS is an essay, and not a policy and guideline. Though based on the guideline of WP:POLITICIAN, there is no reason to keep this article. SunDawn (talk) 02:21, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kichu🐘 ^{Need any help?} 00:51, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

Delete per WP:POLITICIAN as a city-level politician he is not inherently notable. New York City, while a very famous city, remains a "city" and should not have more inherent notability than other cities, except for some circumstances. SunDawn (talk) 02:25, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Keep I don't believe that "local politician" is a correct interpretation of the guidelines of Wikipedia:POLITICIAN in these circumstances. New York City council members represent 150,000 people, while it could be in a "local" area, it is still a very large amount of people where I feel the office should not be excluded from being notable. Also, I feel that OSE is a valid argument in the case of inherent notability. There are New York City Council members, past and present, who have articles without any issue. I don't believe this page should be excluded from other New York City council members for this reason. -BriLila (talk) 20:55, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Keep as a member of the New York City Council the subject passes WP:NPOL. --Enos733 (talk) 16:39, 4 May 2021 (UTC)
Keep Member of the city council of the country's largest city. KidAd • SPEAK 20:31, 4 May 2021 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Randykitty (talk) 09:25, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

Naveed Afzal Haq[edit]

AfDs for this article:

Articles for deletion/Naveed Afzal Haq
Articles for deletion/Naveed Afzal Haq (2nd nomination)

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

Fails WP:SPLIT and WP:BIO1E. There's absolutely nothing in this article that cannot simply be merged to the main article at Seattle Jewish Federation shooting. I think it's time to let go of this article and merge any and all relevant content to the main article. Love of Corey (talk) 03:19, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 10:16, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 10:16, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

Comment - Is anyone going to respond, or...? Love of Corey (talk) 22:10, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Survived previous AFD, ineligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 09:28, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

Comment - Pinging participants from a similar AfD discussion, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kimveer Gill, to stimulate discussion: @Koridas: @Joel B. Lewis: Love of Corey (talk) 07:51, 1 May 2021 (UTC)
Merge into Seattle Jewish Federation shooting - This man is only known for the shooting, which makes him fail WP:ONEEVENT. Koridas 📣 07:59, 1 May 2021 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 01:20, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

Comment - Pinging participants for the previous AfD for this article to stimulate further discussion (not sure if any of them are still active on Wikipedia): @SarekOfVulcan: @NuclearWarfare: @Kuyabribri: @Plot Spoiler: @DGG: @Akcarver: @Elliskev: @Bejnar: Love of Corey (talk) 20:43, 3 May 2021 (UTC)
Delete I'm not sure why Iwould have said keep in 2010, 11 years ahgo, except that perhaps it had no yet been overshadowed byso man ymore horrific events. As an indivdual person, he has no possible notability outside the shooting, an the details of his life are not of encyclopedic interest. I'm not sure how much if anything should be merged into the article on the event--but looking at it now, it seems way disportionate in the amount of detail. DGG ( talk ) 00:34, 4 May 2021 (UTC)

There's barely anything about him in the actual Seattle Jewish Federation shooting article itself, so I personally suggest merging everything to that won't do any harm. Love of Corey (talk) 05:09, 4 May 2021 (UTC)

Delete Crime is not inherently notable + WP:BIO1E. Not much needs to be said about him at Seattle Jewish Federation shooting. I agree with DGG, policy Wikipedia:Neutral point of view#Balancing aspects dictates that we keep that article properly proportioned. --Bejnar (talk) 14:49, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

Rati Raut[edit]

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

The only source [72] was brought to light by me, when I added it into Bhumihar article. Besides this no source exist as google search can easily tell. Its clearly a non notable topic. Other citations have no mention of the person himself. Just put to expand the size anyhow. Heba Aisha (talk) 09:22, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 09:31, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 09:31, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

Note to closer for soft deletion: This nomination has had limited participation and falls within the standards set for lack of quorum. There are no previous AfD discussions, undeletions, or current redirects and no previous PRODs have been located. This nomination may be eligible for soft deletion at the end of its 7-day listing. --Cewbot (talk) 00:02, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

Logs: 2021-03 ✍️ create

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kichu🐘 ^{Need any help?} 06:40, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

Regine De Clercq[edit]

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

Fails WP:GNG. None of the current sources are significant coverage. WP:BEFORE does not turning up reliable, independent sources. Zero hits in Google News. CommanderWaterford (talk) 22:58, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. CommanderWaterford (talk) 22:58, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Belgium-related deletion discussions. CommanderWaterford (talk) 22:58, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 23:03, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 23:03, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Weak keep: Being chair-in-office of the Global Forum on Migration and Development seems notable, but it does seem hard to find detailed sources... Furius (talk) 10:06, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

Weak keep: As per Furuis, being a chair-in-office of the Global Forum on Migration and Development is a notable position and can be counted towards notability. Purosinaloense T/K 18:24, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

Delete: Lacks significant coverage by third party sources, therefor clearly fails GNG. Her position alone can not justify a stand-alone Wikipedia article because without any supplemental information, there is no substance to the article. Throast (talk) 21:12, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Natg 19 (talk) 21:44, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kichu🐘 ^{Need any help?} 13:00, 1 May 2021 (UTC)

Delete. I'm quite certain that chairing the Global Forum on Migration and Development would be a sufficient notability claim if the article could be sourced to enough evidence of reliable source coverage about her work in the role to get her over WP:GNG, but it is not such an "inherently" notable position that it should entitle her to keep an article that's based entirely on the self-published content of her own employers in lieu of any media attention being paid to her by journalists. Even "inherent" notability still isn't "person doesn't have to have any GNG-worthy reliable sourcing at all", it's "we know for a fact that the person has better GNG-worthy reliable sourcing than the article is actually using in its current form". Bearcat (talk) 15:36, 1 May 2021 (UTC)

Akash K Aggarwal[edit]

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

DEPRODed w/o explanation, no sufficient significant, independent coverage, fails WP:BIO and WP:GNG CommanderWaterford (talk) 10:58, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. CommanderWaterford (talk) 10:58, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. CommanderWaterford (talk) 10:58, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 11:51, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Delete: as per nomination, no significant coverage defcon5 (talk) 14:06, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
Keep: More contents (not trivial mentions) with reliable sources have been added now. Please go through the references in the article. Over the past decade, India has made unprecedented progress toward LGBT equality and LGBT activist Akash K Aggarwal has made immense contribution (most notably activism against Section 377). He is also a leading accessory designer in bollywood industry (see the article for more) . I think he meets WP:GNG and we should keep this article. Nalbarian (talk) 05:26, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 18:12, 22 April 2021 (UTC)

Keep: Sources added by Nalbarian are sufficient to meet WP:GNG. 130.245.192.7 (talk) 20:42, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Missvain (talk) 17:27, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

Weak delete The coverage seems to be mostly about the celebrities who wore what he designed while appearing in fashion shows, not him or his career. The guy is successful, but I'm not seeing much about him specifically. -Indy beetle (talk) 07:46, 4 May 2021 (UTC)

Eddie Coffie[edit]

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

WP:BIO1E. Non-notable actor. nearlyevil665 20:15, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. nearlyevil665 20:15, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 20:59, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ghana-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 20:59, 13 April 2021 (UTC)'t

Don't Delete: The reason is he is a veteran Ghanaian actor and has featured in a lot of movie before he passed on so kindly maintain it, you can also research about him to get much fact done tagging for speedy deletion.Jwale2 (talk) 21:45, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

Comment: You will have to be more specific as to how this subject - and other articles of yours that I have tagged for deletion - meet the notability requirements outlined in WP:ENT or WP:GNG. These have to be demonstrated through reliable secondary sources. nearlyevil665 21:57, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 00:50, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Keep: The subject in the article is a veteran actor in Ghana. 3 out of 4 sources provided in the article are reliable and independent sources. These references are top news outlets in Ghana. Myjoyonline, Citi Fm Citinewsroom and peacefmonline. Article needs to be improved rather than deleted. Ampimd (talk) 08:45, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 16:34, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

Delete does not meet notability guidelines. How and why is this actor from Ghana different from every other actor? There dont’ seem to be enough facts in the citations or the article would be longer. Star7924 (talk) 23:20, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

Joel P. Bravette[edit]

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

This BLP has been sitting at the back of the new pages patrol queue for months. Nobody seems sure whether the subject is notable or not. I’m not sure myself so bringing it here for consensus. Mccapra (talk) 18:42, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Mccapra (talk) 18:42, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. Mccapra (talk) 18:42, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ─ The Aafī ^(talk) 00:42, 22 April 2021 (UTC)

Delete ah, this is a 'hospital pass'. It's a very, very fine call, IMHO, but I'd say we're flying a few hundred feet under the ceiling. There is mainstream media, but it's press release/interview stuff on offer, not independent sources. An alternative might be to draftify and wait for other sources to emerge, an inevitability, IMHO. But then that's kicking the can down the road. Joel is clearly aiming for notability, but he's not quite there. Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 09:10, 22 April 2021 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 02:29, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

Isaac Saul[edit]

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

Non-notable or not-yet-notable journalist. After discussions with the page’s creator, who has done extensive research, we were unable to identify significant coverage in secondary RS beyond a single source (Yahoo). This may be a case of WP:TOOSOON; for now the entry relies almost entirely on primary sources and does not meet wiki notability threshold. Innisfree987 (talk) 13:41, 1 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Innisfree987 (talk) 13:41, 1 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Journalism-related deletion discussions. Innisfree987 (talk) 13:41, 1 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. Innisfree987 (talk) 13:41, 1 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: The discussion of sources can be found at Talk:Isaac Saul. Innisfree987 (talk) 14:10, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
Delete there is not enough coverage actually about Saul to justify having an article on him.John Pack Lambert (talk) 20:56, 5 April 2021 (UTC)

Hi @Johnpacklambert: since I'm still not a very experienced editor, and this was my first major article, do you mind explaining why this is? I thought that in particular three of the sources that I included justified this for publication:

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/voter-fraud-debunking-journalist-isaac-saul-talks-about-his-viral-election-thread-and-why-the-conspiracy-theories-put-poll-workers-in-danger/ar-BB1bewmv
https://www.yahoo.com/news/16-people-who-shaped-the-2016-election-isaac-saul-175336283.html
https://www.forbes.com/next1000/

And then, there are the sources for his career in Ultimate on top of that. Do you mind explaining why you don't think it's ready? Kokopelli7309 (talk) 02:19, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kieran207(talk-Contribs) 01:47, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

Keep Establishing notability for journalists is fundamentally difficult because news organizations don't want them to be the story. It looks like we have two qualifying sources ([73] (this WP:INTERVIEW has a substantial introduction), [74]). ~Kvng (talk) 13:34, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
- Typically the notability requirement is for secondary sources tho no? (I’m speaking just of what I understand consensus to be—and actually that’s what that essay says—but I guess I’d have to think over what I think the ideal policy would be on primary sources of this type.) Innisfree987 (talk) 15:56, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
  - Innisfree987, Per WP:INTERVIEW: commentary added to interviews by a publication can sometimes count as secondary-source material ~Kvng (talk) 01:57, 17 April 2021 (UTC)
    - - My apologies, I thought you meant the interview itself was a substantial introduction (to Saul). I take it you were talking about what prefaces it. Agree for sure about regarding that as secondary but have to disagree that it’s substantial—it’s just a few sentences. Innisfree987 (talk) 02:15, 17 April 2021 (UTC)
Delete I don't see any evidence that he's notable (yet, perhaps?) The Yahoo piece is pretty minor and afaict, has no byline and the interview isn't enough to satisfy independence of the source, nor coverage of him. TAXIDICAE💰 18:44, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

I did want to add that I found a new source covering the election fraud Twitter thread that does not include an interview: https://www.freepressjournal.in/world/us-elections-2020-journalists-mega-thread-debunking-trump-campaigns-fraud-claim-is-viral-read-here. Also, here's another interview that I found (I know that these aren't considered high-quality sources on their own, but there are a lot of him, and every one of them includes a blurb before the interview itself): https://braverangels.org/tangle-reimagining-political-news-isaac-saul-with-ciaran-oconnortangle-reimagining-political-news-isaac-saul-with-ciaran-oconnor/. Does this help at all? Also, isn't the Forbes source stronger than the Yahoo one anyway? Thank you! Kokopelli7309 (talk) 20:32, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 07:14, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

Delete I don't see enough secondary coverage independent from him either in this AfD or in the article to sustain an article on WP:GNG grounds, for instance the sources include his writings for Huffpost, personal interviews, and a Forbes piece (which doesn't contribute to notability due to the consensus on Forbes and self-publication.) SportingFlyer T·C 20:50, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Still looks borderline after 2 relists, hoping for more people to take a look.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 04:35, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

Kokopelli7309, I see no one has replied about those additional sources, so my two cents: despite the header, the Free Press source is really about Trump and only has a passing mention of Saul. Prose before interviews can be helpful as Kvng was saying, but for AfD purposes we’re looking for material that’s gone through an editorial process, fact-checking, etc. and to me it’s not clear the podcast blurbs fit the bill. So for me these don’t change much, as far as giving us more to go on that’s not Saul’s own writing/commentary, but I appreciate your looking for more sources! Innisfree987 (talk) 21:05, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

Elohor Aiboni[edit]

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

Non-notable. Of the three sources, one only mentions her once as an attendee. The other two mainly report on her appointment, which is not significant coverage. And the main claim to fame seems to be that she is the first female to hold the position of CEO at Shell Nigeria, which in itself is not an inherently notable role. Fails WP:BIO / WP:GNG. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:26, 1 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:26, 1 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:26, 1 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:26, 1 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Nigeria-related deletion discussions. DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:26, 1 April 2021 (UTC)

~~Keep~~Delete Considering that it is rare for women to occupy prominent positions in Nigeria (see Women in Nigeria), being appointed to head the company is important and has been covered by multiple sources. An aide of the President is reported to have confirmed it. I think WP:CONTEXTUALISATION is important for the keep. Vikram Vincent 08:32, 1 April 2021 (UTC)

By that logic, every one of the couple of hundred male midwives in the UK deserve an article, given that they represent a fraction of a per cent of the total midwifery workforce. I think not. --DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:45, 1 April 2021 (UTC)

Well, if the UK Prime Minister acknowledges their appointment to head the mid-husband company ;-) Vikram Vincent 08:53, 1 April 2021 (UTC)

Updated my !vote to delete after looking at the new sources presented by Bennyontheloose though my logic of context still stands. VV 21:04, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

Comment Reliable sources from Nigeria have been added that document her winning the SheCanTech 2019 Woman of the Year award (SheCan holds second conference, celebrates Nigeria’s ‘First Women’ (The Guardian Nigeria, 2019)), and that she was also the first female Asset Operations Manager at the Bonga DeepWater Floating Production Storage and Offloading (FPSO) facility operated by Shell Nigeria, and her educational background (‘We believe every woman can do more when she recognises her innate potentials, capabilities’ (The Guardian Nigeria, 2019)). Beccaynr (talk) 03:14, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
Delete The level of psotion she holds does not grant automatic notability, and the coverage of her holding the position is not enough to pass GNG.John Pack Lambert (talk) 20:27, 5 April 2021 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kieran207(talk-Contribs) 01:49, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

Comment An article has been published here in the last few days. There's also this and this. Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 07:15, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

Delete — I’m not sure how this has eluded me for thus long, but yes per rationale by @DoubleGrazing, WP:GNG is definitely not met. Celestina007 (talk) 20:44, 22 April 2021 (UTC)
Delete Fails WP:BIO. scope_creep^Talk 19:02, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: No attempt has been made to analyze BennyOnTheLoose's sources.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 04:36, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

Delete per WP:BLP1E, looking at the coverage presented by BennyOnTheLoose and others it seems to all be from the singular event of her being appointed to her position as Chief Executive of Shell Nigeria, with the exception of an interview and a passing mention in The Guardian Nigeria. Devonian Wombat (talk) 00:39, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Teja Tanikella (2nd nomination) Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jyoti Tripathi (2nd nomination)

^ https://www.scotsman.com/sport/rugby-union/scotland-v-italy-sarah-law-is-backed-to-pull-the-strings-at-stand-off-3202738

[1] ttps://lso.ca/about-lso/osgoode-hall-and-ontario-legal-heritage/collections-and-research/treasurers-and-benchers-of-the-law-society-of-uppe/list -оф-закон-общества-казначеев

[2] ttps://www.scotsman.com/sport/rugby-union/scotland-v-italy-sarah-law-is-backed-to-pull-the-strings-at-stand-off-3202738