Wikipedia:WikiProject Biography/Deletion sorting

Note: this page is purely an aggregation page of transclusions and not in the same format as other Deletion Sorting pages. "Generic biographies" should be added to Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/People, which is transcluded directly below.

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to People. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.

Note: In most cases there is another, more specific category than this one.

If possible, please use one of these instead:

Note: The following pages are transcluded onto the Biography Deletion sorting page

Note: the following pages are not transcluded onto the Biography Deletion sorting page

Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Bands and musicians
Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Fashion (e.g. models)
Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Fictional elements
Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Women
Wikipedia:WikiProject Pornography/Deletion for adult film actors and actresses

Adding a new AfD discussion

Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:

Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary, it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Deletion sorting|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.

Note that there are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.

Removing a closed AfD discussion

Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.

Other types of discussions

You can also add and remove links to other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to People.

Further information

For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.

Purge page cache

watch

People[edit]

Atta Soja[edit]

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

Does not pass WP:NBOX or GNG. Sources are database entries, press release with the same images, paid articles posted without bylines etc., Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 09:12, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Sportspeople, and Uganda. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 09:12, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Boxing-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 11:18, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tarang Jain[edit]

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

Hard to meet WP:GNG. Bakhtar40 (talk) 07:16, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Businesspeople, and India. Bakhtar40 (talk) 07:16, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Bakhtar40, as a fairly inexperienced editor (131 edits), you need to read WP:BEFORE, "If there are verifiability, notability or other sourcing concerns, take reasonable steps to search for reliable sources". It is not just the sources actually used in the article that count. A simple Google search for Tarang Jain Varroc (he owns 86%) gives us:

https://www.forbes.com/profile/tarang-jain/?sh=5a0e545f2676

https://www.forbesindia.com/article/big-bet/twinwin-venture-how-tarang-jain-built-a-global-automotive-business/49915/1

https://www.forbesindia.com/article/leaderhip-awards-2013/tarang-jain-taking-risks-to-derisk-varroc/36383/1

https://www.autocarpro.in/feature/varroc-tarang-jain-autocar-professional-3428

https://www.themachinist.in/interviews/2333/investments-help-companies-stay-competitive

https://www.cnbctv18.com/business/companies/varroc-engineering-striving-for-double-digit-margin-by-end-of-fy24-says-cmd-17046041.htm

There are plenty more. And who knows what else in Hindi, etc? Edwardx (talk) 09:19, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Maharashtra-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 11:22, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Meets WP:GNG and WP:BIO. Very reliable sources like forbes have enough coverage on the well known billionaire from India. Google search will also display results with many reliable sources on the subject. RangersRus (talk) 13:23, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2024 Sindh Premier League[edit]

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

Fails WP:GNG, WP:NEVENT. The tournament doesn't have official status with no lasting effect. Robo^Cric Let's chat 05:41, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Sportspeople, Cricket, and Pakistan. Robo^Cric Let's chat 05:47, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. Robo^Cric Let's chat 06:03, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Sindh Premier League Not enough coverage for separate season article. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 09:30, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Marion Evans[edit]

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

Fails WP:GNG. Flounder fillet (talk) 20:21, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Academics and educators, Authors, United Kingdom, and Wales. Flounder fillet (talk) 20:21, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 20:40, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. Curbon7 (talk) 20:47, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rahul Yadav[edit]

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

Does not meet Wikipedia's notability standards. Press Releases and announcements. Most of the news is about his firm. The news are about the company. Or it will be better to Redirect this article on Housing.com. Bakhtar40 (talk) 15:20, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Businesspeople, and India. Bakhtar40 (talk) 15:20, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Rajasthan-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 15:26, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ashwinder Singh[edit]

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

Fails WP:NBIO and WP:GNG. A Google search brings up more such paid PR publications. Bakhtar40 (talk) 15:15, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Authors, Businesspeople, and India. Bakhtar40 (talk) 15:15, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Delhi-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 15:24, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

David Madden (Jeopardy! contestant)[edit]

AfDs for this article:

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

Redirect to List of Jeopardy! contestants#David Madden, or Delete. Case of WP:BLP1E that was previously deleted Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/David Madden (Jeopardy! contestant) (2nd nomination), but it was recreated. Referencing is very poor (there are no quality RS that cover the subject in any SIGOV outside of being in lists of famous winners). I tagged the article a year ago and suggested it should be redirected as IPs were constantly adding badly referenced WP:PROMO material about his other business interests, but when I WP:BOLDLY redirected it a few days ago, having not had any response to my notices, User:Robert McClenon felt it was better to send to AfD. Aszx5000 (talk) 09:49, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Only seeing now that it was also at AfD a third time (that AfD wasn't logged on the Talk Page) where it was kept Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/David Madden (Jeopardy! contestant) (3rd nomination). Having read the sourcing that was provided for the 3rd AfD, I think it was pretty weak, and a redirect, to his entry on List of Jeopardy! contestants#David Madden would be a better solution. Aszx5000 (talk) 09:56, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Aszx5000 (talk) 09:49, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New Jersey-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 12:21, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Arts, Television, and History. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:26, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I've now restored the AfD tag from the article, since it was removed by Oompaloompa1971 for apparently no reason. CycloneYoris ^talk! 00:56, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources. The subject passes Wikipedia:Notability (people)#Basic criteria, which says:
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.
- If the depth of coverage in any given source is not substantial, then multiple independent sources may be combined to demonstrate notability; trivial coverage of a subject by secondary sources is not usually sufficient to establish notability.
Sources
1. McNear, Claire (2020). Answers in the Form of Questions: A Definitive History and Insider's Guide to Jeopardy!. New York: Twelve. ISBN 978-1-5387-0232-1. Retrieved 2024-04-29 – via Google Books.
  The book notes about Bruce Lou: "As a student, he’d done quiz bowl, the team trivia competition often found in scholastic settings, and won the National History Bee—a contest organized by David Madden, who was a nineteen-time Jeopardy! champion in 2005—and Lou found himself missing the competition."
  The book notes: "As Watson entered crunch time, Jeopardy! granted IBM access to notable champions from years past, including nineteen-time winner David Madden, whose streak was second only to Ken Jennings’s at the time. Madden played two games against Watson.“"
  The book notes: "A number of Jeopardy! alumni’s new chapters, perhaps unsurprisingly, have to do with trivia. David Madden was a twentythree-year-old grad student when he first played, and as he left the studio after his twentieth game with vouchers totaling more than $430,000, he wasn’t sure what he wanted to do. ... A quiz bowl alum, he ultimately used his winnings as seed money to found International Academic Competitions, which hosts, among other things, the annual National History Bee and Bowl."
  The book notes: "David Madden, the nineteen-time champion, remembers auditioning in the Jeopardy! studio in May 2004. With him was a friend named Jeff Hoppes, who was called to be on the show just before Madden and ultimately became one of the final victims of Ken Jennings, coming in second in the seventieth game of Jennings's seventy-four-game winning streak. Hoppes, Madden says, first played quiz bowl in high school when he was a classmate of Rutter's, and then went on to marry eventual six-time Jeopardy! champion and Tournament of Champions runner-up Larissa Kelly. Madden, Rutter, and Kelly made up the winning team in the All-Star Games."
2. Grant, Meghan (2019-03-04). "'Jeopardy!' All-Star Games finals include Ridgewood native". North Jersey Media Group. Archived from the original on 2024-04-29. Retrieved 2024-04-29.
  The article notes: "This Bergen County person is competing in the "Jeopardy!" All-Star Games this week. ... Who is former champion David Madden of Ridgewood? Among the former champs will be Madden, a member of Team Brad, one of the six trios of top players in the tournament. ... Back in 2005-2006, Madden won $432,400 in 19 rounds in a row — the third-longest winning streak in the game — earning a rank among "Jeopardy!" top players. ... Madden founded International Academic Competitions, running about a dozen contests in 30 countries, including the National History Bee and National Science Bee, hosting tens of thousands of students. Former players have gone on to "Jeopardy!" teen and college tournaments, and five staffers have won on the show."
3. Grant, Meghan (2019-03-05). "Ridgewood native David Madden and Team Brad win 'Jeopardy!' All-Star Games". North Jersey Media Group. Archived from the original on 2024-04-29. Retrieved 2024-04-29.
  The article notes: "Ridgewood native David Madden and his partners on Team Brad won a decisive victory on "Jeopardy!" All-Star Games, and the $1 million prize. ... Madden earned a spot on the All-Star Games roster by winning 19 rounds in a row in 2005 and 2006, the third-longest winning streak in the show’s history. He was “drafted” by team leader Brad Rutter, along with Madden’s former Princeton classmate, Larissa Kelly. ... Madden used some of his first "Jeopardy!" winnings, a $432,400 pot, as start-up money, going on to found International Academic Competitions."
4. Coutros, Evonnie (2005-09-23). "Ridgewood grad strikes it rich on 'Jeopardy!'". The Record. Archived from the original on 2024-04-29. Retrieved 2024-04-29 – via Newspapers.com.
  The article notes: "Former Ridgewood resident David Madden hit the jackpot this month, but it wasn't in the lottery. Madden, a 1999 graduate of Ridgewood High, had a 19-day winning streak on "Jeopardy!" and walked away from the game show with more than $430,000 in cash. Madden, 24, a graduate of Princeton University, lost to a 24-year-old self-employed musician from Decatur, Ga. The episode aired earlier this week. ... Madden, who now lives in Berlin, is studying for an advanced degree in international relations at Frei University."
5. Daugherty, Haley (2023-02-17). "Greater Latrobe Senior High School to host national quiz competition". Pittsburgh Tribune-Review. Archived from the original on 2024-04-29. Retrieved 2024-04-29.
  The article notes: "International Academic Competitions was started in 2010 by Jeopardy winner David Madden. He and his wife, Nolwenn Madden act as executive directors and they expanded the competition globally in 2012."
6. Adams, Caralee J. (2013-07-01). "Reviving History Instruction: What's Old Is New Again". Education Week. Archived from the original on 2024-04-29. Retrieved 2024-04-29.
  The article notes: "With the goal of engaging students more deeply in history, David Madden, a “Jeopardy” champion and former high school and college quiz-bowl player, established the National History Bee & Bowl in 2010. Now in about 2,000 schools—elementary through high—individual Bee competitions and Bowl events are held throughout the country. Mr. Madden, 31, discovered there was plenty of demand."
7. Ferguson, Mike (2014-02-08). "'I'll take history for $1,000, Alex': Founder of history bowl attends Montana competition". Billings Gazette. Archived from the original on 2024-04-29. Retrieved 2024-04-29.
  The article notes: "Montana high school history buffs can thank David Madden’s 19-day winning streak on the game show “Jeopardy!” nine years ago for the chance to show off their own knowledge Saturday at Skyview High School. Madden, 32, is founder and executive director of the National History Bee and Bowl, an individual and team competition with about 50,000 participants in more than 200 places around the country and overseas, too. About 60 students competed all day Saturday in the state championship held in Skyview’s theater. ... Madden, a graduate of Princeton University, founded the organization four years ago on his more than $400,000 in winnings on America’s most famous quiz show."
8. Zarnowski, Tatiana (2011-02-28). "Saratoga Springs competition will test knowledge of history". The Daily Gazette. Archived from the original on 2014-07-22. Retrieved 2024-04-29.
  The article notes: "National History Bowl and Bee, a private, for-profit startup company, is based in Ridgewood, N.J., where owner David Madden is from. The company conducted a pilot competition there in May. In 2005, Madden reigned in a 20-game run on “Jeopardy!,” the second-longest ever after Ken Jennings, who had a 74-game winning streak."
9. Strauss, Robert (2005-10-09). "Worth Noting; I'll Take Quiz Kids For $600, Alex". Archived from the original on 2024-04-29. Retrieved 2024-04-29.
  The article notes: "Mr. Madden was the captain of the Quiz Bowl team at Ridgewood High, and was on a similar freshman team at Princeton."
10. Pakkala, Tiffany (2008-01-10). "'Jeopardy' winner turns to hiking with a purpose". Savannah Morning News. Archived from the original on 2024-04-29. Retrieved 2024-04-29.
  The article notes: ""Jeopardy" fans remember him as the calculating young trivia expert who won 19 times on the game show and left with winnings more than $442,000, in part because he sought out the "Daily Double" early to maximize his cash. Now David Madden, 26, is crunching numbers for a different reason: He's hiking 3,000 miles to help raise money for a group that offers free and low-cost lodging to hospitalized soldiers and their families."
There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow David Madden to pass Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline, which requires "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject".
Cunard (talk) 05:35, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Todd Archibald[edit]

AfDs for this article:

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

Article recreated by WP:SPA following deletion a year and a half ago. I am bringing this to the community's attention. I am personally a weak delete: somewhat accomplished person, but I think it falls a little short of our notability criteria. Russ Woodroofe (talk) 09:18, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Academics and educators, and Canada. Russ Woodroofe (talk) 09:18, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. This still isn't properly sourced as getting him over WP:GNG — nine of the 13 footnotes are primary sources that aren't support for notability at all, and the four hits that come from real media aren't about him, but just glance off his existence in the process of being about people or organizations that had cases come to his courtroom, which is not enough to get him over WP:GNG. Bearcat (talk) 06:25, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Frederick F. Cornell[edit]

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

Fails WP:GNG. Book source seems to say about as much as an obituary would about each person described there. Flounder fillet (talk) 20:39, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Religion, and New Jersey. Flounder fillet (talk) 20:39, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 21:18, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete -- a Newspapers.com search finds only passing mentions (generally as an officiant at a wedding or in ads for a school he assisted at.) -- Nat Gertler (talk) 17:32, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Robert Thomas Brudenell-Bruce[edit]

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

Fails WP:GNG. No indication of notability. Flounder fillet (talk) 20:31, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Military, and Royalty and nobility. Flounder fillet (talk) 20:31, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Bruce was previously recorded in the article as being a Royal Navy commodore. This seems to be a result of confusion over the shortened rank "Comm." which in this case referred to commander, Bruce's rank upon retirement. As such it's very unlikely that his military career will provide any notability. Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 20:53, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 21:17, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete No credible claim of significance. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 21:54, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ben Obese-Jecty[edit]

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

Candidates for UK Parliament are not automatically notable. Similarly, writing a few newspaper articles also does not confer notability. Propose deleting and if he is successful in his campaign, it would be appropriate to make a page once he is elected. Drerac (talk) 17:15, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Politicians, Journalism, and United Kingdom. Cleo Cooper (talk) 18:04, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Military and England. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:43, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Does not pass WP:GNG, vast majority of sources cited in article are written by article subject. J2m5 (talk) 02:48, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as the number of sources appears to indicate notability for journalism purposes as well as his political career. If the decision is not made to keep the article, moving to draft space would make more sense than deletion, which would only mean a well-written article most likely having to be recreated from scratch after the election if he wins. Chessrat ^{(talk, contributions)} 07:14, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Brendan Lopes[edit]

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

Doesn't meet WP:FILMMAKER or WP:BIO. The subject has coverage only for winning a private island. No other significant coverage on his works or states any importance for an article. 𝓡𝔂𝓭𝓮𝔁 09:39, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Actors and filmmakers. 𝓡𝔂𝓭𝓮𝔁 09:39, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Arab Emirates-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 15:30, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sunarso[edit]

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

No significant coverage or importance on the subject to have an article. 𝓡𝔂𝓭𝓮𝔁 08:59, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Businesspeople. 𝓡𝔂𝓭𝓮𝔁 08:59, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Finance and Indonesia. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 15:31, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Shreya Verma[edit]

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

Case of BLP1E. Fails WP:NPOL and GNG as BLP is contesting in the 2024 Indian general election and has not been elected to any office positions yet. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 07:53, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Politicians, India, and Uttar Pradesh. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 07:53, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I don't know how these people create an article about a politician without reading Guidelines. Clearly fails WP:NPOL. Youknowwhoistheman (talk) 08:47, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fails WP:NPOL, same like previous AFDs Kompella Madhavi Latha, Neeraj Tripathi. No in-depth coverage of the Subject and not yet elected as MP or MLA to pass WP:NPOL, If she wins the election and elected as a MP then he will automatically pass WP:NPOL. Grabup (talk) 08:52, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. As always, people do not get Wikipedia articles just for standing as candidates in elections they have not yet won already — but this makes no claim that the subject has preexisting notability for any other reason. Obviously no prejudice against recreation after election day if she wins, but just standing as a candidate is not in and of itself grounds for an article now. Bearcat (talk) 18:04, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Anurag Sinha[edit]

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

I initially tagged this for UPE for cleanup but after it was challenged by two SPAs, and at the request of one, I dug further into cleanup. The issue is that the references, other than this, are not reliable to show notability. Everything is mentions, WP:NEWSORGINDIA, press releases, churnalism, interviews, or otherwise unreliable. I removed some WP:FAKEREFerences prior but kept everything else in tact so the AfD could be judged based on how it sits currently. CNMall41 (talk) 04:29, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, and India. CNMall41 (talk) 04:30, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bihar, Delhi, and Madhya Pradesh. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:05, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@CNMall41

I think you are indulging in provocation to prove you’re correct. Please refer this case to senior editors and administrators for opinion. My knowledge about Wikipedia rules is limited. However this nomination for deletion seems fishy. Hope fellow editors will objectively contribute to sort this, whatever is right.

Request to refer to the Talk Page of Anurag Sinha to understand the case. His notability and credibility is vouched and acknowledged.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Fixing001 (talk • contribs) 05:37, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Fixing001, Don't worry this ADF discussion will surely closed by an Administrator of Wikipedia. Grabup (talk) 17:48, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @CNMall41

I would really like to contest your decision to provocatively send the article for deletion, while I was engaging in a meaningful conversation with you in the talk page. I will also request the inclusion of other editors and administrators to have a look at this case as I feel that this step may have been influenced due to reasons while this could have been avoided certainly for an actor who has a valid presence and calibre in the indian films industry.

Please have a look at the references right from 2008 till 2023 where these references are attributed from TOI, Press Trust of India, ANI News, NDTV, Organisational bodies, Etimes, Recognised Production Houses and International Film Festivals, Directors and fellow actors from the industry of India.

While some citations may come from a list of as you call “Paid Media”, there is a plethora of other google search articles and references in the article where the subject is not in ‘Mentionary terms’, but actuality a major point of interest.

Articles by reputed journalists of India, like Mr Subhash K Jha, Mr Khalid Mohammad and other prominent journalists have done interviews and wrote articles on ‘Anurag Sinha’. His recent Best Actor Award in International Film Festivals is also merited by TOI and PTI, ANI News, The Week, Zee5 News etc.

While, you discredited the article and the subject 2 months earlier accusing of Paid Creation, why did you not send it for deletion then itself when proper cleaning of language and any inkling of promotional intent was also removed by myself.

I had only requested you remove the “paid template” and present any transactional proof made by the user/article subject for creating the page, to which there is still no evidence provided by you. You have stated the ‘creator of the page’ has been flagged, but that does not mean that all articles created by the creator are false and paid, when the merit of this particular artist/actor is recognised by a mass audience and people of his industry.

However, I again repeat that today seems out of hasty decision, you have altered the article by your edits which are not justified. This article is on my watchlist and some removals are uncalled and was not needed at all. While you also have wrongly exercised your rights to put templates and send the page for deletion. Why?

Also, for clarification of my interest in the article, I certainly am interested in the work of actors and indian film industry and will want to contribute positively towards it.

As a responsible Wikipedia editor, I again would address you to clean the page, if you find it dissatisfying. According to me, all current references are reliable third part sources that are not just mentioning, but are talking about the subject or acknowledging the achievements of the subject.

I trust this process and hopefully this matter will be justly resolved. I will also invite other editors and experienced editors to engage in its resolution.

Thanks Fixing001 (talk) 14:32, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think the article must be uploaded back and edited with supervision. The article subject is legit. DSTR123 (talk) 05:35, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It appears to me that DSTR123 and Fixing001 might be the same individual, given that the DSTR123 account was created today following this nomination and has only posted this comment thus far. Grabup (talk) 17:42, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Grabup:, They likely are. SPI filed here. I believe the image uploads are a pretty good trail of breadcrumbs. --CNMall41 (talk) 22:23, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Based on my checking, I've discovered that sources are only WP:NEWSORGINDIA and press releases, sponsored articles, and interview pieces can't establish notability at all. The individual clearly doesn't meet the criteria outlined in WP:GNG due to a lack of comprehensive coverage on the subject. Grabup (talk) 17:40, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

’’’Keep’’’ - The article subject has a 16year career where he has recently won Best Actor Awards in his field at International Film Festivals in New Jersey and Toronto. The notability can’t be debated with the individual being working with premium indian production houses like Mukta Arts, Emmay Entertainment, Applause Entertainment, T Series etc in leading roles with directors and co-stars who are also having a sterling background.. like Subhash Ghai, Anil Kapoor, Nikkhil Advani, Shefali Shah, Purab Kohli etc. The article references are cited from the premier news agencies of indian media viz..Times of India, HT, Rediff, The Week, Press Trust of India, ANI News, NDTV, Money Control, The Print etc. Mostly all the articles in India media are cited with references from the above agencies, if that’s the case, we may need to delete every article in Indian Films section.

This article must be added with citations available in the public domain and be made available. It’s a KEEP. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fixing001 (talk • contribs) 08:19, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Carterson[edit]

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

Fails WP:NMUSICIAN. Sources are either PRs/promo puffs/Advertorials, WP:RUNOFTHEMILL both primary and independent of the subject. Non-notable musician. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 16:31, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Bands and musicians, and Nigeria. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 16:31, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Olanrewaju Smart[edit]

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

Fails WP:NPOL (WP:NSUBPOL), sources are mostly WP:ROUTINE and WP:RUNOFTHEMILL. In short, the offices being occupied by the subject do not guarantee notability under WP:NPOL and fail WP:GNG too. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 16:24, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Politicians, and Nigeria. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 16:24, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Chief of Staff to the Speaker, House of Representatives is a notable position in Nigerian politics. His successor Jake Dan-Azumi also has a Wikipedia article. Batmanthe8th (talk) 17:46, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Batmanthe8th Oh, thank you for bringing my attention there. Under what criteria do you think COSs are notable? They do not fall under any and have to pass WP:GNG which this one and the one you have pointed me to utterly fails. Even the COS page is AfD-worthy. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 18:47, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I recall accepting the COS page a while back on the generous side due to its notable role in Nigerian politics. I didn't nessesarily imagine the individual people getting their own articles unless they were notable for something else, though. TheBritinator (talk) 23:22, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: being the Chief of Staff to the Speaker, House of Representatives and Senior Special Assistant to the President are notable positions. I know all of the Senior Advisor to the President of the United States are considered notable, so why not Nigeria especially that this article have good sources to confirm WP:42 FuzzyMagma (talk) 22:24, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

James A. O'Flaherty[edit]

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

Biography of subject that doesn't meet WP:NBIO or WP:MUSICBIO or other criteria. (Article was created, seemingly, by a family member. And relies entirely on sources written by family members. Was speedy deleted in 2007. Was restored, after request from creator, shortly afterwards - on the basis that notability might be established by "news reports" and having a music retreat "named for him". However, the only news report mentioned (which doesn't appear to be verifiable) seems to be about the music retreat. Rather than the subject. And while it is a credit to the man/family/community that the event was so-named, it doesn't establish notability. Even if the event was notable (and I would question whether it is), notability isn't transferrable.) My own WP:BEFORE has returned nothing to indicate that NBIO or SIGCOV are met. WP:COI and WP:NOTMEMORIAL are also relevant. Guliolopez (talk) 13:14, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ireland-related deletion discussions. Guliolopez (talk) 13:18, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Guliolopez (talk) 13:18, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Military, and Texas. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:14, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete fails WP:GNG all sources seem to be related to the subject. Mztourist (talk) 03:00, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - The nominator nailed the problems with the article. It is possible that the Irish music retreat was named after this gentleman, but the retreat itself is not very notable and the gentleman's music career appeared to be semi-pro at best. This article is clearly an attempted memorial that is inappropriate for Wikipedia, where notability is key. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 13:44, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: for the reasons outlined in the nomination InDimensional (talk) 11:06, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sabir Alasgarov[edit]

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

Reviewed during NPP, No indication of wp:notability under GNG or SNG. The article says that he was a radio announcer. The on-line source had only a brief listing of him. Was not able to review the other 2 sources; they are off line Azerbaijani sources. (one appeared to be on line but that was just a link to a Wikipedia article about the source in general.) but content is indicative of them not being GNG sources. North8000 (talk) 02:00, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Radio, Television, Azerbaijan, and Georgia (country). Skynxnex (talk) 03:45, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. My very best wishes (talk) 00:43, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tobi Mohammed[edit]

AfDs for this article:

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

Again, Fails WP:GNG, WP:ANYBIO or any applicable WP:SNG even after previous AfD. This is mostly based on WP:INHERENT and WP:RUNOFTHEMILL. Below is my source assessment;

Source	Independent?	Reliable?	Significant coverage?	Count source toward GNG?
Source assessment table:
https://www.thisdaylive.com/index.php/2022/09/13/the-plug-topboy-entertainment-formalise-merger-announce-mohammed-as-managing-partner	Promotional piece about the merger of The Plug and TopBoy Entertainment	Even though ThisDay is reliable per WP:NGRS, No byline used in the piece. Promotional nature of this piece also affects its reliability	~ Mostly about the merger of The Plug and TopBoy Entertainment	✘ No
https://www.thisdaylive.com/index.php/2022/10/16/oluwatobi-mohammed-the-young-entertainment-disruptor	Promotional piece that is not entirely independent	Ditto		✘ No
https://tribuneonlineng.com/tobi-mohammed-a-journey-of-innovation-from-tech-to-entertainment/	This source appears to be a promotional profile piece on Tobi Mohammed.	Even though per WP:NGRS, Nigerian Tribune is reliable, the promotional nature of this article affects its reliability.		✘ No
https://www.vanguardngr.com/2022/11/from-dream-to-reality-the-inspiring-journey-of-topboy-entertainment/	This source seems to be a promotional piece about TopBoy Entertainment.	Source is marginally reliable per WP:NGRS, and the promotional nature of this article affects its reliability	The article provides significant coverage of the journey of TopBoy Entertainment	✘ No
https://www.turntablecharts.com/news/1256	~ This source is a promotional piece about Tobi Mohammed’s BlockParty series.	Even though the promo from here oozes, it does not affect this context.	This is about Tobi Mohammed’s BlockParty series and not Tobi Mohammed himself	✘ No
https://digimillennials.com/music/offstage-alhaji-popping/		No byline used in piece and reads promotional		✘ No
https://socialmediaweeklagos2020.sched.com/speaker/tobi27	This source is a profile of Tobi Mohammed from the Social Media Week Lagos 2020 event.	Promotional profile		✘ No
https://dailypost.ng/2023/06/09/tobi-mohammed-shares-invaluable-insights-on-soft-power/	Obvious sponsored content	Even though Daily Post is reliable, this is an obvious sponsored content		✘ No
https://notjustok.com/article/afrobeats-live-and-awards-power-players-2019/		No byline used	Not specifically about the subject	✘ No
https://www.turntablecharts.com/magazine/3rd/57	Ditto	~	Ditto	✘ No
https://www.turntablecharts.com/news/1184	Ditto	~	Ditto	✘ No
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{source assess table}}.

Vanderwaalforces (talk) 23:48, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Businesspeople, and Nigeria. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 23:48, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: We had this about a year ago, here we are again, still not notable. The source chart is overly generous with a few sources, but I agree it's a !delete, this is PROMO. Oaktree b (talk) 23:52, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Music, Entertainment, and Management. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:07, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete looks like promotion per sources provided. No deep coverage by independent sources. Tumbuka Arch (talk) 11:17, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. The subject of this article has not been discussed in reliable secondary sources. Some of the sources (ThisDay) cited in the article are not independent of him and others (The Nation newspaper) are promotional to say the least. The awards he has won or been nominated for aren't notable. Versace1608 ^{Wanna Talk?} 17:15, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Chris Ashby[edit]

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

Subject does not meet the WP:GNG due to a lack of WP:SIGCOV. Of the current sources, the first was written by the subject himself, and the second is a brief mention quoted from a press release. A BEFORE check revealed some quotes and namedrops but little else. Let'srun (talk) 19:10, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Finance, Law, and Politics. Let'srun (talk) 19:10, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:19, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete; no claim to notability. TJRC (talk) 02:37, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Clearly fails WP:GNG as none of the cited sources cover the subject in depth.-- Tumbuka Arch (talk) 11:30, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hakeem Nisar Ahmad[edit]

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

Fails WP:GNG and WP:NPOL as he never won a national or provincial election, merely running for an election does not make one notable. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 12:04, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Politicians, and Pakistan. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 12:04, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. --—Saqib (talk | contribs) 12:10, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I'm not seeing any significant coverage except for press releases about his part in running for elections to which he did not win. Fails WP:NPOL as not having won any seat-- Tumbuka Arch (talk) 12:37, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: [1] Did not win his election so no WP:NPOL pass, and there does not appear to be WP:SIGCOV of him beyond routine campaigning releases. Curbon7 (talk) 04:08, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. As always, people do not get Wikipedia articles just for standing as candidates in elections they didn't win — but this makes no claim that the subject has preexisting notability for any other reason. Bearcat (talk) 18:07, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

KJ Dhaliwal[edit]

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

Does not pass WP:GNG /WP:BIO.

The Forbes article is authored by a brand builder.
Nothing about the subject in the TOI article.
Source 3 is a blog.
nytimes article is an opinion piece.
[2] No significant coverage and a primary source.
Looks like the dealstreetasia article is about the app Dil Mil.
qz.com is about the app again.
techcrunch.com is about the app. WP:TECHCRUNCH
[3] has no mention of the subject. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 11:57, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Businesspeople, India, and United States of America. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 11:57, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Businesspeople, Business, and Internet. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 12:07, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: subject lacks GNG as most of the sources available online are press releases, passing mentions, etc. Tumbuka Arch (talk) 14:10, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per source analysis by Jeraxmoira. To satisfy GNG articles need significant coverage in multiple independent reliable secondary sources which the subject of the article does not have. 2601:5CC:8300:A7F0:5450:3A3:46CC:17EC (talk) 16:34, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Sources are just about his company, that too mostly about fundings. No independent sources about the subject. Lacks GNG 𝓡𝔂𝓭𝓮𝔁 19:23, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Punjab, California, and Pennsylvania. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:18, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The individual doesn't meet WP:GNG, and the sources provided aren't independent reliable secondary sources. Blogs, opinions, and primary sources can't establish notability. Grabup (talk) 15:47, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Kind of close, but not close enough. I think the Dil Mil app could be notable, so this can be redirected there if an article for Dil Mil is made. Cleo Cooper (talk) 01:01, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kent Edunjobi[edit]

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

An article about an individual that doesn't meet out general notability guidelines for inclusion of musicians, actors and as the case may be. The sources doesn't seem to be significantly covered and per se, have more of PR and paid writing. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 09:45, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, Artists, and Nigeria. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 09:46, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:45, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Significant awards (https://thenet.ng/kent-edunjobi-wins-first-amvca-for-anikulapo-soundtrack/) -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 14:40, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Mushy Yank, winning a major award remember per WP:ANYBIO doesn't mean the person is notable. It means likely and the award hasn't be credited multiple times. My major concern here is the source as much of them are somewhat PR. — Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 06:51, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep: As pointed out by Mushy Yank, the subject won a major award. Moreover, he has produced the soundtrack to notable films such as Roti, Citation, A Naija Christmas, and Anikulapo. Although majority of the sources (1, 2, 3, 4) discussing the subject aren't independent of him, I feel like the two previous facts stated are enough for a weak keep. Versace1608 ^{Wanna Talk?} 21:25, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: awards mean he passes notability outlined by WP:MUSICBIO InDimensional (talk) 11:06, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

John Ratcliff (producer)[edit]

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

Fails WP:GNG/WP:NBIO, and I do not believe being a producer for a notable band is an automatic WP:NMUSIC pass either. I could not locate sources with substantial coverage of Ratcliff. All sources cover him only peripherally, as a producer for a-Ha. The article is now primarily an autobiography. Would accept a redirect to a-Ha as an alternative to deletion. Jfire (talk) 03:54, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Music, and United Kingdom. Jfire (talk) 03:54, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I not only re- produced the final masters of 8 of the tracks on a-ha’s 15 million selling first album Hunting High and Low but I also discovered them in 1983 and kept them, gave them £thousands and helped secure a record deal with Warners. I managed them under contract from 1983 to 1993 and without my financial and creative input they would have returned to Norway and never been heard of again! How dare you propose to delete this article. I have nearly completed my autobiography which inevitably contains the entire story of how I rescued them when they had no money left and put them in my recording studio for 2 years without any return for another 12 months. 217.137.18.193 (talk) 01:24, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Bands and musicians, Journalism, Television, Advertising, and England. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:44, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
agree that REDIRECT to a-Ha is appropriate. Most sources are primary references. The only third party references are more about a-Ha with this subject being mentioned tangentially. Otherwise, this article seems more promotional than anything else. ShelbyMarion (talk) 18:27, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
How dare you presume! You know nothing. In 1983 a-ha came into my studio but ran out of money after 2 weeks. For the next 2 years I covered every housing cost., food cost and leisure costs out of my own pocket because I believed in their talent.I also let them have free studio time for 2 years during which we recorded and produced nearly all of the tracks on their first album. I became their manager in 1983 and their contract lasted with me until 1993!Their best 10 years to date. 217.137.18.193 (talk) 01:43, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I.will take legal action if you have the cheek to remove this article. My autobiography is almost finished detailing my entire 10 years managing the band and the consequences for both a-ha and myself. 200 million record sales for a start! If you want a copy of my management contract with a-ha just ask. I lost my house and marriage while supporting the band before their success. Buy my autobiography next year and you can read every detail. Nobody, nobody knows the ‘a-ha’ history better than I do. 217.137.18.193 (talk) 01:53, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Get your facts right. I discovered the band when they came into my studio and spent 2 weeks recording. I liked what I heard and when they ran out of time and money I supported them for 2 years before Take on Me became a bestseller.I was contractually their Manager from 1983 to 1993. I re-produced 8 out of 10 tracks on their first and most popular album Hunting high and Low. 217.137.18.193 (talk) 02:00, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: There are two decent sources on the article, both telling the story of the recording of "Take On Me": "Talking Away: A-Ha On The Making Of Take On Me" on The Quietus, and "Classic Tracks: A-ha 'Take On Me'" on Sound on Sound. There may be some claim to notability. However, the article subject badgering us and making legal threats on this deletion discussion makes it difficult for me to vote keep. Toughpigs (talk) 02:01, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If you are not going to allow this article to remain then you are ignoring the truth of the matter. I thought the truth was a basic necessity of a site that should only provide fact.I am only writing as a matter of principle. My lawyers will only reveal their legal expertise. Buy the album…my name is all over the sleeve. More times than the band members themselves 217.137.18.193 (talk) 02:39, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
To toughpig. I don’t give a damn - oh sorry..is that blasphemy? In this day and age? I am in no way making threats! I am merely standing up for myself and the truth.Who is your superior? Put him/her on to it before I wake up my lawyer and we can sort this out legally and properly. 217.137.18.193 (talk) 02:47, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I now understand the reason for your username. Well I am tough too but my lawyer is tougher, and very expensive as you will discover should this minuscule matter not be resolved satisfactorily. 217.137.18.193 (talk) 02:57, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
To tough pig. It says you have ‘2 decent sources’. What better ‘source’ could you have but myself. I discovered, produced and managed ‘a-ha’ for 10 years from 1983 to 1993. I think my knowledge of this entire matter is inevitably going to be seen as the most accurate. Your organisation obviously listens hardest to those names you recognise. You don’t realise that it’s the people behind the names who have a far greater knowledge and understanding for detail than you ever will. Change your username….or is it your real name? I do apologise. 217.137.18.193 (talk) 03:39, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It will be very easy for me to find out who you really are. 217.137.18.193 (talk) 03:53, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
217.137.18.193, stop your threats. WP:NLT and WP:OUTING are policies here. You can vent, and you can argue for this article to be kept, but you can't harass people. Jfire (talk) 04:15, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Read my opening statements from the top again. Johnratcliff (talk) 04:27, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I am not harassing anyone. I am merely pointing out that I am not ‘just’ their producer. I discovered them in 1983, kept, housed, fed and gave them my studio for 2 years,signed them to an extremely lucrative management contract for 5 years and then to a major deal with Warners. That is an awful lot more than ‘producing’ a track don’t you think? Johnratcliff (talk) 04:34, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I was their manager from 1983 to 1993.I still get royalties!

Why am I having to justify facts that are common knowledge in my industry? Johnratcliff (talk) 04:38, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I saw your opening statement and I believe you when you say you've done all those things for the band and were important to their success. But saying things like "I will take legal action if you have the cheek to remove this article", "My lawyers will only reveal their legal expertise", "before I wake up my lawyer and we can sort this out legally", and "It will be very easy for me to find out who you really are" is not okay here. You need to avoid making statements that can be construed as legal threats or threats to reveal someone's identity.

"Why am I having to justify facts that are common knowledge in my industry?" is a valid question. The answer is that one of the pillars of Wikipedia is that information here is verifiable: readers must be able to check that any information is not just made up. That means we can't rely on what's "common knowledge" in any industry unless it's been published in reliable sources somewhere. When your autobiography is published, we may be able to use it as a source in a-ha (depending on whether it is self-published or not). But we can't just rely on your own personal statements here, even if we believe them. Jfire (talk) 04:52, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I apologise if you feel I was harassing you. ‘a-ha’ is a very sensitive subject for me. I gave up my home and lost my wife and young child on account of my involvement with a-ha. So it is a passionate and sensitive subject.

I reiterate, I am very sorry to have upset you.

John Johnratcliff (talk) 04:43, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to a-ha (with merging in of any useful information) pending publication of the autobiography referred to by the 217 IP (who appears to be the same person as Johnratcliff?). If it gets reviews in reliable sources, the article can then be reinstated based on those in addition to the few good sources currently present. Notability is borderline at present, since it can't be inherited from the band (and since our criterion for an independent page is notability, not admiration). The article is an under-referenced BLP and the last paragraph is stylistically inappropriate: "PS ... John". But it may be rewritable from sources a year from now. Yngvadottir (talk) 08:29, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect per above, does not seem independently notable. Slatersteven (talk) 09:59, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect per Yngvadottir. I removed a lot of recent COI additions that were entirely unsourced. Those should not be in a BLP. What remains are 4 sources that I will throw into a source analysis table:

Source	Independent?	Reliable?	Significant coverage?	Count source toward GNG?
Source assessment table: prepared by User:Sirfurboy
https://www.johnratcliff.com/john--a-ha	"In his own words". His own website. WP:SPS	? Reliable but self promotional		✘ No
https://web.archive.org/web/20220521024623/https://www.soundonsound.com/techniques/ha-take-me		I believe it is. Didn't actually check.	He is mentioned in the source several times but there is no significant information about him	✘ No
https://thequietus.com/articles/18805-aha-hunting-high-and-low-take-on-me-review-anniversary			He is mentioned in the source several times but there is no significant information about him	✘ No
https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/01727601			A primary source that says nothing about Ratcliffe in any case	✘ No
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{source assess table}}.

However the redirect is reasonable as this is clearly someone who gets a mention regarding a-ha and is borderline notable. Although the above assessment covers what is in the page, there could be more secondary sources on him. However the name is quite common and searching is complicated by finding other notable Jonh Ratcliffes. I was not able to find any suitable coverage, but if multiple independent reliable secondary sources with sigificant coverage can be found, then, of course, this would be a notable subject for a page. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 10:50, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to a-ha: Not enough notability outside of a-ha to warrant an individual page. InDimensional (talk) 11:10, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to a-ha. I haven't been able to find sources to support WP:GNG beyond those mentioned here, and none of those support a stand-alone article. Schazjmd (talk) 16:33, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nkosana Makate[edit]

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

Product of WP:BLP1E. Yes, the subject has been making the news in the past few months but this is all just 15 minutes of fame. WP:ATD, a redirect to Vodacom#"Please Call Me" would make sense. dxneo (talk) 00:07, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Businesspeople, Technology, Africa, and South Africa. dxneo (talk) 00:07, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment this case been in the news for years, not months. It has been extensively covered in WP:RS for that time. So the nomination description of it as “15 minutes of fame” is inaccurate. Makate may, or may not be notable in terms of WP:BLP1E but the case almost certainly is. Park3r (talk) 03:29, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Park3r, the case may be notable. However, I don't think Nkosana Makate is, the article is composed of this particular case only. Opening statement says "…is a South African who proposed the "Buzz" idea to Vodacom", no description nor WP:SIGCOV, and back to the nom, this is a clear BLP1E. Until relevant sources are brought to light, I think redirecting the article to Vodacom is the way to go. dxneo (talk) 04:50, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Not sure I understand the deletion rationale here. The case is definitely notable and as much as Nkosana Makate may not be notable but he definitely deserves a mention in the case because after all he is the central figure to the case. Also, seeing that most articles on Wikipedia are about Europe and U.S and there is a serious lack of African content (including content on languages) I think it would have been wise for you Dineo to be bold fix the issues on this article and go on to translate it to your mother tongue than tag it for speedy deletion. Wikimedia ZA is there to support African Wikimedian like yourself to increase African content and languages on Wikipedia. Please reach out to me on bobby.shabangu@wikimedia.org.za to talk more on how we can support you. Bobbyshabangu _talk 18:36, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Bobbyshabangu, yes he may be the central figure but this is pure WP:BLP1E (meaning he's known for one event only) which is the deletion rationale here. I wouldn't have nominated it for deletion if there was something I could do to improve it. Nkosana Makate is already mentioned on Vodacom#Please Call Me. Note that your comment does not support your "keep" !vote in any way. dxneo (talk) 19:35, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Vladimir Ivanov (model)[edit]

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

Non-notable model, fails WP:NMODEL. Both references are from 2013 (one is broken). Doesn't seem to have his models.com profile updated since 2017. Does not meet wp:ANYBIO or wp:GNG. Classicwiki (talk) If you reply here, please ping me. 22:22, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Entertainment, Fashion, Kyrgyzstan, Russia, and United States of America. Classicwiki (talk) If you reply here, please ping me. 22:22, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ebrahim Etemadi[edit]

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

Ebrahim Etemadi likely doesn't meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines. Additionally, the mentioned sources might not be reliable enough. Waqar💬 19:25, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Artists, and Music. Waqar💬 19:25, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Iran. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:28, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Three of the citations presented (2 Farsi and 1 Enlglish) seem to be OK. The Persian version of this has 17 citations and I saw some Ok ones there, such as 1, 2. We can't just assume because something is in a foreign language, it is unreliable. He seems to be well known in his country.Yolandagonzales (talk) 09:09, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Elias Huizar[edit]

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

A defamatory article based on WP:OR with a non-free image improperly labeled as such and a subject that fails WP:GNG. Lettlre (talk) 19:07, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Crime, Police, Education, and Washington. Lettlre (talk) 19:07, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Delete/Convert - I feel like the shooter himself doesn't meet notability guidelines, but the event does, I feel like the article should be converted into something similar to 2014 Isla Vista killings, where the event itself is published, but not focused on the perp. Gonzafer001 (talk) 21:21, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That's plausible Red Slash 16:10, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I concur, we should move the page to focus less on the perp, and more on the actual story. Gonzafer001 (talk) 03:21, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy delete - WP:NOTNEWS, WP:BLP. Suspected murderer on the run, not yet captured by authorities. Also, the image of the suspect is not licensed for our use. — Maile (talk) 19:25, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete G10/A7.Mccapra (talk) 20:58, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Not a speedy. The copyrighted image can be removed. This article is not "entirely negative in tone and unsourced." (emphasis mine). It may be entirely inappropriate for Wikipedia, but CNN has covered it, so it's unreasonable to argue it's A7. Jclemens (talk) 22:28, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I've removed the speedy tag and added a link to the CNN coverage. That doesn't mean I think this should be kept: it means I don't think any of our speedy deletion criteria apply. Jclemens (talk) 03:59, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete/speedy delete per WP:NOTNEWS LegalSmeagolian (talk) 00:49, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy keep - this neither is WP:OR (did you... read the references??), nor does it fail the WP:GNG based on the substantial news coverage. Red Slash 01:41, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The main source is a self-described zine that basically makes a bunch of allegations on a non-convicted individual. That's what I mean by OR. Lettlre (talk) 17:31, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete To the above user, this article and its tone is wholly inappropriate for Wikipedia (WP:BLPBALANCE) and inappropriately POV, incredibly violating WP:PERP; as the subject has been caught there's no use for the article as-is currently. The picture has been removed due to a poor licensing rationale and as the image involves children in no way involved with the subject or the story, and a BLPBALANCE-violating title in itself. Nate • (chatter) 02:18, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete as a WP:BLP violation. The article is almost completely unsourced contentious claims about a living person. Jfire (talk) 02:53, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The BLP issues have been resolved, but this still fails WP:NOTNEWS and WP:CRIME. Coverage is unlikely to be WP:SUSTAINED. Jfire (talk) 04:34, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It is completely sourced. Red Slash 16:10, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment This is all over the news in the Northwest. He was tracked down and committed suicide. It's being presented on the news as factual including interviews with people he worked with. He isn't a living person but a recently deceased person so I realize BLP still applies. The name of the minor victim has not been included here or mentioned in the news but they spoke with her family. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:07, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Rename to 2024 Yakima murder and child abduction case, or something similar. They issued an Amber Alert about this case in the middle of the night, and it has certainly been heavily covered, but I agree that naming the article after Huizar doesn't entirely make sense since nothing about him is notable except for his crimes. See WP:BLP1E (although he is dead it is still relevant).LonelyBoy2012 (talk) 07:02, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jeff Unaegbu[edit]

AfDs for this article:

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

I came about this article during clean up and saw it's contains a bit vague and non verifiable content. Taking into cleaning up, I became tired at the line seeing almost if not all the sources lacks editorial guidelines, perhaps doesn't go with our policy and guidelines for reliable sources.

On the other hand, apart from the quality percentage of primary sources linking to book that were self published in the platforms such as Amazon, etc., the article generally doesn't meet WP:GNG, no WP:SIGCOV, and it contains a bit hoaxes that were made (those like references/acclaims which I have removed when cleaning part of the article). The article in general doesn't conform with Wikipedia's inclusion for authors, journalist too—since he edited a magazine and has written for some magazines per the article. Lacks verifiable source and seem looking like a advert/promotional/vaguely constructed source, and more.

The books he wrote doesn't meet our guidelines for books, so we may try redirecting or WP:PRESERVE albeit there is nothing to be preserved here. I also discovered the previous AFD that reads 'no consensus', and it seems there were no improvement or rather say; the previous AFD seeking for clean up which I've did to some part and found no substantial need for the inclusion of this article. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 01:53, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, Authors, and Nigeria. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 01:53, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: I once looked at this article and realized that it was created when some of the links verifying some information were not yet dead links. It was created in 2010 or so. For such kind of articles, caution is required. I saw that he was mentioned by the Nigerian author, Chimamanda Adichie in the New Yorker Magazine and he was involved in creating the Occupy Nigeria protests online. There is also some newspaper articles (see Newswatch) on his writings, especially his poem on Lagos, said to be the longest metrical poem by a Nigerian. I think it needs serious clean up and I may help to find his recent activities. Royalrumblebee (talk) 16:28, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Royalrumblebee, dead links doesn't mean anything. There is the Wayback machine for saving pages to archives. While you argue about being mentioned by notable Nigerian writers, it's not a criteria for notability. Almost all the references are links to his publications and things about him were written from a PR which is no shadowed to the eye. In any case, provide me with the links that credibly show this article meets notability. — Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 11:03, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  Ok. I found some of his academic publications, including two in JSTOR. But I will look for articles about him, and really- I share your opinion about making sure articles meet notability to remain in this encyclopaedia. Note: see https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6285-4800 Royalrumblebee (talk) 11:08, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  Royalrumblebee, that can't be a source. It's a database. — Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 20:58, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  Oh ok @SafariScribe. I see The Punch as a reliable Nigerian newspaper and it talked about him as a celebrity in depth here (https://punchng.com/nigerian-entertainers-born-october-1/). I also see Daily Trust as another reliable Nigerian newspaper and it told the in-depth story of how he and other two writers (Gimba Kakanda and Richard Ali created the Occupy Nigeria group that online-remotely organized the protests in Nigeria in 2012 (https://dailytrust.com/the-occupants-of-nigerias-harmattan/). I also see Newswatch (Nigeria) as a reliable Nigerian newspaper made a full page review of his book and it states in its first line as well as in details later that "Jeff Unaegbu's This Lagos Na Wa has set a record as the longest poem written by a Nigerian! (https://web.archive.org/web/20120504135846/http://www.newswatchngr.com/editorial/prime/bob/10326094437.htm). Other reliable newspapers that mentioned him only in passing are the American magazine The New Yorker (https://www.newyorker.com/culture/personal-history/notes-on-grief);
  
  This Day here (https://www.thisdaylive.com/index.php/2020/09/15/james-nwoye-adichie-1932-2020);
  
  Daily Post (Nigeria) here (https://dailypost.ng/2014/05/02/ekweremadu-donates-transformer-nsukka-community/);
  
  There are many more, but less reliable links that mentioned him in depth such as this (https://www.gistmania.com/talk/topic,61413.0.html). I have already inserted in the article his direct activities as a journalist reporting for Vanguard (Nigeria).
  
  My honest opinion is that inexperienced editors added a lot of unreliable links such as amazon over the reliable ones and so the article only needs serious clean up. I have seen articles in Wikipedia held by just one reference that is not as reliable as the ones I saw on this article. I have included the reliable links above already too. Thanks. Royalrumblebee (talk) 04:32, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  Royalrumblebee, all these sources doesn't link or explained the article like one. For example, a source can say "John Doe is a Nigerian writer who was awarded an MFR by the president of the country. He hasbeen recognized in .....". Then another days "John Doe said he was awarded an MFR by president Doe. In a speech by the president, the world revognised many people and John Doe, standing at the outside asked who is the president." In both sources, the first one seems to he verifiable, significantly covered albeit requires multiple confirmation. It also was taking about John Doe,while the second was taking about an event he attended while giving much view on the president. The thing about John Doe was reported by him—so it's not verifiable. I believe this can help though not broadly covered. Thanks! — Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 15:23, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ajay Raju[edit]

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

Unremarkable lawyer, not known for any notable achievements in his field. Doesn't seem to be known for holding any academic or law journal positions, involvement in notable cases, etc. Reliable sources are mainly smaller local outlets (in the Philadelphia area). Bridget (talk) 22:36, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Law, and Pennsylvania. Bridget (talk) 22:36, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Lawyer that has his own law firm isn't notable. Being a "boutique" firm is fancy wording for specialist law firm, nothing notable. The reads as a biographical profile suited for somewhere else, not for wikipedia. Oaktree b (talk) 00:01, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Madhya Pradesh-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:13, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: An article that reads more of family and a simple biography (blog). Lacks context which doesn't show importance per subject notability guidelines. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 01:39, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete promotional article which does not state why the subject is notable, per rationale above. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chekidalum (talk • contribs) 11:33, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Cheryl Epple[edit]

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

The highest-held position is as an elected trustee/board president to Cerritos College. All references are based on death/obituary. Don't think she meets the threshold for WP:NPOL or wp:anybio. Notability is not inherited through marriage. Doesn't make any mention of business accomplishments. Internet search results are sparse. I suggest deletion or move to draft at minimum. Classicwiki (talk) If you reply here, please ping me. 18:42, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Businesspeople, Politicians, Politics, and California. Classicwiki (talk) 18:42, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 20:06, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Agree that college board member is not a notability-bearing position and the coverage is not significant enough. Reywas92^Talk 15:16, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Notability is not inherited, so she isn't automatically entitled to have an article just because her husband has one — but the article is not demonstrating or properly sourcing that she has any meaningful claim of standalone notability in her own right. There also appears to be a bit of a pattern here, as this was created by the same editor who created Patti Garamendi, which I put up for AFD last week for virtually identical reasons. Bearcat (talk) 18:14, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Carlos Pesina[edit]

AfDs for this article:

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

Unreferenced article. No pre or post-wiki sig coverage. Being on the crew in a lot of video games does not automatically inherit notability. Wikipedia Library, Newspapers.com, and current Google search results in hardly any in-depth sig coverage. Passings mentions/brief coverage I could find from major pubs: 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7- do not help passing GNG. X (talk) 10:00, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Video games, and Martial arts. X (talk) 10:00, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Illinois-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:48, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Nothing has changed in the article since the previous discussion. There's no doubt he was part of the Mortal Kombat animation and motion capture, but there's still no indication of significant coverage of him. A much better case can be made for his brother, but notability is not inherited. Perhaps a case can be made for redirect or merge to the article on Daniel Pesina, but I'm not seeing the rationale for an individual article on Carlos. Papaursa (talk) 01:40, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Still fails WP:BASIC, only passing mentions, no significant coverage. --Mika1h (talk) 12:47, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tayler Kane[edit]

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

Unreferenced article with an IMDb external link. Pre-wiki coverage was hard to find, even a cursory Google search today shows nothing. Although the actor seems to have played several minor roles in notable shows, there's no significant coverage of him that I could find. If printed sources exist, one may list them. X (talk) 09:31, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Actors and filmmakers. X (talk) 09:31, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. 09:47, 22 April 2024 (UTC) Turtletennisfogwheat (talk) 09:47, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:50, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Renzo Vitale[edit]

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

Highly promotional piece written by a UPE. PROD declined. - UtherSRG (talk) 12:15, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Artists, Bands and musicians, and Italy. UtherSRG (talk) 12:15, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete — the subject has had an ordinary career, with no indication of encyclopedic notability. — Biruitorul ^Talk 12:46, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Previous WP:PROD candidate, ineligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 12:16, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Iftikhar A. Ayaz[edit]

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

Fails WP:BASIC and WP:PRIMARY: "Do not base an entire article on primary sources, and be cautious about basing large passages on them." No secondary sources at all. AusLondonder (talk) 07:40, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Businesspeople, and Bilateral relations. AusLondonder (talk) 07:40, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Oceania-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 09:13, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy keep. Clearly meets WP:GNG. @AusLondonder: Have added reliable secondary sources to the article now. Request withdrawal of AfD nomination. Cielquiparle (talk) 21:09, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Of the sources you have added, I'm not sure a single one is actually significant coverage of him as an individual. One source is the Court Circular column in the Daily Telegraph which reports he awarded an Tuvalu Order of Merit to Prince William. Another article is about persecution of Ahmadis in Pakistan which name-checks him. I'm not seeing this as meeting WP:BASIC: "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." AusLondonder (talk) 14:32, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Extraordinary Writ (talk) 08:06, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Adeseha Wuraola Becky[edit]

AfDs for this article:

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

The subject of this article fails WP:GNG and WP:NACTOR. She has not starred in a single notable film; a Google search of her doesn't show her being discussed in reliable secondary sources. Most of the sources cited in the article are primary sources that involve the subject granting interviews to several publications. The article was previously deleted via an afd discussion, which can be seen here. Versace1608 ^{Wanna Talk?} 22:32, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, and Nigeria. Versace1608 ^{Wanna Talk?} 22:32, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 22:55, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Same as the previous deletion. My mind is why there seems always to be a minimal participation for consensus reach. However, an article created barely two /four days after deletion. What am I suspecting? Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 16:47, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Versace1608, isn't this G4 you could have tagged. — Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 16:49, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Safari Scribe, I wasn't aware that the article was previously deleted. I only learned this info after nominating it. Sometimes if an article is different from the one that was previously deleted, the admin handling the speedy deletion will decline the G4 request. I have experienced this in the past. Anyways, thanks for the message. Welcome to Wikipedia and thanks for your contributions to this site. Versace1608 ^{Wanna Talk?} 17:03, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You can't G4 on a prod/soft delete. Desertarun (talk) 18:13, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. The refs check out. She doesn't pass Nactor, nor does she need to because she passes both Basic and GNG. Desertarun (talk) 18:10, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:07, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Shreyas Puranik[edit]

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

Fails WP:GNG, appears not notable. Bakhtar40 (talk) 16:52, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Bands and musicians, and India. Bakhtar40 (talk) 16:52, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Maharashtra-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:06, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. As the creator of the article i would like to suggest keep, as it passes WP:MUSIC. The musical artist have received full fledged coverage from independent media sources for his work such as [4], [5], [6].[7]. Further the artist also passes one of the criteria of winning or being nominated for a notable award, as he won the notable Filmfare R. D. Burman Award in the category of upcoming music talent.[8][9]

Hineyo (talk) 17:44, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above references are either paid placement or Press Releases. Bakhtar40 (talk) 15:29, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

:Note - This account (Hineyo) is blocked. Bakhtar40 (talk) 15:29, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Pass WP:MUSIC, Also, there are significant reliable sources availabe which talks about the subject. Grabup (talk) 04:26, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Toadette^Edit! 18:12, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Imaan Zainab Mazari[edit]

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

She fails WP:GNG as there is no sources covering her in depth. The article is created based on recentism because she just received nominal coverage due to her few days arrest and she being the daughter of a notable politician Shireen Mazari. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 21:04, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Women, and Pakistan. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 21:04, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment It seems a proper WP:BEFORE search was not conducted before nominating. As the creator of this BLP, It's natural that I prefer not to see it deleted. The BLP is well-sourced, contains no OR, and maintains a NPOV. I'll leave it to the community to decide. I can expand this page further as there's still more coverage on her, but I believe the community may agree that this BLP, in its current state, adequately demonstrates the subject meets WP:GNG. --—Saqib (talk | contribs) 21:10, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Law and Scotland. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:08, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The article appears to rely heavily on sources that cover her in the context of recent events, particularly her arrests, rather than on her long-term significance as a human rights lawyer. The current state of the article may indeed be more appropriate for Wikinews, given its focus on recent events. Although she marginally satisfies the WP:GNG, the content is largely influenced by her brief detentions and her mother's political stature. Whereas, the criteria demand sustained and significant coverage, reflecting a subject’s lasting relevance. samee converse 02:26, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I find it surprising that you guys perceiving this as a RECENTISM issue. She has consistently received press coverage- both nationally and internationally- dating back as far as 2014 (see this) which indicates that she passes WP:10YT. It's not a matter of receiving temporary blip of news coverage for a single incident or event, rather- it's a compilation of several incidents. --—Saqib (talk | contribs) 08:05, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's merely a brief mention, and even that's only in relation to her being Shireen Mazari's daughter. She states her mother had no objection to attend the protests. There is no mention of her own credentials in the source if she had any. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 10:35, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

My point is that she has been consistently covered in the news since 2014. In 2015 she received more press attention after being targeted by trolls on social media, a phenomenon not typically experienced by children of official or public figures in Pakistan. --—Saqib (talk | contribs) 11:02, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

All the coverage from 2014/2015 you're referring to is primarily because she's Shireen Mazari's daughter. Reports focus on the novelty of her actions, such as voting for her mother's rival party or protesting against PTI affiliates who stormed PTV, rather than her qualifications. Perhaps she stood out as the only protestor who was child of a prominent figure on that particular day. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 11:55, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not implying that this 2014/2015 press coverage is alone establishes her meeting the criteria of WP:GNG. The point is, she has been consistently receiving media attention since 2014. Anyways, to establish WP:GNG, we should focus on the sources present in the BLP itself, which I believe are sufficient. —Saqib (talk | contribs) 12:01, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. I agree with Saqib that the sources are sufficient, and even the delete vote is acknowledging that the article meets the GNG. With general notability, sufficient sourcing, and a well-written article, what exactly is the problem here? rspεεr (talk) 14:20, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

off topic discussion

@Rspeer: personal disagreements. --—Saqib (talk | contribs) 15:37, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's ridiculous. I recently endorsed your nomination just a few days ago. If I had personal disagreements, I wouldn't have supported it. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 17:01, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

But I didn't even mention your name. Isn't this ridiculous that you just recently created this BLP on a non-notable police officer, an unknown figure who just received some recent press attention. This a clear case of WP:RECENTISM. You cited a video source multiple time as a reference to back up claims in the Early Life and Education as well Career sections. Yet here, you even didn't care to do a proper WP:BEFORE search. This clearly suggest that you've some sort of issue with me which I'm trying my best to ignore. --—Saqib (talk | contribs) 17:24, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Per WP:ANYBIO, award recipients are considered notable, video source is Geo News, a reliable source. You should assume good faith, you ignored the part in my previous comment where I showed you the evidence of my recent support for you. I did not even know that you were the creator until after AFD submission when I saw bot added message to your talk page in my watchlist. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 18:06, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

She did receive an award for the recent incident that garnered press attention, but this is falls under WP:RECENTISM. However, the WP:ANYBIO also states that receiving an award does not automatically confer notability. Regarding the citation of a Geo News video as a reference, it's important to note that this video is an interview, and thus a a primary source. Citing video interviews as reference could set a problematic precedent for BLP articles. Despite my efforts to AGF, it seems reciprocity is lacking. And as for your support vote, it was not solicited nor necessary. I find it difficult to believe your assertion that you were unaware this BLP was created by me. Following our disagreement on this BLP, you promptly nominated this for deletion. Therefore, Assume the assumption of good faith. Anyways, let's avoid further escalation on this matter, at least on this page. —Saqib (talk | contribs) 19:35, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Meets GNG: BCC, TFT, etc. Hameltion (talk | contribs) 03:48, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:12, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Regardless of the reasons (be it her detentions and her activities, or her parents), she has received lasting media coverage (not every coverage has to be sig/in-depth), and the sources present in the article, some of them are mostly fine and can be considered sig cov - with everyone here acknowledging she meets GNG/WP:BASIC. X (talk) 12:52, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mark Schulman (chess player)[edit]

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

Subject does not have the WP:SIGCOV needed to meet the WP:GNG. The sources in the article are all databases, and a WP:BEFORE check only comes up with passing mentions such as [[10]]. Let'srun (talk) 18:06, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Games, Law, and Canada. Let'srun (talk) 18:06, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Notes. Not voting one way or the other at this stage, just noting that he represented a large country (Canada) at chess, and most of his activity was in the 1960s where sources are not so easy to find on the internet. He played in 3 Canadian Championships. His Elo rating on the first FIDE list in 1970 was 2260, and it seems he didn't play any rated games after that. MaxBrowne2 (talk) 07:38, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 18:11, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There are several mentions of him in the Chess Life/ Chess Review archives at the USCF site (https://new.uschess.org/chess-life-digital-archives), usually in connection with either the Canadian championship or the annual Minnesota vs Manitoba match (he was one of the top players from Winnipeg). I haven't found any 1960s Canadian chess publications digitized on-line. Still, he satisfies two of the informal WP:NCHESS criteria, having played in 3 Canadian championships (1963, 1965, 1969) and represented Canada at the Olympiad. MaxBrowne2 (talk) 01:32, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Leaning towards delete. I wanted to keep it, I really did, but in the end I couldn't justify it to myself. It's true that there are probably a lot of off-line sources from the 1960s, but he just doesn't really have enough achievements to get more than a few passing mentions in specialist chess publications. We haven't even confirmed a date of birth or death (chesstempo says he was born in 1934 but no better source found; a memorial tournament named after him was held in 2018). Playing in 3 Canadian championship (https://www.bcchesshistory.com/canchslate.html) and 1 Olympiad (https://www.olimpbase.org/players-ind/2/28e2amqe.html) doesn't really add up to notability since Canada has never been a major chess playing power, and his achievements in these events was a little underwhelming. His published FIDE rating of 2260, while not to be sneezed at, suggests that he was of below International Master strength. It appears he was strictly an amateur, a lawyer who only occasionally found the time to play competitively. MaxBrowne2 (talk) 02:54, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NCHESS doesn't mention playing in a national championship, it mentions winning a national championship. And it doesn't mention playing in the Olympiad, it mentions earning a ... medal at an Olympiad. So, I don't think we can rescue this article. That said, I enjoyed learning these little tidbits about a Canadian chess player whom I had not otherwise heard of. Bruce leverett (talk) 17:54, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As noted elsewhere I found a DOB for him in the Chess Federation of Canada's 100th anniversary booklet by Daniel Yanofsky. I'll note here that he disappeared from the FIDE rating list on the January 2008 list, after being present in the October 2007 list, indicating a likely death in 2007. I've found references to a Winnipeg lawyer who is probably this person, but no obituary (he has a namesake from Maryland who also died in 2007, and another namesake who was P!nk's drummer). The lack of an online obituary does not bode well for notability. MaxBrowne2 (talk) 03:56, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ossanda Liber[edit]

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

Fails WP:NPOL and WP:GNG. Sources mostly cover her in the context of her unsuccessful candidacies (of which in one she received 84 votes out of 109,350 cast). AusLondonder (talk) 14:30, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Politicians, Conservatism, and Portugal. AusLondonder (talk) 14:30, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - I translated this article into English from Portuguese as part of Women in Red. This page is much longer than Nova Direita, perhaps it could be merged. Moondragon21 (talk) 15:54, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Moondragon21 When you translate an article, please check it. The tables of election results had broken templates and looked a mess. I have commented out that code, so the tables now look tidier, even though they don't have a coloured bar for the party. PamD 07:39, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete an unsuccessful candidate not otherwise notable. SportingFlyer T·C 16:04, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:11, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I think coverage of her activity as founder of the new party probably makes her notable. PamD 08:15, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: A unsuccessful political candidate that is not notable enough. BlakeIsHereStudios (talk | contributions) 03:45, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:17, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: as PamD said being founder and president also makes me think she's notable

Prima.Vera.Paula (talk) 20:12, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure how being the founder of a minor party which received 0.25% of the vote indicates notability. AusLondonder (talk) 23:49, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

James Dring[edit]

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

PROD requested, but denied for being Grammy nominated. However, WP:ANYBIO requires winning once, or being nominated multiple times. Is twice good enough? I read multiple as something greater than two. So, fails ANYBIO. Even more, none of the references pass WP:SIRS, so fails WP:GNG. - UtherSRG (talk) 14:41, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Bands and musicians, and United Kingdom. UtherSRG (talk) 14:41, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Fails WP:GNG/WP:NBIO. Sources are database entries and press releases. No significant coverage. Jfire (talk) 16:05, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete — to add to what UtherSRG said, he was nominated for one Grammy, not two, together with four other people. Also, the article is by a banned sockpuppet and paid editor, which we shouldn’t reward. — Biruitorul ^Talk 18:27, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment As per this link [11], as well as the Grammy nomination, he has been nominated for a Golden Globe. Also - clearly WP:MUSICBIO applies here. ResonantDis_tortion 19:47, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep With named nominations for ~~two~~ three notable awards, that is sufficient to meet WP:MUSICBIO#8. There's also sufficient WP:RS to show the subject meets WP:COMPOSER#1. I have cleaned up the article including removing non-RS citations and adding several more, which may not be multiple lines in depth but do contribute per WP:BASIC, so any "whiff" of paid editor contribution no longer applies. ResonantDis_tortion 23:14, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment per the Billboard reference just added to the article - Dring was a named credit in the nomination of the Feel Good Inc. Grammy award. So he does have two Grammy nominations, plus the Golden Globe; I've updated my !vote. ResonantDis_tortion 15:47, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Per ResonantDistortion. X (talk) 20:45, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Subject specific guidelines are for guidance only - every topic has to meet WP:GNG when WP:AFD is invoked. It seems unlikely that we will find WP:SIGCOV about him. Fails WP:GNG and WP:PROMO. 2A02:AB88:4C01:7500:84E:6485:B66C:DC73 (talk) 22:17, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:15, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete also per WP:NOTINHERITED. Article is rife with the requisite heavy namedropping and coattailing (Jamie T in particular) in attempt to cover for lack of individual notability and weak press-release sourcing. Being nominated just once for a soundtrack song all the way back in 2010, signing an agreement, and his recent production for an unknown indie artist (Terra Twin) aren't enough for SIGCOV. 💥Casualty ^{• Hop along. •} 00:20, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
(1) "all the way back in 2010" The date of the Grammy nomination is irrelevant as per WP:NTEMP, (2) Dring has been a Grammy nominee twice not once, the first in 2005, which is verified by a RS in the article, (3) The reason the article is "rife with the requisite heavy namedropping" is because the subject has made credited and verified contributions to a number of notable works, (4) two credited grammy nominations does rather indicate that notability by association does not apply, and (5) There are c. 14 words devoted to Jamie T, which does not appear undue, given that, for example, on the album Trick "sees Jamie T play all instruments alongside longterm collaborator James Dring" ([12]). I know I am probably repeating myself, but WP:BASIC, WP:MUSICBIO and WP:COMPOSER all apply. ResonantDis_tortion 07:23, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete fails WP:MUSICBIO and fails WP:GNG. Can’t find independent reliable sources giving significant coverage. Contributor892z (talk) 05:14, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Abdul Ameer[edit]

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

This guy fails both WP:GNG and WP:NCRICKET. A search seems to only one article with his name in it and it only covers him tangentially. Allan Nonymous (talk) 23:25, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Cricket. Allan Nonymous (talk) 23:25, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and Pakistan. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:02, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete samee converse 01:23, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I found several references using this search by focusing my search on Dawn.com, a leading English-language newspaper in Pakistan. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 05:16, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The sources here seem to all be tangential coverage of him playing for his team. The first hit isn't even of Abdul Ameer but of a M. Abdul Ameer who seems to be unrelated. Allan Nonymous (talk) 13:16, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete too poor to stay on Wikipedia, not much to salvage around here. Acartonadooopo (talk) 20:20, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Acartonadooopo, it's the English Wikipedia's rule that Wikipedia:Deletion is not cleanup. It doesn't matter whether the current version of the article is "too poor to stay on Wikipedia", because the question here at AFD is whether the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia:Separate, stand-alone article. WhatamIdoing (talk) 23:59, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to List of Karachi Kings cricketers Not sure I'm seeing enough in a search to suggest a WP:GNG pass, however there could well be offline coverage. Suitable redirect per WP:ATD. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rugbyfan22 (talk • contribs) 19:45, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:23, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Sources likely to exist in Pakistan; taking 100 first-class wickets is no mean feat. AA (talk) 22:11, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"Sources likely to exist" is a WP:THEREMUSTBESOURCES argument. Allan Nonymous (talk) 15:15, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rox De Luca[edit]

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

Regrettably, I'm not seeing evidence that the subject passes WP:GNG/WP:NARTIST. I hope to be proved wrong! IgnatiusofLondon (he/him • ☎️) 10:16, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Artists, Arts, Visual arts, Italy, and Australia. IgnatiusofLondon (he/him • ☎️) 10:16, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment, there seem to be enough reputable sources on the page for notability. Will watch this discussion. Randy Kryn (talk) 10:54, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment, please let me know what is missing to make notability.louibu (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 20:51, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment, considerable work has been done on this page since the AfD was posted. Can the discussion be closed and the notice removed? Louibu (talk) 06:10, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm still not seeing evidence that the subject passes WP:NARTIST, so I won't be withdrawing the nomination. In particular, in my reading, the presented sources don't seem enough to constitute significant critical attention, nor is the subject's work represented within the permanent collections of several notable galleries or museums, which seem the two easiest criteria for the subject to pass. IgnatiusofLondon (he/him • ☎️) 08:10, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion will run at least seven days. There is no reason present for a speedy close in either direction. Star Mississippi 13:03, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, evidence of the subject's work represented within permanent collections of several notable galleries has been added. Carolinephillips (talk) 21:55, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What are these notable galleries, and where is the evidence? IgnatiusofLondon (he/him • ☎️) 22:15, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Source	Independent?	Reliable?	Significant coverage?	Count source toward GNG?
Source assessment table:
https://www.roxdeluca.com/images/Gleaning_for_plastics_defying_wastefulness_by_Paul_Allatson_2020_.pdf		This is a reupload on the subject's website of a blogspot article (WP:SELFPUBLISH).	See WP:SELFPUBLISH.	✘ No
https://www.roxdeluca.com/index.php/artist-cv-curriculum-de-arte	This is the artist's CV.	See WP:ABOUTSELF.	See WP:ABOUTSELF.	✘ No
https://theculturetrip.com/pacific/australia/articles/sea-of-plastic-an-artists-quest-to-address-ocean-pollution			This is a travel guide website that ran an article on the artist.	✔ Yes
https://searchthecollection.nga.gov.au/object?keyword=anna%20de%20luca&searchIn=artistOrCulture&searchIn=title&searchIn=medium&uniqueId=127158			Doesn't mention the subject; this is just the link to a painting by the subject's mother.	✘ No
https://gunyah.blogspot.com/search?q=rox+de+luca	This is a residency report from the subject itself on a blog.	See WP:ABOUTSELF.	See WP:ABOUTSELF.	✘ No
https://www.artshub.com.au/news/features/artists-giving-materials-a-new-life-2512531/			~ This is a fairly short mention; the subject is not the main focus of the article, but is quoted, with some commentary on their work.	~ Partial
Millner, Jacqueline; Moore, Catriona (2022). Contemporary art and feminism. New York: Routledge. p. 193.			Offline source, accepting in good faith: according to the block quotation, this is a paragraph mention in the book.	✔ Yes
Brennan, Anne (1 December 1997). "Beyond reason: Jo Darbyshire and Rox De Luca". Eyeline. 35: 22–24.			Offline source, accepting in good faith, though the title suggests this may be an interview.	✔ Yes
https://opus.lib.uts.edu.au/bitstream/10453/45398/2/The%20Transcultural%20Edge.pdf			A paragraph mention on the subject and their work.	✔ Yes
Allatson, Paul (1996). "Men and Mettle". Artlink. 16 (1): 24–26.			Offline source, accepting in good faith.	✔ Yes
https://www.gq.com.au/style/trends/the-style-download-15324/image-gallery/a1114634ed7db996d49f80ed40e73536			Very short mention of the subject and one of their works.	✔ Yes
https://www.projectvortex.org/	This is a project with which the artist is associated.		Name doesn't even feature in the source.	✘ No
https://www.artshub.com.au/news/reviews/review-deakin-university-contemporary-small-sculpture-award-2018-256473-2360787/			Very short, one-sentence mention of the subject and one of their works, which to me constitutes a trivial mention.	✘ No
https://www.unsw.edu.au/news/2017/07/the-inaugural-ravenswood-australian-womens-art-prize--finalists			Just the subject's name is mentioned.	✘ No
https://www.artshub.com.au/news/sponsored-content/turning-waste-into-art-is-a-community-affair-261135-2368551/			Just the subject's name is mentioned.	✘ No
https://www.woollahragallery.com.au/Artists/Artist-in-Residence/Rox-de-Luca	This is her biography as an artist-in-residence, almost certainly written by the subject.		See WP:ABOUTSELF.	✘ No
https://www.deakin.edu.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0003/2192259/deakin_university_art_collection_artists.pdf			Just the subject's name is mentioned.	✘ No
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{source assess table}}.

Your mileage may vary, but to me, these sources, assessed together, do not demonstrate that WP:GNG is met. In particular, we have only one "chunky" piece that focuses on the artist, while the rest are either borderline trivial mentions or the artist and their work are discussed, in no more than a paragraph, as a subtopic. IgnatiusofLondon (he/him • ☎️) 10:01, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, the source analysis shows that sufficient sources have been obtained to reach GNG. Randy Kryn (talk) 11:44, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hey man im josh (talk) 13:55, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep IMO WP:BASIC is marginally met. X (talk) 13:03, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Consort Chen Farong[edit]

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

No refs on the page for many years. Not seeing useful refs but they may exist in other languages. At present there are various claims on the page which should be removed per WP:V JMWt (talk) 09:47, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and China. JMWt (talk) 09:47, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Having written this a long time ago, I agree that it could and should be sourced better. However, as the mother of an emperor of a large state, she is inherently notable. --Nlu (talk) 18:14, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Nlu, any chance you remember what sources you used to write it? -- asilvering (talk) 04:05, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 11:46, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete reluctantly. I don't see the sources. There's a paragraph in the Southern History [13] that discusses her. But secondary sources in English seem to be absent, and those in Chinese appear (I'm skimming here) to mainly be from Chinese Wikipedia or Baidu Baike or scrapes of those articles, or to be brief mentions in articles on her son. Oblivy (talk) 03:57, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Zoran Kalabić[edit]

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

The article is written in a blattantly promo way WP:PROMO. While there are some resources, there is a problem of WP:SNG, since most available resources are very promo-like, and there is no secondary and reliable coverage. After an online research, most available resources lack of independency and are written in a blatant way to promote this person, and most of these resources in a similar way are presented in his website: https://zorankalabic.com/biography/. It should be noted that there is a weird editing history, since the main editor created almost entirely a few months ago both the English and Serbian Wikipedia articles of this person, having a very minimal presence in editing other articles of Serbian people. Lately, the templates with notability issues were removed without any valid explanation, and the photos that are blatantly promo and were initially removed, were restored. Apart from notability issues with lack of reliable and independent resources, there may be a strong problem of WP:COI. Chiserc (talk) 08:24, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Businesspeople, and Serbia. Chiserc (talk) 08:24, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep this is quite strange request here. Article is not promo, as there is nothing in it to make it like that. Subject is notable and i already explained that i have seen this person on television receiving highest medal of Republic of Serbia after some large donation to the hospital, and wanted to create article as it was incredible for me the person of such importance does not have article on Wikipedia. Some parts of the article were edited and fixed by other editors that actually wanted to contribute instead of this user who only insisted to tag the article and inform others to delete it, without actually working on article. That is normal way of working on article. Notability is without questions no problem at all, many sources are top level independent news agencies of the world so nominator also misrepresented sources quality. Photos were not deleted because they were promo, that is another blatant lie by nominator but because it took some time to confirm original ownership of them by website where i found them. When that was done they were restored as in many other articles. In the end article history shows only good proper editors who are actually trying to make article of this notable person better, and nominations without any proper Wikipedia work which fails good faith guideline, making false accusations about original author of the article. Also, templates with notability issues are not intended to indefinitely tag the articles, but to make explanation that further work is needed. Bit if none is actually trying to fix the article and tags are standing there for weeks without any further comment on talk page or edit, wiki guidelines allow them to be removed. You are not allowed just to restore them and never to point in detail what do you find problematic with this article. I feel that I should protect the article I wanted to create but not because I have COI, i dont, but because this person received highest awards by several countries and donated to many causes, which make it more then valuable and notable addition to Wiki. It baffles me is there anything else behind this request as most of the things article is nominated for are actually misrepresented, also having in mind nominator agenda to delete it for quite some time. --Pane.Vino.Wiki (talk) 06:57, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete no significant coverage from reliable sources Good day—RetroCosmos ^talk 19:09, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
User:RetroCosmos, Most important national public news services of European countries are very much reliable sources. Talking like Radio television of Serbia for example, there isn't anything more important and reliable than that. --Pane.Vino.Wiki (talk) 18:03, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia is not a soapbox. Sources that appear to be should not be acceptable for the purposes of establishing notability Good day—RetroCosmos ^talk 21:37, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Delete Initial reaction is Delete. Article is a gushing account of this subject. Definitely MOS:PEACOCK. In conjunction with the simultaneous creation of English and Serbian articles, and a block of photos going up on Commons (lifted straight off subject's own website, with release emailed to VRT by the subject - WP:COI much?), this has the feeling of a PR job. Also the fact that the Wikidata Description was "one of the most successful Serbian businessmen in the diaspora" instead of a more appropriate "Serbian businessman". HOWEVER, this is only a Weak Delete. There might be a case to keep given that there appears to be a legit and (minorly) notable award in the Order of Karađorđe's Star. I'm mindful of WP:Globalise - I would not expect a lot of coverage in English language media and a lack of a profile in the BBC or NYT does not imply a lack of notability! Coverage in Serbian or German would also be acceptable. In that case though, this article needs an end-to-end rewrite to encyclopaedic style (WP:MOS). About 30% of it needs to go, and the rest needs to be backed up by independent cites, not the subject's personal website.Hemmers (talk) 15:59, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Hemmers is there a way to ask you to change your mind to week keep? I will be more then willing to follow your guidelines and to make article better, but he is really notable in more than a few countries following his donations and support. I find out about him over news following his donation of equipment to children's hospital, and it was incredible to me that such a person does not have Wikipedia article. There isn't anything of those things you mentioned. I was the one who took the photos from website because I found them there, and wanted to make article better as other articles look better with images. There are many important news services publishing about him, including central national ones like Radio Television of Serbia. Would be more then interested in fixing the article, even if it would be smaller, but i cannot understand why would we delete notable subject just because some of the content is not ok. --Pane.Vino.Wiki (talk) 18:12, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
P.S. wikidata description was the first sentence of the article, but that was deleted after other users explained it to me that we cannot use "big words" in articles. I didnt know that, and that's why it was like that. Please assume good faith, i didn't mean anything bad, and its not promotion, i just wanted to create nice article for someone who created many good things for many countries. That is my only motivation. --Pane.Vino.Wiki (talk) 18:23, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The difficulty is that I have searched for sources using google.at, google.rs and google.sr in an attempt to find additional coverage. Each search (for both Zoran Kalabić and Зоран Калабић) returns very few results, at the top of which are these wikipedia articles and the subject's personal website and social media.

Whilst he does have the Order, this is not itself enough to establish notability. There are lots of people who do a great deal of philanthropic work, appear in local media and even get an MBE (in the UK). But they don't all get an article. WP requires sustained and substantial coverage which I am struggling to see.

I am open to the idea that there is coverage which has not been indexed by google (because their coverage of non-English material is often flaky, particularly for Cyrillic and other non-Latin scripts), and that is why I am wary of deleting articles for subjects covered by those languages simply because Google does not trivially surface a load of English-language sources. There are undoubtedly many notable Serbs, Kenyans, Indonesians and Malay who are omitted from Wikipedia because native-English speakers are notoriously bad at foreign languages.

Nonetheless, you need to bring those sources to bear, because I am increasingly unsure that they exist. A mention in RTS is not notable (everyone who receives an MBE is listed in The Times, but that does not automatically earn them an article). Likewise several of the sources are basically press releases or interviews - not substantial independent coverage.Hemmers (talk) 10:31, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, there are many more sources in Serbian I didn't included in the article, but I will list you here and add an article more if that will help, now I understand it will. --Pane.Vino.Wiki (talk) 10:00, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I don't understand why this article is nominated for deletion. It is quite relevant; this person is a well-known public figure. The article has reliable sources, and it is generally well written; there is no need to delete it. If someone is missing something, they can add or edit it.Bandzimir (talk) 14:05, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
it is generally well written "generally" is doing quite a bit of heavy lifting there Good day—RetroCosmos ^talk 14:30, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I tend to agree with Hemmers that the only minor and possible aspect that may imply some notability is the Order of Karađorđe's Star. However, I have checked that these state awards and orders have been given by President of Serbia to many people, and, only during the last very few years, hundreds of institutions and people have taken this or even a higher state order - check the website: https://www.predsednik.rs/predsednik/ukazi-o-odlikovanjima. For this reason, while this award can indeed establish some notability, I see that this one fact cannot validate the notability of WP:ANYBIO for a well-known and significant award or honor, especially if the article continues to be a WP:SOAPBOX. Chiserc (talk) 16:27, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sorry but this is again very misleading I don't understand why are you doing this. The list you sent is a general list of all state awards that have been given by president, every single metal and awarded that was given throughout the years. That does not imply that quantity diminished quality, as it is one more lie in this nomination. Only 10 was given for entire year for entire country. So this award recived by this person is by far something important as it is for other countries. Please stop with this anti propaganda. Article is NOT the soap, and you have never pointed anything that is wrong with the article but you just keep repeating and tagging it without any proper explanation this is actually disruptive editing. --Pane.Vino.Wiki (talk) 20:53, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Article should stay since there is sufficient evidence that he is a public figure, but it should be reduced to appropriate size. For example, two photos from ERA events are absolutely not needed. One is more than enough. Parts of some sentences like "and is currently preparing for a doctorate" (Why is this relevant?) and "After a series of successful business years" (What's the evidence?) really make this article look like a PR project. Whoever wrote this should take care of it. But I still think that article should not be deleted. Tresnjevo (talk) 07:04, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your productive comments, i will fix and delete all of those great guidelines you pointed out. This means a lot to me to understand editing style, thank you. --Pane.Vino.Wiki (talk) 09:58, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Randykitty (talk) 15:41, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: I believe this meets WP:ANYBIO#1, for Order of Karađorđe's Star. I don't agree that this one fact cannot validate the notability of WP:ANYBIO for a well-known and significant award or honor, especially if the article continues to be a WP:SOAPBOX; notability is a property of the subject, not the article. Furthermore, I agree with Pane.Vino.Wiki that this has been a disruptive, not a collaborative process. No one should be saying things like if the main author does not fix these issues, I will aggressively delete the offending texts. -- asilvering (talk) 03:50, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Prince Nicolas of Sweden, Duke of Ångermanland[edit]

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

I am nominating this article for failing to prove notability by WP:BASIC and WP:GNG. This is an 8-year-old child and should be redirected and merged into the parent article until such a time there is independent notability.

Move to restore redirect to Madeleine, Duchess of Hälsingland and Gästrikland#Marriage and children section. Similar to Princess Leonore, Duchess of Gotland (9th in line for Succession to the Swedish throne). Classicwiki (talk) If you reply here, please ping me. 23:34, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Royalty and nobility, and Sweden. Classicwiki (talk) If you reply here, please ping me. 23:34, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment See the 2020 AfD discussion Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Prince Nicolas, Duke of Ångermanland, which was closed as redirect. TompaDompa (talk) 23:43, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Firstly, all the other Royal family members of Europe have individual articles for their kids. Secondly, the sources are good. And it falls within WP:GNG.BabbaQ (talk) 23:48, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- That's simply untrue. There is no article for Princess Laetitia Maria of Belgium following Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Princess Laetitia Maria of Belgium, for instance. TompaDompa (talk) 23:55, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Again, all Royals and those of Scandinavias children have separate articles. Why should the Swedish royals be any different. Still passes WP:GNG.BabbaQ (talk) 06:17, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. He is independently notable. His titles as prince and duke belong to him, not to his parents. The deletion of Princess Laetitia Maria of Belgium was probably a mistake. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 01:30, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Eastmain - it was likely not a mistake. A great number of adolescent children of nobility redirected to their parents regardless of their title/station. As noted above, please see previous AFDs of children of nobility. Additionally, King Gustaf's grandchildren no longer have royal titles (albeit a bit more nuanced). Just being a noble is not automatic notability (see the failed WP:NR discussion). Classicwiki (talk) If you reply here, please ping me. 02:13, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This is where most of you have it wrong including the Harpe Bazzer article cited the child of prince Carl Philip and Princess Madeleine only lost their styles of His/Her Royal Highness but they are still prince(s) and Princess (s) of Sweden, Duke(s) and Duchesses and still in the line of succession^[1] they are listed by the royal court of Sweden as members of the royal family and are not required to perform any duties incumbent of the head of state Ug culture (talk) 05:37, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
^[2] Ug culture (talk) 06:36, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect per nom. The fact that this article contains no information about his life since his christening suggests that he is probably not in the public spotlight. In fact, he and his sisters have had their royal status downgraded since they were born; since 2019, they no longer have the style of "royal highness" and are no longer considered members of the Royal House, although they remain princes and princesses and members of the Royal Family. [14] Practically speaking, this means that as adults they will be expected to pursue careers outside royal duties rather than being paid by the monarch from government funds. (That's not mentioned in this article, but is mentioned at the redirect target.) If, in the future, Nicolas does go into the public spotlight, whether as a socialite or as anything else, the article can be re-created at that time. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 03:54, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
His grandfather's sisters(The Haga princesses) are nolonger members of the royal house and their articles are in existence.why then should articles of those who is in the line of succession be deleted and members who are not be retained Ug culture (talk) 05:20, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The criterion we use is not "Is this person in the line of succession?" but rather "Do we have enough significant coverage of the person in reliable independent sources to warrant an article?". Among persons related to monarchs, there may be some who are excluded from the succession but remain public figures and thus generate significant coverage, while others may be in the line of succession but out of the public eye at least for now (particularly young children). --Metropolitan90 (talk) 06:39, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
And that is an approach that can be strongly questioned. Princes and princesses of reigning royal families are per definition important persons who warrant their own articles. Therefore, this article should be kept, and the deleted articles of his siblings and cousins should be reinstated. Marbe166 (talk) 09:24, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

if we are to go by this then Former Monarch of Denmark's grandchildren (prince Joachim's children) whose titles have been taken away and they do not generate significant coverage their articles have not been withdrawn and like Marbe166 said the deleted articles of prince Nicolas's siblings and his cousins should be reinstated Ug culture (talk) 19:32, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ https://www.kungahuset.se/english/royal-house. {{cite web}}: Missing or empty |title= (help)
^ https://people.com/royals/princess-madeleine-and-prince-carl-philips-kids-were-stripped-of-their-royal-titles-by-the-king/. {{cite web}}: Missing or empty |title= (help)

Keep addendum: over 4 000 hits in Mediearkivet Retriever [sv]. Okay, some of them are about the Greek prince and the remainder is ~90% gossipy tabloids, which still leaves a couple of hundred hits in Swedish mainstream newspapers. I don't buy that we should have special rules for the nobility, it's the 21st century after all, but neither should anti-royalist sentiments cloud our judgement. Draken Bowser (talk) 09:53, 18 April 2024 (UTC) (talk) 07:14, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect. Articles shouldn't be recreated in violation of a previous community discussion. There's insufficient here for a standalone article at present. Celia Homeford (talk) 10:14, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Grandson of a ruling monarch and meets WP:GNG. -- Necrothesp (talk) 12:29, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect First, I can't see how he meets WP:GNG. In many AfD discussions the phrase "Meets WP:GNG" seems to be just an elaborate WP:VOTE. If you think that he falls into WP:GNG, please explain why, otherwise your contribution does not provide much progress into a discussion. Second, please refer to the 2020 AfD discussion. If you want to reach a different consensus, you should explain what changed since then. Third, just beeing related to someone notable, like a ruling monarch, does not mean automatic notability, see WP:BIORELATED. --Theoreticalmawi (talk) 17:29, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect: Titles are not, and should not be, part of the criteria for NBASIC. All of the coverage is about him as a relation to his parents and even then a lot of them are just photo galleries which do not amount to substantial coverage, which is to be expected as a christening is a pretty routine event - so they do not meet GNG by my reckoning. I don't know what is meant by Marbe166 saying per definition important persons who warrant their own articles, what definition is this refering to? Being an heir to anything shouldn't confer notability since notability is not inhereted. It is reasonble to assume that there will be coverage of this subject once he grows up, but since that's in the futre there's no good reason to have an article at the moment. ---- D'n'B-t -- 17:20, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Restore redirect to Princess Madeleine, Duchess of Hälsingland and Gästrikland#Marriage and children: Per Nom. Lacks notability. Wikipedia is not a genealogy outlet nor is notability of royal households inherited (Example: Just being the grandson of a ruling monarch is not a stepping stone to an article), See WP:BLPFAMILY. Lacks significant, reliable, and independent coverage for a stand alone article. Bringing in that other stuff exists means there might be more AFD's needed. Notability (royalty) is a failed proposal. It states: "Anyone who was, at one point, an official member of a ruling family of a country is considered notable", which is against current community consensus. There is no compelling evidence that anything changed since consensus for the redirect. The people magazine source stated they "lost their official HRH (His/Her Royal Highness) titles" and further, "will no longer be members of The Royal House". The parents of the children involved all made statements they support the Kings decision so their children can have more privacy. Wikipedia should honor this for children. -- Otr500 (talk) 06:43, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I strongly agree with this. voorts (talk/contributions) 14:04, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per precedent (WP:OUTCOMES). What's good for Great Britain is good for Sweden. Bearian (talk) 12:55, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- The relevant section of WP:OUTCOMES -- which isn't even a policy or guideline anyway -- doesn't particularly support keeping this article. It says, "The descendants of monarchs or nobles, especially deposed ones, are not considered notable for this reason alone. The principle that Wikipedia articles are not genealogical entries is often mentioned in this context. But persons who are active in their capacity as a member of a royal house or as a holder of a title of nobility will often receive media coverage for it, which may help establish their notability according to the general notability guideline." (See WP:MONARCH.) Prince Nicolas, as an 8-year-old child, is not exactly "active" in the capacity of a member of a royal house. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 04:39, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect: Redirect to mother and revdel everything. Nicolas is a non-public figure, a child that has done nothing notable, and the only coverage about him is from royal-watching tabloid publications. The keep votes basically amount to "he has a royal title" or "he's in a royal family", but there's no SNG that says every royal gets a page no matter what. voorts (talk/contributions) 01:12, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Several of the keep !votes above rely on the fact that other article exist and that we'd also have to delete other articles if this one is deleted. WP:WHATABOUTX is a bad argument because we evaluate each article on its individual merits, not in reference to what other articles we may or may not have. Those !votes should be completely discounted. voorts (talk/contributions) 14:06, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Further comment: Otr500 provides a great reason for REVDEL here: these children are no longer in the line of succession and the press coverage is about them existing, not about them doing anything notable. Our policies (BLP) require that we respect the privacy of these children. voorts (talk/contributions) 14:08, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 06:10, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. One look at Swedish-language sources shows that the guy gets sufficient coverage to warrant an article. Cortador (talk) 06:16, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect per nom. DrKay (talk) 07:41, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mehr Hassan[edit]

AfDs for this article:

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

Fails WP:Notability Wikibear47 (talk) 17:42, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Women. Wikibear47 (talk) 17:42, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Has been in multiple films that seem to have wikipedia articles of their own. As per: WP:ARTIST, criteria 3, that should probably be enough.

also, seems like this is the 3rd nomination. User:Sawerchessread (talk) 17:59, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Dance, Music, Fashion, Pakistan, Punjab, and Kentucky. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:07, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: The newspapers used now in the article for sourcing are all there is for this person; I don't see notability beyond the local level. I can't find any mention of them otherwise. Oaktree b (talk) 19:25, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The fact she has been seen on multiple movies which has a wikipedia page doesn't qualify her to have a wikipedia page. This is just like the case of Lucy Grantham (2nd nomination). The subject Mehr Hassan fails WP:GNG. Her first AFD which was keep was just a two vote of keep which was still saying because she appeared in a movie. No independent reliable source, No award won or being nominated as an actress or dancer. I really don't see anything notable. --Meligirl5 (talk) 17:56, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Meets WP:NACTOR with significant roles in multiple notable films. The Louisville Courier article too makes a case for notability. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 22:56, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Does having just one reliable source qualifies a person of having a Wikipedia page?

Hassan started her dancing career as a stage performer in the United States.

How do we believe such statement with no reliable source.?--Meligirl5 (talk) 00:45, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Meets WP:NACTOR, which is clearly the applicable guideline. rspεεr (talk) 14:30, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:08, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Soft Keep. WP:NACTOR appears to hold here for now, although perhaps the articles for the films she starred should be reviewed for their notability. The bottom line is that long as those films are notable, she is, if barely. Stefen Tower_{s among the rest!} ^{Gab • Gruntwerk} 16:00, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I'm familiar with a "Soft Delete" but can anyone define a "Soft Keep" for me? Do you mean "Weak Keep"?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:51, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

François Mathieu[edit]

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

Fails WP:GNG & WP:NARTIST. Gedaali (talk) 02:09, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Arts, and Visual arts. Gedaali (talk) 02:09, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of France-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 10:18, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:01, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 06:58, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. There are other potentially notable people with this name, including fr:François Mathieu, a French senator, as well as a Quebec sculptor. I don't see an article about this painter in the French Wikipedia. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 15:23, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Leopoldo Soto Norambuena[edit]

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

Article is based entirely on work by the subject and has no evidence of third-party notability. Almost identical to article previously speedy deleted and salted as Leopoldo Soto * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 18:30, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2024 April 11. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 18:42, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Science, and Chile. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:52, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete I am inclined to think they may be notable, but just across the line. --Bedivere (talk) 19:07, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Improve (an unusual vote). Based upon just his publication record he does not qualify (he publishes as Leopoldo Soto), and I could not verify his appointments listed in http://pppp.cl/contenido/investigador.php?varbajada=1. However, with a bit more digging I found https://www.cchen.cl/?p=7217&highlight=Leopol which has more notable information, but I am using Google to translate from Spanish. I think some more digging (and possibly improvement) is needed first by a native Spanish speaker. (Android visual editor messing up?) Ldm1954 (talk) 22:39, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:43, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 05:53, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Henry Hereford[edit]

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

I have carried out WP:BEFORE for this article about an actor, and added a reference to his employer's website; but cannot find significant coverage in reliable sources, and do not think he meets WP:NACTOR. Tacyarg (talk) 13:36, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, United Kingdom, and England. Tacyarg (talk) 13:36, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:55, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not an article for deletion - definitely meets the criteria for actor. Multiple credits in major film and tv shows. 2600:1700:4640:E70:ECCA:5D5:421E:ECB4 (talk) 13:42, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure what you mean by "employer". Henry is an established actor having been on several films and TV shows as referenced in IMDB and trade magazines. There is no reason this page would be deleted. Thefilmsorcerer (talk) 22:15, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Desertarun (talk) 08:18, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Fails GNG or NACTOR. A 21st-century actor and yet yields no results in Google News tells a lot. General searches also did not produce anything of use. Other than 1-2, the used refs aren't about him rather the films/shows he's starred in. X (talk) 05:05, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Michele Fitzgerald[edit]

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

Notable for only winning Survivor: Kaôh Rōng. I think her runner-up finish in Survivor: Winners at War doesn't have enough depth or substantial coverage to be as equally notable as her Survivor win, despite being highly focused there. Same can be said about her appearances in The Challenge, where she hasn't yet won. I don't think she qualifies for WP:NENT either. Must be redirected to Survivor: Kaôh Rōng per WP:BIO1E (if WP:BLP1E doesn't apply), WP:PAGEDECIDE, or WP:BIODELETE. George Ho (talk) 01:45, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Women, Television, and New Jersey. George Ho (talk) 01:45, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Previous WP:PROD candidate, ineligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 02:10, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I think more independent reliable source are needed.--Meligirl5 (talk) 09:03, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
How do independent reliable sources make BLP1E or BIO1E inapplicable? Even meeting WP:N or GNG would not outweigh the topic's potential failures to comply with the project's policy toward such biographies, but I bet you disagree, eh? George Ho (talk) 09:08, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I clearly understood she was only notable because she won in a notable event. But I can’t say delete or keep because the biography tells more than just the notable event but fails providing sources to meet WP:GNG. So I just had to suggest an opinion that could help to meet WP:GNG. Other editors are welcome to say what they feel.--Meligirl5 (talk) 11:01, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 04:26, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose deletion because of her performance in both of her Survivor seasons, but I agree more independent reliable sources are needed. JohnAdams1800 (talk) 20:33, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Meligirl5 and JohnAdams1800: What are your thoughts on redirecting the article to Survivor: Kaôh Rōng, an alternative to deletion? George Ho (talk) 20:49, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:42, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Semzi[edit]

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

Fails WP:GNG or WP:NPRODUCER. Sources are either passing mentions, interviews, PRs, or not even mentioning the subject. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 11:49, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Bands and musicians, and Nigeria. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 11:49, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep: I'm almost certain the award nominations are notable, but we still need better sourcing for more biographical information. Oaktree b (talk) 15:25, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
More research would be done to support article with more sourcing for biographical information. The subject is quite a notable individual with just probably limited press publications ReoMartins (talk) 18:05, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@ReoMartins Well, now you’re taking. As far as I know, there are a lot of notable people in real life who can’t a Wikipedia entry because they don’t meet the necessary Wikipedia notability criteria. Wikipedia’s notability is not exactly real world notability. The current status of this article doesn’t meet up, not that they’re not notable or influential in real life. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 19:23, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. The subject does not meet any criteria outlined in WP:GNG or WP:MUSICBIO. None of the sources cited in the article actually discuss the subject. His nominations at the Beatz Awards aren't enough to justify a stand-alone article. Versace1608 ^{Wanna Talk?} 15:00, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep: I agree with Oaktree B that this is a weak keep due to the award nominations. His other sources are weak.Maxcreator (talk) 03:07, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Draftify: and mark as promised. Majority of the sources in the article doesn't meet SIGCOV and while the awards merits notability: it's still not much for a standalone entry on Wikipedia. I will remove some sources that didn't add to notability. For my vote (if draftified) can be marked as "promising", since there is a partial way to notability in the future! Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 20:40, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Shadow311 (talk) 16:03, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Shadow311 (talk) 16:05, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Source	Independent?	Reliable?	Significant coverage?	Count source toward GNG?
Source assessment table:
https://www.vanguardngr.com/2022/02/bad-boy-timz-is-one-of-nigerias-best-singers-ive-worked-with-semzi/amp/	Was talking about the subject	Vanguard is reliable per WP:NGRS	~ Much like an about music interview	~ Partial
https://guardian.ng/saturday-magazine/weekend-beats/producing-songs-for-davido-mayorkun-the-highlight-of-my-career-so-far-semzi/	Ditto	Guardian Nigeria is reliable per WP:NGRS	Normally, Weekend Beats sounds like PR	✘ No
https://the49thstreet.com/49th-exclusive-semzi/	Above	Blog sites	Interview and blog post	✘ No
https://pan-african-music.com/en/nigerian-producers-2022/	~ A list that mentions articles, more of featuring, no PR here	~ See editorial	List	✘ No
https://www.pulse.ng/entertainment/music/review-dj-consequence-vibes-from-the-future/jhle44r	No mention	Per WP:NGRS	No mention	✘ No
https://culturecustodian.com/bad-boy-timzs-mj/	No mention	Ditto	No mention	✘ No
https://www.vanguardngr.com/2020/11/nicki-minaj-nas-ifeanyi-adeleke-feature-on-davidos-a-better-time-album/	No metion	Per above	No mention of the subject	✘ No
https://www.pulse.ng/entertainment/music/mayorkun-features-victony-on-holy-father/jbrp0lg	Ditto	See above	No mention	✘ No
https://www.okayafrica.com/joeboy-drops-new-music-album/	No mention	Okay Africa is reliable	Applied same as above	✘ No
https://www.morebranches.com/omah-lay-couples-with-more-emotions-on-the-deluxe-version-of-boy-alone/	No mention	Not a reliable source, blog or PR	Same as above	✘ No
https://guardian.ng/life/listen-ajebo-hustlers-featuring-fave-in-love/	Mention!	Why not?	More like PR—get away magazine mention; just mention	✘ No
https://culturecustodian.com/bad-boy-timz-serves-new-visuals-for-faya-from-empires-where-we-come-from-vol-1-compilation-album/	Passing mention	Per WP:NGRS	Inherent mention	✘ No
https://www.max1023.fm/boy-spyce-releases-new-single-relationship/	Les or no mention	Max FM is a Lagos based television channel	Inherent notability only on Boy Source	✘ No
https://culturecustodian.com/no-bad-boy-no-party-highlights-significant-moments-in-bad-boy-timzs-journey/	Passing mention	Culture custodian is a reliable source	Still on production. Inherent notability	✘ No
https://soundcity.tv/afropop-sensation-bad-boy-timz-unveils-debut-album-no-bad-boy-no-party/	Focuses on Bad Boy Time, a Nigerian artist	Sound City TV is a Nigerian television music channel	Focus lacking on the subject	✘ No
https://www.pulse.ng/entertainment/music/victony-features-14-artists-on-new-song-ohema/8988dbp	Passing mention	Like above	Doesn't meet notability	✘ No
https://randr.ng/nominations-list-the-beatz-award-2021/	List	Rhythm and Rhyme is a blog site	List	✘ No
https://thebeatzawards.com/winners-perfecto/	~ List	For the award but not for other citations	Being nominated doesn't mean notability. Per WP:ENT, the subject must have been nominated multiple times of a major award	✘ No
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{source assess table}}.

Delete: After analysis of the source above, I was convinced of the many "passing mentions", "no mention" and more generated in citing sources relating to PR. Nothing to draftify again. It doesn't meet WP:THREE for sources, WP:GNG and WP:PRODUCER. Each of the sources either mention, or not at all, or about a music one of an artist he had worked for previously. Delete is the "best" alternative. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 13:22, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In one of the discussions and sources, it submits an evidence about this act who just recently co-produced a track that has over ten credible and notable artistes from Sub-Sahara Africa featured. These artistes have their wiki pages, I believe the professional who takes up the task to fuse these different acts into a single musical project is worthy of an article on Wikipedia as well. ReoMartins (talk) 13:19, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@ReoMartins It is imperative for you to know that WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS is not a reason for you to think an article should be kept. You should also importantly see WP:INHERITED. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 14:08, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:19, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Liz, there is already a consensus here if by analysis of the arguments above. Isn't see the reason for relisting. Most importantly, the keep isn't strong enough or showed how the article meets inclusion. The source table can also be reviewed to see blatant addition of sources that doesn't mention the article. (Just a 'simpler' suggestion. ) — Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 09:57, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@SafariScribe Hehe, if I was an administrator, I would have relisted this discussion too, so don't worry, Liz made the right decision. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 14:06, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Vanderwaalforces, Sure. It's just that Liz doesn't take time analysing such deletions. Welp, it's good getting clearer consensus. — Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 14:07, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Safari Scribe, well, that's quite an insult I didn't expect to see when I was reviewing open AFD discussions tonight. I'll just leave this one for another closer to handle since you are unsatisfied with how I'm handling things. Again, this is a volunteer hobby, not a job and nothing obligates me to close or relist any AFD discussion but I try to use my best judgment. But I'll leave this one alone and someone else can eventually close it. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:55, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Working with subjects that pass GNG is not enough to provide notability. While I see subject having some nominations, I fail to see WP:GNG or WP:NPRODUCER here by secondary sources.Tumbuka Arch (talk) 13:39, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Strictly Ballroom (band) (3rd nomination)

People proposed deletions[edit]

Academics and educators[edit]

Max Baker-Hytch[edit]

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

Does not meet Wikipedia:Notability (academics): (1) research does not have a significant impact (1 book recently published, no commentary on his work, less than 100 citations. (2) zero awards. (3) Not a member of a highly selective and prestigious scholarly society or association. (4) Nothing to indicate that anyone is discussing this person's work, let alone "academic work has made a significant impact"! (5) Not a distinguished professor, a postdoc and a tutor. (6) did not hold a highest-level elected or appointed administrative post. (7) mentioned once BBC Dorset for playing in a band, which he does not have a substantial impact outside academia in their academic capacity. (8) Not the head or chief editor of a major, well-established academic journal in their subject area. Checking the basic criteria, the article is compiled from his work (WP:Primary + the section about "Ideas" is pure original research, e.g., "Baker-Hytch contends that mutual epistemic dependence is an essential mechanism for human acquisition of knowledge with no citation. A few sentences later, there is a citation to a book that discusses the topic but not the person or the person's ideas. FuzzyMagma (talk) 19:12, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.

However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end.

Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts: {{subst:spa|username}}; suspected canvassed users: {{subst:canvassed|username}}; accounts blocked for sockpuppetry: {{subst:csm|username}} or {{subst:csp|username}}.

Keep. This article satisfies the criteria for notability (academics). (1) His research has the significant impact. He has published numerous papers in various academic journals. In addition, he has the high rate of citations (more than 100 considering the rate of citations of all his papers). You may use Google Scholar carefully. (2) He received the British national award from the Research Councils UK. (3) He is a member of a highly selective and prestigious scholarly institute. He is a fellow of the University of Oxford and member of the relevent associations at Oxford. (4) Many academic papers discuss his ideas. For example, DEBUNKING ARGUMENTS GAIN LITTLE FROM COGNITIVE SCIENCE OF RELIGION, Divine hiddenness, the demographics of theism, and mutual epistemic dependence: a response to Max Baker-Hytch etc. Again, you may use Google Scholar carefully. If you find it difficult to have the access to academic journals, the easiest way is to contact your university library if any. (5) He is a distinguished research fellow at the University of Notre Dame and University of Oxford. (6) He is a senior fellow at the University of Oxford. (7) He has a substantial impact outside academia such as popular debates. (8) He reviewed and edited numerous academic journals such as Erkenntnis, Philosophical Papers, Religious Studies etc. Therefore, it is indispensable to keep this article. --Pesclinomenosomlos (talk) 19:49, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think you really missing the point here and provided more reasons for the article to be deleted as participating in debates, having citations around few hundreds, and being a postdoctoral research fellowships or a college tutor (that is his own words) is not a reason for article to be included here. see Wikipedia:Notability (academics) for details about what the word "substantial" entail FuzzyMagma (talk) 21:25, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If you read carefully the criteria, you will find that academics meeting any one of the criteria, are notable. There is no need to meet all criteria. One is enough. Max Baker-Hytch already satisfies the first criterion and others. Therefore, he meets the notability requirements.

By the way, welcome to debate at Oxford. Pesclinomenosomlos (talk) 22:41, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The section regarding mutual epistemic dependence is NOT a pure original research. If you read it carefully, you will find that J. L. Schellenberg's discussion on Max Baker-Hytch's mutual epistemic dependence Divine hiddenness: Part 2 (recent enlargements of the discussion) is cited. If you find yourself unable to get the access to academic journals, the easiest way is to contact your university library if any. Also, Max Baker-Hytch's mutual epistemic dependence is discussed by Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. --Pesclinomenosomlos (talk) 19:57, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Philosophy, Christianity, England, and Indiana. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 22:31, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Double-digit citation counts on Google Scholar fall below the bar for WP:PROF#C1. Being a Fellow at Oxford is just a teaching job, not the kind of honorary level of membership in a selective society (such as FRS) that would pass #C3. Reviewing for journals and occasionally getting cited in journals are things all academics do; our standards for notability are significantly above that level. Nothing else in the article even resembles a claim of notability. —David Eppstein (talk) 22:48, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Max Baker-Hytch is not only a fellow but a reputable academic and researcher at Oxford. His work is characterised by its depth and relevance, evidenced by its considerable, significant impact within the academic sphere. In addition, his research consistently maintains a high rate of citations, further solidifying the claim to keep his article. As a result, he obviously meets WP:PROF#C1 and the established criteria for inclusion on Wikipedia. Pesclinomenosomlos (talk) 22:54, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have struck out your comment as you are only allowed a single keep or delete opinion in a deletion discussion. This is not a vote; more keeps and more repetition of the same claims will not help. It is a discussion to clarify how Wikipedia's notability guidelines apply to this case and build concensus on whether Baker-Hytch does or does not meet those guidelines. You might also find WP:BLUDGEON to be helpful advice. —David Eppstein (talk) 23:05, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Striking out my comment is unacceptable and outrageous as it goes against a fair discussion on Wikipedia and the First Amendment.

If I mistakenly make more than one KEEP, please delete the redundant KEEP but leave my comment intact. Pesclinomenosomlos (talk) 23:31, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Max Baker-Hytch has written numerous academic papers, resulting in a total citation rate (of all papers) higher than 100. This impressive achievement reflects the impact and significance of his contributions to the academic sphere. Pesclinomenosomlos (talk) 23:08, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This promotional glurge reads like something an AI would write. [Comment referred to Special:Diff/1221275435 before it was edited to change what I replied to.] —David Eppstein (talk) 23:09, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I am a human and not an AI, but I speak in a calm, formal manner. I am elaborating on my argument. Could you stop irrelevant distractions or personal attacks? We should focus on our clarification instead. Pesclinomenosomlos (talk) 23:15, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

100 citations isn't a high bar for a real academic in most fields. I have 88 at the moment, and I've never held a non-clinical faculty appointment. Jclemens (talk) 23:12, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
But you are not from Oxford. Pesclinomenosomlos (talk) 23:15, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If you read carefully, you will find that I said his TOTAL citation rate is higher than 100, not only 100 but significantly higher than that. The total citation rate and discussions on all his papers are obviously above one thousand. You may use Google Scholar to search all his papers and relevance discussions. Pesclinomenosomlos (talk) 23:24, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Looks WP:TOOSOON for this 2014 PhD. Citations are far short of WP:NPROF, even in a low citation field. I don't see reviews of the one book for WP:NAUTHOR, and it would likely be a WP:BLP1E anyway. Little sign of other notability. Russ Woodroofe (talk) 00:22, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It appears to me that you have only considered his DPhil thesis and have neglected many papers written by him. The total citation rate and discussions of all his papers are higher than hundreds or thousands (see Google Scholar). Therefore, there is no doubt that he meets the WP notability criteria. Pesclinomenosomlos (talk) 00:32, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I specifically address the citation record above. I have examined the publication and citation record, and see nothing that is not WP:MILL. There is one paper with a good number of citations relative to career stage, and not much else. As I say, WP:TOOSOON (at best). Russ Woodroofe (talk) 06:08, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Pesclinomenosomlos has apparently been canvassing this AfD to multiple user talk pages [15] [16] [17] and has been blocked as a result. Pesclinomenosomlos, once your block expires: do not do that. —David Eppstein (talk) 00:45, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. TOOSOON is too generous. I see no evidence of coverage, let alone significant coverage. — HTGS (talk) 01:28, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Paul Melo e Castro[edit]

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

Orphan article with no evidence of notability. Lecturer does not meet WP:PROF and an h-Index of 4 means the research output had little impact. Tried to find book reviews to see if the subject could meet WP:NAUTHOR but I was only able to find this one and I don't think it's enough to qualify for notability. No evidence of WP:SIGCOV as well. Contributor892z (talk) 17:44, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Authors. Contributor892z (talk) 17:49, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 22:32, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Steven James Bartlett[edit]

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

fails WP:NPROF and WP:AUTHOR, appears to be a vanity page Psychastes (talk) 22:45, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Philosophy and Psychology. Psychastes (talk) 22:45, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Authors, France, Germany, Mexico, California, Connecticut, Florida, Missouri, and Oregon. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:25, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Passes WP:Author. Xxanthippe (talk) 02:32, 28 April 2024 (UTC).[reply]
how so? Psychastes (talk) 05:17, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

However BLP is bloated and needs pruning to 20% of current. Xxanthippe (talk) 22:59, 28 April 2024 (UTC).[reply]

Weak delete unless someone provides more RSes - the existence of Steven Bartlett (businessman) makes searching for sources quite annoying, but I managed to find a few. Here is an extended discussion of his book The Pathology of Man: A Study of Human Evil but I'm not sure about the journal or if the reviewer is an independent source. Other sources I found are briefer mentions, e.g. [18][19], or I don't have access (also unsure about the journal here) [20]. Shapeyness (talk) 11:17, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Marion Evans[edit]

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

Fails WP:GNG. Flounder fillet (talk) 20:21, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Academics and educators, Authors, United Kingdom, and Wales. Flounder fillet (talk) 20:21, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 20:40, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. Curbon7 (talk) 20:47, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Todd Archibald[edit]

AfDs for this article:

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

Article recreated by WP:SPA following deletion a year and a half ago. I am bringing this to the community's attention. I am personally a weak delete: somewhat accomplished person, but I think it falls a little short of our notability criteria. Russ Woodroofe (talk) 09:18, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Academics and educators, and Canada. Russ Woodroofe (talk) 09:18, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. This still isn't properly sourced as getting him over WP:GNG — nine of the 13 footnotes are primary sources that aren't support for notability at all, and the four hits that come from real media aren't about him, but just glance off his existence in the process of being about people or organizations that had cases come to his courtroom, which is not enough to get him over WP:GNG. Bearcat (talk) 06:25, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Alamgir Hashmi[edit]

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

This BLP reads like a CV. None of the listed works or awards strike me as noteworthy or notable, indicating a failure to meet WP:AUTHOR. Additionally, there appears to be a lack of significant coverage in WP:RS, which means the subject also fails basic WP:GNG. —Saqib (talk | contribs) 13:23, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. —Saqib (talk | contribs) 13:23, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Authors, Poetry, United Kingdom, and Kentucky. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 15:12, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - Appears in The Oxford Companion to Twentieth-Century Poetry in English (1 ed.) (available through Wikimedia Library, excerpted here):
Hashmi, Alamgir (1951– ), was born in Lahore, educated in Pakistan and the United States, and has worked as a professor of English, editor, and broadcaster. His early work ... is characterized by a terse, witty, imagistic style, and reveals a recurring preoccupation with language, time, and place. The poet's peripatetic career in America, Europe, and Pakistan is reflected in the concerns of his subsequent collections, .... As Hashmi has developed, there has been a broadening of human sympathies and an emerging political awareness which have modified the virtuosity and self-absorption of some of his earliest writing. His most recent publications are ....

I would vote Keep by WP:GNG if a similar source was found. FYI, I removed the author bio paragraph that was completely uncited and appears to have been included verbatim from the author's personal website. This may be a copyright concern. Suriname0 (talk) 15:58, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I acknowledge that there is some coverage available. However, the concern lies in the insufficient extent of coverage to meet the WP:SIGCOV. The subject is listed on Oxford Reference, just because some of their work must have been hosted by Oxford University Press but I'm sure that won't make him WP:IHN. -—Saqib (talk | contribs) 16:07, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Unusually for a poet, there is plenty of in-depth coverage of him and his work to be found [21] [22] [23] [24] [25] [26] [27] —David Eppstein (talk) 17:31, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep While the article needs work, there are tons of citations out there proving this poet meets notability guidelines, including in-depth analysis of the poet's works in various literary journals accessible through the Wikipedia Library.--SouthernNights (talk) 21:49, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ami Dror[edit]

AfDs for this article:

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

Fails WP:SIGCOV. References are atrocious and consist mostly interviews, passing mentions and tangenital links and profiles. scope_creep^Talk 14:15, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Sourcing meets WP:GNG. --Omer Toledano (talk) 14:47, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep--היידן (talk) 15:03, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Has at least 3 solid GNG references. I didn't review all 57 references, but if some or even many have the problems described in the nom, that is not a reason to delete the article. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 15:05, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Sofiblum (talk) 15:09, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is a WP:SPA and has made no other contributions to Wikipedia. scope_creep^Talk 15:52, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Businesspeople, Politics, and Israel. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 15:08, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I'll look at the references, all of them this weekend, including the 3 supposed good references on a 30k article with close to 60 references, suffering from WP:CITEKILL. scope_creep^Talk 15:48, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
keep a very well known docial activist who had asignificant impact on the protests in Israel Hila Livne (talk) 16:17, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
keep. A known activist and the article has enough references. Danny-w (talk) 16:27, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This editor hasn't edited for months and magically appears now for some reason. scope_creep^Talk 17:04, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

*Comment Seems to a lot of canvassing going on here, from Hebrew speaking Jewish editors again, espousing the same arguments I've heard before about being fanstastically well known and article has enough references. We will find out. scope_creep^Talk 16:53, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Seems as though tag teaming is going on. I might have to take you all to WP:ANI, including the Hebrew admin, except North8000. This behaviour is probably disruptive. scope_creep^Talk 17:04, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Strike your comment, which violates WP:CIVILITY and WP:AGF. The religion and nationality of other editors is irrelevant, as are evidence-free charges of canvassing. Longhornsg (talk) 17:27, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

User:Scope creep: I would like to repeat Longhornsg's request. Strike your comment. It comes across as ad hominem and racist. It has no place in an AfD. You have made several additional comments to this AfD without addressing it. Do not continue to comment here while failing to address this. —David Eppstein (talk) 02:14, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It is not meant to be racist. I've struck the comment, but it still looks like canvassing and this is the 20th Afd where I've seen this behaviour. scope_creep^Talk 07:14, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Are all the sources perfect? Absolutely not, the article needs work. Does coverage of the article topic in RS satisfy WP:GNG? Yes. Longhornsg (talk) 17:28, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The article was reviewed at Afc by 4 seperate editors who found it wanting before I rejected it. To say it needs work, is the understatement of the century. scope_creep^Talk 17:50, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Lets looks at the references, to find these three elusive WP:SECONDARY sources.

Ref 1 [28] This is exclusive interview. Not independent.
Ref 2 [29] This is contributor. Its non-rs.
Ref 3 Unable to see it at the moment.
Ref 4 [30] This is another interview. Not independent.
Ref 5 [31] This is another interview style PR business article. Not independent.
Ref 6 [32] This is from a press-release. It is non-rs.
Ref 7 [33] Ami Dror, founder. That is not independent.
Ref 8 [34] Non-notable trade award. A small profile on Dror.
Ref 9 [35] His business is thrilled to annouce. A press-release. Non-RS.
Ref 10 [36] Another press-release Non-RS.
Ref 11 [37] An interview. Not independent.
Ref 12 [38] Business interview. It is not independent.
Ref 13 [39] Another interview. Not independent.
Ref 14 404
Ref 15 [40] A radio interview. Not independent.
Ref 16 Unable to view it.

Out of the 15 references in the first block, the majority of which are interviews. So nothing to prove any long term viability for this WP:BLP article. scope_creep^Talk 18:07, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - Following references are solid and satisfy WP:GNG:

Ref 32 [41] - "Shine News" in Shanghai
Ref 33 [42] (Hebrew) - in Calcalist
Ref 30 [43] - in Israel21c

Kindly retract your deletion request. --Omer Toledano (talk) 18:23, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for posting these @Omer Toledano:. I will take a look at them.

Ref 32 This is a business interview style article for a new business by Dror, based in Shanghai. It is not idependent.
Ref 33 This is also a business style interview with Dror that comes under WP:NCORP as part of PR branding drive for his new company in Shanghai. It is not independent either. Its is him talking.
Ref 30 This is another PR style article with no byline, promoting the business. It is not independent.

None of these are independent. They are not valid sources for a WP:THREE exercise. This is a WP:BLP tha must pass WP:BIO to remain on Wikipedia. WP:BLP states, "Wikipedia must get the article right. Be very firm about the use of high-quality sources." Not one of these 19 sources can satisfy notability to prove it. They are not independent, they are not in-depth and they are not significant. I'll look at the second block. scope_creep^Talk 19:03, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

They satisfy WP:GNG and that is sufficient enough. Kindly retract your deletion request. --Omer Toledano (talk) 19:11, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Looking at the 2nd tranche of references:

Comment Some discussions mentioned requirements from WP:NCORP WP:ORGIND and WP:SIRS. These are requirements for using special Notability Guideline "way in" for Companies/Organizations. This is an article about a person, not a company or organization. The applicable standards would be to pass either the sourcing WP:GNG (the center of the discussion here) or the people SNG Wikipedia:Notability (people) (not discussed here). Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 19:19, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@North8000: The article mixes WP:BLP and promotes a stong business content via PR which are pure spam links and that one the reason that it was repeatedly declined continuously on WP:AFC. It has been established practice since about 2018 and is consensus to note these when it fails a policy, even if its WP:NCORP. The PR spam link reference make up a tiny number, less than 3-5% of the total. There not independent. scope_creep^Talk 19:37, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Thanks for posting these @Omer Toledano: in the spirit they are intended. I will take a look at them.

Ref 32 This is a business interview style article for a new business by Dror, based in Shanghai. It is a promotional PR piece and is not independent.It is a WP:SPS source.
Ref 33 This is also a business style interview with Dror that comes under WP:NCORP as part of PR branding drive for his new company in Shanghai. It is not independent either.
Ref 30 This is another PR style article with no byline, promoting the business. It is non-rs.

None of these are independent. They are not valid sources for a WP:THREE exercise. This is a WP:BLP tha must pass WP:BIO to remain on Wikipedia. WP:BLP states, "Wikipedia must get the article right. Be very firm about the use of high-quality sources." Not one of these 19 sources can satisfy notability to prove it. They are not independent, they are not in-depth and they are not significant. I'll look at the second block. scope_creep^Talk 19:03, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Looking at the 2nd tranche of references:

Ref 17 [44] Another interview. Its not independent.
Ref 18 [45] Another interview. Seems he was the bodyguard of Netanyahu.
Ref 19 Non-rs
Ref 20 Non-rs
Ref 21 Unable to view it
Ref 22 [46] Its a passing mention.
Ref 23 Non-rs
Ref 24 [47] It is a profile. It is junk social media. Non-rs.
Ref 25 [48] Essentially a passing mention.
Ref 27 [49] "Ami Dror, said in an interview with CNET" Not independent.
Ref 28 [50] Doesn't mention him.
Ref 29 [51] It is a passing mention and is not significant.
Ref 30 Duplicate of above. PR
Ref 31 [52] A small profile. Not significant.
Ref 32 Described above as PR that fails. It is a WP:SPS source.
Ref 34 Non-rs
Ref 35 [53] That is a press-release. Fails WP:SIRS.
Ref 36 [54] That is a routine annoucenent of partnership that fails WP:CORPDEPTH.

So another block of junk reference. Not one of them is a WP:SECONDARY source. Some passing mentions, lots of interviews, a lot of business PR and not one that satisfies WP:BIO or WP:SIGCOV. The article is a complete crock. (edit conflict) scope_creep^Talk 19:26, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Give it a rest and stop WP:BADGERING. Longhornsg (talk) 20:44, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment There has been linking to essays, guidelines, and policies which I feel in several cases has been incorrect regarding what they are, their applicability (including the context of where they came from) and interpretations of them. Other than to note that, I don't plan to get deeper in on them individually. IMO the core question is whether the topic/article has the sources to comply with a customary application of WP:GNG Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 20:53, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I've removed the WP:NCORP mentions per discussion, although the businesses are heavily promoted in the article. The rest of the reference in the 3rd tranche are of equally poor references, made up of profiles, interviews, podcast and lots of non-rs refs. It none of secondary sourcing needed to prove the person is notable per WP:BIO. Of the three criteria in WP:BIO, this person fails all of them. Up until Dror started to protest which was quite recent, he was invisible. Its all of the moment. scope_creep^Talk 14:59, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Lodahl[edit]

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

Essentially an unsourced biography of a living person for nearly twenty years. WorldCat is not useful for establishing notability, yet it is the only source for the entire article. Just Step Sideways ^{from this world ..... today} 18:41, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators and Christianity. Just Step Sideways ^{from this world ..... today} 18:41, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: California, Idaho, and Missouri. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:57, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete No secondary, independent coverage in either news outlets or the literature. Fails both WP:ANYBIO and WP:NPROF through a dearth of third-party coverage and lack of overall recognition within their field (no honours, chair, or nat. biog entry, significant contribution, etc). ——Serial Number 54129 19:17, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
comment I see that his book Shekhinah/Spirit attracted some attention though I couldn't say how influential it eventually proved. Mangoe (talk) 19:38, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Being held in a library isn't notable, but could point towards notability. Unfortunately, I've tried and been unable to find "Shekhinah/spirit : divine presence in Jewish and Christian religion" book reviews. A zillion hits on where to buy the book, no proof of scholarly notice. I don't see AUTHOR being met. Gscholar and Jstor came up blank. Oaktree b (talk) 19:42, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Per nomination. Noorullah (talk) 00:26, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Saman Amarasinghe[edit]

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

Questionable for sustained notability with WP:RS Amigao (talk) 23:30, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Sourcing I find is primary from his school (MIT) and some Army folks that set a world record for something unrelated. I don't see coverage that we'd use for PROF. Just a working educator, nothing notable here. Oaktree b (talk) 23:59, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Computing, California, Massachusetts, and New York. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:10, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, probably Speedy Keep. Strong publication record with an h-factor of 74 and four pubs with over 1000 cites. Two professional fellowships, so he qualifies under #C1 with the addition of #C3 to prove that peer recognition is not fake. The page does need better citing, but not delete.Ldm1954 (talk) 00:37, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Keep WP:PROF category 3 -- fellowship in a highly prestigeous honorary society. -- Michael Scott Asato Cuthbert (talk) 02:08, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: I concur that he appears to pass WP:NPROF on multiple criteria. Article needs work, but deletion is not clean-up. Curbon7 (talk) 03:53, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This is probably going to be kept on the basis of what I consider technicalities. Association for Computing Machinery may be prestigious, and a fellowship in it may be relevant per NPROF #3, but we wouldn't be able to tell it from the article; there's a link, but it announces that there's 58 new fellows--so how special is it? H-factor is of course always problematic, as are publications and cites. Let's not forget that we're writing an encyclopedia here, and if there's nothing to write because everything is based on organizational websites announcing "fellowship" or databases showing a ranking, what are we doing? That's right, resume writing, where all the content is derives from faculty pages or from the subject's own publications. Drmies (talk) 19:59, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. ACM Fellow is an unambiguous pass of WP:PROF#C3 (potential COI: I am one too) and he has very strong citations, passing WP:PROF#C1. These are not technicalities. One doesn't become a full professor in a tech field at MIT without significant accomplishments, and these indicators show that he has them. The article needs cleanup but WP:DINC. —David Eppstein (talk) 20:05, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Passes WP:PROF#C1 and WP:PROF#C3, as argued above. Deletion is not cleanup, and the first pass at cleaning up was very easy. XOR'easter (talk) 21:35, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Clear pass of WP:Prof. Xxanthippe (talk) 01:03, 28 April 2024 (UTC).[reply]

Alexey Okulov[edit]

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

Non-notable Russian physicist. The article was created by its subject (Okulov99 (talk · contribs)), contains no references or sources confirming the subject's notability (expect of the publication list of the subject). It is basically a promotional page. Ruslik_Zero 20:10, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Science, and Russia. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 21:01, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Citation counts [55] too low to pass WP:PROF#C1. Membership in scientific societies, and working for the Russian academy of sciences, are not the sort of honorary memberships needed to pass WP:PROF#C3. The references appear to alternate between Okulov's own publications, and academic publications about background material that do not mention or cite Okulov; a rare exception is reference [2], which actually does cite a paper by Okulov, in passing. None of these references contribute to notability nor provide the material to properly source an encyclopedia article. —David Eppstein (talk) 21:49, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, as per above. No indication that he is close to any of the notability criteria. Ldm1954 (talk) 23:59, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Robert McGee[edit]

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

I'm usually sympathetic to pages on perpetual students but I couldn't find enough reliable sources for this person besides that he got a bunch of degrees and is a professor. HadesTTW (he/him • talk) 18:57, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Sportspeople, Martial arts, North Carolina, and Pennsylvania. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:06, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Interesting human interest story and I'm amazed he hasn't been featured in NPR or something... I don't see anything we'd use, no news coverage, nothing, for sourcing. Oaktree b (talk) 00:12, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Other than mentions of his degrees and being a professor, I cannot find anything to convince GNG.-- Tumbuka Arch (talk) 11:33, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Independent sigcov appears in the Fayetteville Observer (more, book review) and Miami Herald (cont., later). His Google Scholar may suggest an NPROF pass too but I don't know the field well enough. Hameltion (talk | contribs) 14:49, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep -- I think the multiple sources with SIGCOV provided by Hameltion are enough for a GNG pass. JTtheOG (talk) 02:24, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jill Astbury[edit]

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

Fails WP:BIO. No significant coverage. 2 of the 4 sources refer to publications by her and don't establish notability. Being on the Victorian Honour Roll of Women doesn't necessarily add to notability. LibStar (talk) 23:40, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Health and fitness, and Australia. LibStar (talk) 23:40, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators and Psychology. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:09, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Passes WP:Prof#C1 on GS citations, albeit in a high cited field. Xxanthippe (talk) 00:15, 24 April 2024 (UTC).[reply]
Keep Concur that it passes WP:Prof#C1, and Astbury was quite prolific in the 1980's and 1990's so online sources may be hard to come by. Perhaps seeking offline sources to better establish notability might be an option? While I agree being on the Victorian Honour Roll of Women doesn't "add to" notability, there is a reason why she is there, and that is for the significant contribution that she has made in her chosen field. I'd also like to add that it is disheartening to see articles of notable women being nominated for deletion, particularly when Wikipedia continues to battle the issue of gender bias when it comes to biographical articles about women 2001:8003:6C00:F400:48D1:EF54:F265:DE2B (talk) 07:52, 26 April 2024 (UTC)— 2001:8003:6C00:F400:48D1:EF54:F265:DE2B (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

I think that being on the Victorian Honour Roll of Women does add to notability but, by itself, does not establish it. Xxanthippe (talk) 09:03, 26 April 2024 (UTC).[reply]

Bruno Marques (architect)[edit]

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

No independent sources given that show notability. Of the links provided one is to his staff biography and the other doesn't mention him at all. All I found were items that show he exists but don't show notability. CambridgeBayWeather (solidly non-human), Uqaqtuq (talk), Huliva 18:22, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

And I just noticed the name of the articles author, Brunomarkes. A variant of the subjects name. CambridgeBayWeather (solidly non-human), Uqaqtuq (talk), Huliva 18:24, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Is this not eligible for speedy deletion due to the article probably being written by the same guy, serving as a promotion, and not going through AfC but instead being created by a page move? Traumnovelle (talk) 06:16, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There is nothing stopping an editor from moving a draft to main space. I didn't feel that any of the criteria at Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion applied. So easier to go with AfD and then if it is re-posted it can be G4. CambridgeBayWeather (solidly non-human), Uqaqtuq (talk), Huliva 11:08, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Architecture, Germany, Portugal, and New Zealand. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:32, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Fails WP:ARCHITECT. Self-written bio, reads like self-promotion. No details of individual accomplishments. — Maile (talk) 23:27, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Zivit Inbar[edit]

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

Unreliable information. No RS. Fails the GNG. gidonb (talk) 23:39, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Business, Israel, and Australia. gidonb (talk) 23:39, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete orphan article that looks like a CV. WP:NOTRESUME. LibStar (talk) 23:41, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability, this is just promotional. Fails WP:GNG among other notability cirteria, and WP:NOTCV. LizardJr8 (talk) 23:53, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: PROMO with no sources outside of PR items or lists. Even my searches only turn up PR items. Oaktree b (talk) 23:57, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Authors, Businesspeople, Women, and Israel. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:11, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I searched for reliable sources and found no evidence of notability. Marokwitz (talk) 15:13, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: per norm Robertjamal12 ~🔔 16:07, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete: Looks just like a CV, clearly intended as promotional. -- D'n'B-t -- 18:48, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Wikipedia is WP:NOTLINKEDIN. Best, GPL93 (talk) 12:32, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: not notable. TarnishedPath^talk 08:43, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete nothing notable about the topic. Chekidalum (talk) 11:30, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Strong delete: promotional material without any evidence of WP:GNG. Contributor892z (talk) 17:21, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Stephen Barth[edit]

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

Non-notable lawyer/keynote speaker. Lack WP:GNG-style direct and in-depth coverage. DepreciateAppreciate (talk) 21:25, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2024 April 19. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 21:38, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Law, and Texas. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 00:01, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors and Businesspeople. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:05, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I lean toward delete; but I'm wondering if his textbook "has made a significant impact in the area of higher education" per WP:NACADEMIC #4 (although the discussion under that bullet point suggest that meeting notability through that path requires "several books that are widely used as textbooks"). This is an area of academic law not within my experience, so I will refrain from an actual !vote. TJRC (talk) 00:33, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. We are thankful to the kamikaze account who created and posted up this text, just as we're thankful to Mr Barth himself for supplying his photographic portrait. If only the text could be worthy of inclusion! It is not, due to our subject's notable lack of independent notability. We check the article and we search for sources but, alas, nothing of substance do we manage to scare up. All we catch are routine listings in trade media, such as this; online brochures, such as this; a bunch of expired links, e.g. here, here, here; and a few advertorials. And WP:NACADEMIC is spectacularly failed. -The Gnome (talk) 14:27, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:45, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Gregg Henriques[edit]

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

Given that most external links go to either gregghenriques.com or unifiedtheoryofknowledge.org and not to very many well-known independent sources that would significantly cover him, I have a suspicion that this article might not survive the AfD test in its current state. – MrPersonHumanGuy (talk) 23:31, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Authors, Psychology, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, and Virginia. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:11, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral -- the article is a mess, but the subject has a credible claim at notability as a full professor of psychiatry at a well-known university, with a pretty good citation trail. The impact does, however, look a little bit low for the field; if someone with more domain-specific knowledge could weigh it I'd appreciate it.

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relistiing due to low participation. Please remember to sign all comments made in a deletion discussion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:45, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Paolo Tasca (professor)[edit]

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

Previously deleted and salted as Paolo Tasca * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 14:30, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Economics, Computing, Italy, and England. Hey man im josh (talk) 15:16, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Delete ~~Delete~~ -- I don't have access to the deleted versions of the article, but since it has been deleted and salted, the level of improvement to notability needs to be higher than typical to keep, and I don't see a WP:PROF pass here that would warrant it. But UCL is a significant university, so I don't want to be too hasty -- salting seems to me to be primarily based on a "wasting the community's time" basis and not on a "this person couldn't possibly be notable" one. -- Michael Scott Asato Cuthbert (talk) 10:07, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Moving to weak delete by Mikejisuzu's arguments, but nothing warrants speedy keep by a long shot. -- Michael Scott Asato Cuthbert (talk) 00:33, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. Note that he's actually only an associate professor, not a full professor. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:46, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy keep -- Paolo Tasca is much more notable now in 2024, with multiple publications and third-party media references. Right now Tasca has several citations in triple digits. I'd argue that notability itself has increased significantly since the last deletion.

Given the higher requirement for notability, Tasca should have at least one well-cited multiple author work and others in double digits. From a quick look at Google Scholar, he has 6 works in triple-digit citations and more than 20 with double-digit citations. It looks like he has also grown in notability from a media perspective at least regards to reliable sources such as Euronews, and Project Syndicate. [56] As a result, Tasca clearly meets WP:GNG and WP:NPROF notability criteria. Mikejisuzu (talk) 21:33, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Whoever gave you the idea that that is enough citations in the very highly-cited field of computer science? Phil Bridger (talk) 20:53, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Well, for a start the title is a lie, as he's an associate professor, not a professor. Why do people involved with blockchain always seem to lie like this? Exaggeration is a sign of immaturity, not strength. Phil Bridger (talk) 20:47, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Randykitty (talk) 15:49, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment on notability, encyclopedic relevance, academic publications, positions, and so on - In response to Phil's and Necrothesp's comments: Paolo Tasca's work is multidisciplinary, and he also does a lot of work in economics. Please check Google Scholar for his many dozens of academic publications. This is certainly enough to establish basic notability. (Google Scholar)

He also has an ORCID profile where dozens of published works are listed. (ORCID)

And if that's not enough, there's an official UCL profile as well with additional information. (UCL page) UCL is one of the top universities in the UK and Europe, equivalent to an Ivy League-type institution. We can't just delete UCL, or Yale, professors with many dozens of publications unless we can demonstrate solid reasons for why they absolutely don't fit into the scope of this online encyclopedia. This is definitely a serious academic, not some self-promoting "motivational speaker" or "life coach."

There are plenty of academics out there who used to be non-notable, but have since become much more notable due to their recent extensive publications, research, and presentations. Tasca would certainly be one of them. Simply having a previous deletion or two should not prevent the subject from being permanently barred from eventually having a Wikipedia article even after the subject has eventually attained sufficient notability. I understand that the nominator thinks that Tasca had been deleted before and hence would like to reconsider whether or not the article should remain deleted. Nevertheless, by now, I strongly believe that his notability and encyclopedic relevance has greatly increased, and he is certainly worth including on Wikipedia now. This article is now certainly useful and relevant for encyclopedia readers, which is what Wikipedia is meant for.

I would also really like to see more experienced users vote on this issue, particularly @Cunard: and others.

As for Tasca being an "associate professor"? I'm not sure who created the page and why they decided on "(professor)", but it certainly seems fair enough to me. The article creator didn't try to put "(full professor)." A professor is a professor, whether he or she is an full, associate, assistant, or adjunct professor. Thus, "(professor)" is a fair an accurate description, and I think it's unfair to call out the article creator for inaccurately describing the subject and picking on whether Tasca is a full or associate professor.

I hope that I have laid out a strong case for why Paolo Tasca should be a strong keep and speedy keep. Mikejisuzu (talk) 06:32, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Associate and assistant professors are types of non-professor, not of professor. "Full professor" is an American term, but the subject has no connection with America. Phil Bridger (talk) 07:02, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A professor is a professor, whether he or she is an full, associate, assistant, or adjunct professor. No they're not. In the UK, these people used to be (and in many universities are still) called lecturers, senior lecturers and readers, not professors. An associate or assistant professor who called themselves or insisted on being addressed as "professor" would still be looked on askance, because they have no right to that title. The use of "professor" as a synonym for "academic" is an Americanism, pure and simple. Elsewhere, the unqualified "professor" only refers to someone who holds a chair. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:53, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. I agree that salting seems to me to be primarily based on a "wasting the community's time" basis and not on a "this person couldn't possibly be notable" one; this certainly looks like someone who could become notable under WP:NPROF. But I agree that citations are not high, given his discipline. Note also that our article contains false claims; he is not the author of The FinTech Book or Banking Beyond Banks and Money. Both books are edited collections. (He is not one of the editors of the former, either.) -- asilvering (talk) 03:36, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletions[edit]

~~List of presidents of Southern University (via WP:PROD on 16 April 2024)~~

Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Actors and filmmakers Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Athletes Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Authors Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Businesspeople Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Lists of people Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Politicians

[1] ttps://www.kungahuset.se/english/royal-house. {{cite web}}: Missing or empty |title= (help)

[2] ttps://people.com/royals/princess-madeleine-and-prince-carl-philips-kids-were-stripped-of-their-royal-titles-by-the-king/. {{cite web}}: Missing or empty |title= (help)

[1]

[2]