Wikipedia:XfD today

Shortcuts

This page transcludes all of the deletion debates opened today on the English-language Wikipedia, including articles, categories, templates, and others, as a convenience to XfD-watchers. Please note that because this material is transcluded, watchlisting this page will not provide you with watchlist updates about deletions; WP:DELT works best as a browser bookmark checked regularly.

Speedy deletion candidates[edit]

Articles[edit]

Recent AfDs: Today Yesterday

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

< May 02	May 04 >

Guide to deletion

Purge server cache

Muhammad Ashar Asghar[edit]

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

on the face of it, it appear that the subject has directed some dramas, but those dramas themselves don't appear to be WP:N, which suggests that this person fails to meet WP:DIRECTOR. The reference cited in this BLP are either unreliable or don't mention the subject at all, contradicting what the SPA Ritajon (talk · contribs) claimed when they created this BLP. A quick Google search also yields not much, indicating a failure to meet the basic WP:GNG. —Saqib (talk | contribs) 17:02, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. —Saqib (talk | contribs) 17:02, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:11, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

FinePix Z5fd[edit]

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

Not sure this is notable Chidgk1 (talk) 17:01, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Photography-related deletion discussions. Chidgk1 (talk) 17:01, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

MUN TV[edit]

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

The coverage is not in depth or significance, failing to meet the basic WP:GNG. I don't see it passing WP:ORG either —Saqib (talk | contribs) 16:50, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. —Saqib (talk | contribs) 16:50, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 16:56, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Khalifa Gul Nawaz Teaching Hospital[edit]

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

The press coverage received lacked depth or significance, failing to meet the WP:GNG. I don't see it passing WP:ORG either —Saqib (talk | contribs) 16:24, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. —Saqib (talk | contribs) 16:24, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Health and fitness and Medicine. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 16:57, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Anoosha Syed[edit]

AfDs for this article:

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

So back in 2019, this BLP was a nom. for deletion and the consensus was to move this BLP to the draft NS, but it wasn't executed. Five years have passed since then. Upon conducting a quick Google search, it seems that the subject still doesn't meet the basic WP:GNG. Most of her work doesn't meet the standards for WP:N so she fails WP:NCREATIVE as well. Despite receiving Asian/Pacific American Awards for Literature, it's not adequate to establish WP:N. Therefore, it seems appropriate to proceed with deletion for now. —Saqib (talk | contribs) 15:58, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Pakistan and Canada. —Saqib (talk | contribs) 15:58, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete this article; it clearly fails to meet WP:N --Crosji (talk) 16:31, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 16:58, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dean Alberto Villarruz College[edit]

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

Former school with little to no coverage. Sanglahi86 (talk) 15:30, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education, Schools, and Philippines. Sanglahi86 (talk) 15:30, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mahira Miyanji[edit]

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

She doesn't appears to meet WP:GNG beause the press coverage she received in WP:RS lacks significance or depth which does not satisfy WP:N. N-Peace Award alone may not confer WP:N —Saqib (talk | contribs) 15:29, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. —Saqib (talk | contribs) 15:29, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women and Education. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 15:31, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unzela Khan[edit]

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

It appears the subject doesn't meet the WP:JOURNALIST or WP:AUTHOR, as their works don't seem noteworthy enough. The press coverage in WP:RS also not significant or in depth enough, so fails to meet WP:GNG. Does not satisfy WP:N —Saqib (talk | contribs) 15:03, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Journalism, Pakistan, and United Kingdom. —Saqib (talk | contribs) 15:03, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Television, and England. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 15:33, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Larkana Institute of Nuclear Medicine and Radiotherapy, Larkana[edit]

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

The press coverage received lacked depth or significance, failing to meet the WP:GNG. I don't see it passing WP:ORG either —Saqib (talk | contribs) 14:50, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. —Saqib (talk | contribs) 14:50, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 15:34, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Shaheed Benazir Bhutto Cultural Complex And Museum[edit]

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

The press coverage received lacked depth or significance, failing to meet the WP:GNG. I don't see it passing WP:ORG either —Saqib (talk | contribs) 14:48, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. —Saqib (talk | contribs) 14:48, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Museums and libraries-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 15:35, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Masjid Eid Gah[edit]

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

Seems fails to meet WP:NBUILDING as well basic WP:GNG —Saqib (talk | contribs) 14:39, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Islam and Pakistan. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 15:36, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of college sports team nicknames in North America[edit]

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

Non-notable grouping that fails to meet the WP:NLIST due to a lack of WP:RS. Let'srun (talk) 14:19, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sports, Lists, Canada, United States of America, and North America. Let'srun (talk) 14:19, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I don't think there's a corresponding article, but college teams' nicknames is certainly a notable topic discussed by a variety of sources. Sources include [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17]. Reywas92^Talk 14:41, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
In North America though? Let'srun (talk) 15:36, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ilya Spiegel[edit]

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

I can find nothing to indicate they pass WP:NBASIC or WP:GNG. They are just another politician who just stood for election but was not elected. There is no Finnish article or any mentions on Finnish Wikipedia of them that I can find. There used to be a Russian version but that was deleted. KylieTastic (talk) 14:14, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Politicians, Politics, Finland, and Russia. KylieTastic (talk) 14:14, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

MailHippo[edit]

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

Deprod by IP. Deletion reason still stands. The Yahoo Finance ref is a press release, the other sources are likewise either primary and nonindependent, blogs, or both. I have performed searches in EBSCO, Gale and ProQuest and have not been able to locate any sources suitable for WP:NCORP, it is likely that it is simply WP:TOOSOON for any significant coverage to exist. Alpha3031 (t • c) 14:08, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Products, Software, and United States of America. Alpha3031 (t • c) 14:08, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lasse Schäfer[edit]

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

Fails WP:NPOL for not being the MP, and fails WP:GNG or WP:ANYBIO generally. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 13:50, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Politicians, and Germany. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 14:23, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Neither being an unsuccessful election candidate nor being organizational chair of a minor political party constitutes an automatic notability freebie that would guarantee a Wikipedia article — but this is referenced almost entirely to directly-affiliated primary sources that are not support for notability, and the only citation to media is just a photograph of him rather than a news article about him, and this isn't adding any GNG points either. Bearcat (talk) 15:41, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sports teams named Trojans[edit]

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

Non-notable grouping that fails to meet the WP:NLIST. Let'srun (talk) 13:34, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sports and Lists. Let'srun (talk) 13:34, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Useful for navigational purposes as a split from Trojan (disambiguation). Someone searching "Trojans" is likely looking for a sports team, given that it is a popular mascot. -- Tavix ^(talk) 13:56, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: No sources cited, let alone any that discuss the topic of the list as a group. I can find user wikis and database-type articles listing teams named Trojans but nothing close to RS. WeirdNAnnoyed (talk) 14:02, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tappytoon[edit]

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

This article about a Web fails Wikipedia:Notability (Web); Because it did not meet the conditions for notability. The company's history, adaptation, awards and nomination, etc. were not introduced. Also, there are no articles that can attract attention. It should be deleted or redirected to the list of webtoon sites in Korea. Hkm5420 (talk) 05:08, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Webcomics and South Korea. Hkm5420 (talk) 05:08, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep – Lots of reliable sources have covered TappyToon in their online publications. See The Escapist, Heidi MacDonald's The Beat, BusinessKorea (not personally familiar with it tho), Yahoo, plus release listings like The Korea Herald and The Mary Sue. Are there problems with the sources available here? ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 07:11, 12 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!} 07:21, 19 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) 12:52, 26 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, Shadow311 (talk) 13:29, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Haven’t done a BEFORE check yet, but every source shared by Maplestrip other than the Escapist is a reprinted press release Mach61 13:58, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Micro (text editor)[edit]

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

Besides one potentially WP:RS on the article, I wouldn't consider this article to pass WP:GNG. "[D]esigned around simplicity and ease of use" also makes the article quite promotional. Cocobb8 (💬 talk • ✏️ contribs) 12:56, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 12:59, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The promotional wording wasn't intentional. Anyhow in the context of WP:NSOFT, having 20k stars on GitHub and coverage in Linux Magazine and many other FOSS-focused sites makes it notability imo. Wqwt (talk) 13:13, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Barn Jams[edit]

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

Fails WP:GNG. No significant coverage in reliable secondary sources. Popcornfud (talk) 12:47, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Popcornfud (talk) 12:47, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 15:38, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Added plenty of sources. I don't get what your problem is. – Dyolf87 (talk) 16:23, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Added a few more. – Dyolf87 (talk) 16:37, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Masaaki Ueki[edit]

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

Has been on the list of articles not meeting WP:NBIO for 14 years. A bare number of sources (two) and no corresponding Japanese article strongly suggest this he does not meet WP:GNG in addition to clearly failing WP:NSPORT. Allan Nonymous (talk) 12:28, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Martial arts, and Japan. Shellwood (talk) 12:58, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Alfred Davis[edit]

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

Reviewed during NPP. No evidence of wp:notability. Co-founder of Rolex. Article is basically just tidbits of Rolex history with mentions of him. Half of the small amount of material in the article is Rolex history that doesn't even mention him. The same with sources; there are no sources on him much less GNG sources. I did a search with the same results. Rolex history with just mentions of him in that context. Article was prodded by others in October and de-prodded by creator. During NPP work I did a merge/redirect into Rolex (there was no real material to merge) and creator reversed that. I don't think that the creator understands wp:notability; I left a note on their talk page explaining that it's about coverage. North8000 (talk) 12:22, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and United Kingdom. Shellwood (talk) 12:57, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: This book: [18] might have something, but I don't have access to it. The two sources cited in the article don't seem to be RS. WeirdNAnnoyed (talk) 13:49, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Rolex. No notability independent of the company. Nothing in Internet Archive or newspapers.com beyond the basic fact of having founded the company with Wilsdorf. Jfire (talk) 15:17, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

TV2 Stars[edit]

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

Non-notable. There doesn't really appear to be anything to be said about this subject. toweli (talk) 12:13, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Television, and New Zealand. toweli (talk) 12:13, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete unreferenced article that does not demonstrate any notability. The "I got 2 babe" network ID promo receives mostly trivial mentions in one or two independent sources of varying reliability I found on Google. The group is not specifically named in any of these. There is nothing of substance here to warrant a standalone article. The network promo itself could probably be covered by a single sentence in the articles for TVNZ or the "Other media" section of I Got You Babe. Dfadden (talk) 14:05, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Epsilon Nu Tau[edit]

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

Highly promotional and unencyclopedic. Fails WP:ORGCRIT as lacking significant coverage in multiple reliable secondary sources. AusLondonder (talk) 12:08, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and Education. AusLondonder (talk) 12:08, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

G. E. Kidder Smith[edit]

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

Does not appear to pass WP:NBIO, only sources that I could find is one book from 2022 [19] (already cited extensively in the article, and authored in part by is grandson), and his obituary [20] in the NYT. Most of the contents of the article were added by one IP and do not look verifiable. His son Hopkinson Smith looks notable though. Choucas Bleu (T·C) 11:29, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Authors, Architecture, Photography, Military, Alabama, New Jersey, and New York. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 15:42, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Brighton & Hove bus route 6[edit]

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

Non-notable bus route. WP:Run-of-the-mill applies here. --wooden superman 11:29, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Transportation and England. Shellwood (talk) 12:57, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I see nothing notable about this bus route. Athel cb (talk) 16:06, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rogério dos Santos (footballer)[edit]

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

No evidence of notability found, source is database only, Prod removed with statement that he received a yellow card for Kaunas which is not really adressing the issue at hand. A search didn't immediately provide better sources, but perhaps with different search terms better results can be had. Article in any case needs thorough cleanup, stating that he "plays" for a club which folded in 2012 is slightly outdated at best. Fram (talk) 10:25, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, Lithuania, and Brazil. Fram (talk) 10:25, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Per lack of WP:SIGCOV. The player's career is mostly unknown (ogol.com, Soccerway). Svartner (talk) 16:46, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

National University station[edit]

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

Neither source cited mentions a station with this name. Source 2 is also deprecated per WP:AOPLACES. I could not find other sources online. Please redirect this page to Line 1, Ho Chi Minh City Metro. Toadspike (talk) 10:18, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

1. A reminder that train stations are not presumed notable simply because they exist (see WP:NTRAINSTATION)

2. This is, in fact, a different station from Vietnam National University station in Hanoi. Toadspike (talk) 10:19, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Transportation and Vietnam. Shellwood (talk) 10:35, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It is Listed as Generaly Unreliable not Depracated. 😎😎PaulGamerBoy360😎😎 (talk) 13:50, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Stations-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 15:44, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Vietnam National University station[edit]

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

The only source cited doesn't mention this station at all, could not find any others online. Please redirect to Line 3 (Hanoi Metro) Toadspike (talk) 10:16, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

1. A reminder that train stations are not presumed notable simply because they exist (see WP:NTRAINSTATION)

2. This is, in fact, a different station from National University station in Ho Chi Minh City. Toadspike (talk) 10:20, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Transportation and Vietnam. Shellwood (talk) 10:37, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Line 3 (Hanoi Metro), which should have a better table of stations. Reywas92^Talk 14:43, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Stations-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 15:44, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of Little League World Series Championship Game broadcasters[edit]

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

WP:NOTTVGUIDE applies here. Also listcruft (or WP:CRUFT). The subjects are not described as a group, failing WP:LISTN. Also, sources are YouTube links, some are not significant for a list and none of those assert notability to this list. Those arguing for a keep claiming how useful it is, shall be advised to refer to WP:USEFUL. I also advise them to start a Fandom page if they want to save it so much. SpacedFarmer (talk) 10:04, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, Baseball, Lists, and United States of America. SpacedFarmer (talk) 10:04, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Apache Ambari[edit]

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

There are references that verify its existence but nothing that shows notability under WP:GNG. Once of many forks from List of Apache Software Foundation projects. Can be redirected back to the list page as an WP:ATD but bringing to discussion in case someone is able to find better sourcing. CNMall41 (talk) 00:30, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. CNMall41 (talk) 00:31, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:43, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Found a couple of books that mention Ambari-Hadoop for Dummies and Hadoop in 24 Hours — Sean Brunnock (talk) 11:35, 15 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!} 00:40, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: There's some decent coverage in books and in articles found in scholar. StreetcarEnjoyer (talk) 20:45, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Which references? I do see mentions (which again, verify its existence) but which references would you say contribute to notability? --CNMall41 (talk) 03:40, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 03:08, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to List of Apache Software Foundation projects as nom suggested. Pretty insignificant coverage. — Sean Brunnock (talk) 16:15, 29 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, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 10:04, 3 May 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]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 10:04, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Carrier Air Group SIX[edit]

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

No evidence that this formation meets the GNG. Of the currently-cited sources, 2, 3, and 5 are self-published, not independent, and not reliable (except for direct quotes from Navy documents in source 3). Source 1 [21] seems to list only establishment and disestablishment dates (not sigcov), which is more than I expected from a source supposedly covering "1910-1920" – it seems the citing editor made a typo, the citation should read "1910-2010". Source 4 [22] doesn't seem to mention this unit at all. In sum, there are 0 sources that count toward the GNG, and I couldn't find anything in a before search. Toadspike (talk) 10:03, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Military and United States of America. Toadspike (talk) 10:03, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This can also be redirected to List of United States Navy aircraft wings. Toadspike (talk) 10:05, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Aviation-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 15:46, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

EcoCute (Japan)[edit]

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

This is a recreation/fork of EcoCute (old revision link) at a new title with unnecessary disambiguation. The outcome at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/EcoCute in February was to merge it to Air source heat pump. They should be re-merged absent a changed consensus to split the content back out into its own article, such as via a WP:SPLIT discussion or WP:DRV. SilverLocust 💬 18:26, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. SilverLocust 💬 18:26, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Products, Engineering, and Technology. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:00, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment We just did this one and it's back again. !Merge as suggested less than 6mths ago. Oaktree b (talk) 19:47, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I mentioned my position/opinion is on Talk:EcoCute (Japan), please refer.--Namazu-tron (talk) 07:01, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Note that previous AfD was closed as merge despite the fact that it appears one editors were advocating for keep, one (nominator) for merge, and one for delete: it seems more like no consensus to me. Appears to have some international coverage from fiz-karlsruhe.de that's already cited in the article. ja:エコキュート has lots of coverage including from Yomiuri, Mainichi, Kyodo, NHK, and more including an award from ja:発明協会. I also found this magazine featuring it. I would also rename to get rid of the parenthetical per WP:PARENDIS. DCsansei (talk) 10:52, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge Re-creating a page that was closed as merge, now with a spurious disambiguation, is not constructive. Dmoore5556 (talk) 05:24, 3 May 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) 10:01, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: EcoCute is trademark with millions of units used in Japan, some number of units also used in oversea, hopefully more number in area other than Japan. Installations, Japan and oversea case study list Article context and external link shows reality. I had created article EcoCute in July 2008‎, in January 2024, nominated for delete, then merged to, but eliminated section EcoCute in Air source heat pump thereafter. EcoCute (Japan) is based on number of units used/working in Japan, so that this is eligible to be an article in fact with (Japan). As Generic trademark, no one nominate trademark Coca-Cola merger into Coke nor Jeep into automobile, neither Wikipedia® registered trademark neither. EcoCute is registered and generic trademark. I shall repeat once again:

Once an article A deleted and marge to another article B, even A redirected to B, anyone can edit article B include word A in context of article B, but long term in future, it is possible/happen the word A may disappear from B due to number of editing by many editor/user. No one able to guarantee such sad thing if article A is worthful. This is my understanding. This comment is in My opinon on 12:46, 7 February 2024. If this nomination be resulted as merge back to Air source heat pump again, or other, merge or delete nomination will be happened again and again. Independent article EcoCute (Japan) is much safer from delete/merge, and contribute CO₂ reduction with implemented efficiency. --Namazu-tron (talk) 11:06, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Medixsysteme[edit]

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

Spammy promotional page written by connected WP:SPA-contributors. Does not appear to even have a functional website let alone any rs's. Pabsoluterince (talk) 09:58, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Products, and Medicine. Pabsoluterince (talk) 09:58, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of NBA All-Star Game broadcasters[edit]

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

WP:NOTTVGUIDE applies here. Also LISTCRUFT (or WP:CRUFT). The subjects are not described as a group, failing WP:LISTN. Also, sources are about the game itself, many of those are YouTube links and none of those assert notability to this list. Those arguing for a keep claiming how useful it is, shall be advised to refer to WP:USEFUL. I also advise them to start a Fandom page if they want to save it so much. SpacedFarmer (talk) 09:57, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, Basketball, Lists, and United States of America. SpacedFarmer (talk) 09:57, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, with sourcing from [23], [24] and [25]. Esolo5002 (talk) 15:43, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Minesh Mehta[edit]

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

Written as an advert for a radiation oncologist. Possible COI edits by User:Anniyam and User:Pikar 81. GobsPint (talk) 09:29, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Medicine, Uganda, Florida, Illinois, Maryland, and Wisconsin. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 15:48, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hiljson Mandela[edit]

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

The subject is not notable. The award "Cesarica" is not at all notable to value the importance of the subject. Upon WP:BEFORE, I could find 3 articles about him, which doesn't show notability. 𝓡𝔂𝓭𝓮𝔁 08:57, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Artists, Bands and musicians, and Croatia. 𝓡𝔂𝓭𝓮𝔁 08:57, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's easy enough to find widespread Croatian mainstream media coverage of this person - HRT had them on one of their music shows in 2021[26], RTL interviewed him in 2022[27] and later hired him for their 'Masked Singer' show in 2023[28], and Nova TV covered his interview in 2023[29]. There's a nationwide renown and it's a topic that might conceivably interest a few average English readers. Ultimately, if we kept Barbara Radulović back in the day, we might as well keep this. --Joy (talk) 07:53, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Absolutely strongly disagree. I second everything Joy mentioned! He is one of the most successful young Croatian musicians/rappers. With 2 Porin nominations[30][31], coverage by the 3 biggest Croatian TV channels (including interviews and participating as one of the celebrity contestants in Masked Singer) + millions of YouTube views and a lot more (I get that you couldn't find it tho, but there's def a lot of sources), I would say he is undoubtedly notable. I'm willing to expand the article soon. CroatiaElects (talk) 18:47, 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!} 08:22, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of La Liga broadcasters[edit]

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

WP:NOTTVGUIDE applies here. The subjects are not described as a group, failing WP:LISTN. No context to assert notability either. Also, sources are primary sources, nothing but news announcements and none of those assert notability. Those arguing for a keep claiming how useful it is, shall be advised to refer to WP:USEFUL. SpacedFarmer (talk) 07:58, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, Football, Lists, and Spain. SpacedFarmer (talk) 07:58, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 09:23, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found please ping me. Giant Snowman 09:30, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom, Not a tv guide.. Govvy (talk) 14:03, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Relevant information and sources have been added that give it notability.[32], [33], [34]--Claudio Fernag (talk) 01:29, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Worthy in an article itself but we don't need a broadcasting list so you can watch in whoever country. SpacedFarmer (talk) 06:45, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:58, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep based on sourcing found by Claudio Fernag. Esolo5002 (talk) 15:44, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sangmin[edit]

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

Prod challenged so bringing here. Totally unsourced, original research, before finds nothing. Theroadislong (talk) 07:16, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Korea-related deletion discussions. Theroadislong (talk) 07:16, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, notable sources in the Korean language. [35] in Encyclopedia of Korean Culture, [36][37] (Parts of e-books on a history website maintained by the Academy of Korean Studies)

, academic paper [38].

I mentioned this in edit comment on the article, but we focus on notability first and foremost, and then look at article quality. And I agree, the article isn't great. This was an entire social class for centuries, and has been written about extensively in Korea. Lmk if you'd like me to dig up more sources. 104.232.119.107 (talk) 08:45, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of television programmes broadcast by ITV[edit]

AfDs for this article:

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

Fails NOTDIRECTORY/NOTTVGUIDE. List criteria is programming "that are either currently being broadcast or have previously been broadcast", Wikipedia is not an electronic program guide, current or historical. Fails NLIST, no independent reliable sources discuss this as a group. BEFORE found programing schedules, nothing more. List has grown so much is it hard to tell if any of it is original programming, BEFORE did not find sources showing original programming discussed as a group. // Timothy :: talk 07:15, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, Lists, and United Kingdom. Shellwood (talk) 10:45, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dayari Balbuena[edit]

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

I am unable to find sufficient in-depth coverage of the subject, a Dominican women's footballer, to meet WP:GNG or WP:SPORTCRIT. All I found were trivial mentions. JTtheOG (talk) 05:44, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Women, Football, and Dominican Republic. JTtheOG (talk) 05:44, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Per nom. Svartner (talk) 16:40, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Caribbean Basin[edit]

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

WP:OR/WP:SYNTH, 1 source providing a dictionary definition, plus an WP:UNSOURCED quasi-duplicate of Caribbean#Countries and territories list. Whatever else this article might have been intended for, is better served by List of Caribbean islands or Caribbean Sea. It has been a redirect in the past, that could work instead of deletion, but then we must agree on the best target. NLeeuw (talk) 21:18, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Caribbean-related deletion discussions. NLeeuw (talk) 21:18, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

PS: The discussion has evolved a lot since I commenced it three days ago. Now 4 editors (including myself as nom) are in favour of Disambiguation, and 2 editors are in favour of Keep, while nobody is in favour of outright Deletion or a Redirect anymore. Just want to note that, because the latter two are the only options I suggested in my original rationale above. NLeeuw (talk) 08:52, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Reywas92: I see you've just turned it into a redirect to Caribbean. I'm not opposed to that outcome, but isn't this a bit of a premature move after I have just initiated this AfD? NLeeuw (talk) 21:32, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oops, I was using the easy-merge tool and had the page up since before your nomination so I didn't even see that when I saved it five minutes later! I undid that and will vote ~~redirect~~ to Caribbean. The one source is an analysis of the breadth of terms that can apply to this region, all of which can have different geographic and political definitions, so I see no basis for a separate article as if this were a distinct or well-defined concept. The see also links for the US program use the political definition that includes some non-bordering countries, so this is pointless. Reywas92^Talk 21:53, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Haha I already thought that might have been going on as we acted almost at the same time. No worries. :) NLeeuw (talk) 10:02, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In light of the comment below I would also support disambiguation However, I am still strongly opposed to keeping the page. Even with the added information, I don't see the need for stand-alone article. The origin of the term for the Caribbean Basin Initiative belongs on that article, and the rest is just generically about the region. Yes, the term is used – inconsistently, including for this Initiative and as described by [39] – but even if Basin countries are related in various ways however defined, a separate page isn't warranted. Reywas92^Talk 21:33, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 21:53, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Not OR or SYNTH - in fact, a very easy WP:BEFORE search as the defined area is discussed by many books and scholarly articles dating back years including [40] [41] [42] [43]. These just scratch the surface - there was a history section at one point that was deleted for lack of sourcing, wondering if restoring and sourcing it would be a good idea. SportingFlyer T·C 22:03, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Turn into a disambiguation page to disambiguate w/ Caribbean, Caribbean Basin Initiative, Caribbean Basin Economic Recovery Act of 1983, Caribbean Basin Trade Partnership Act and Caribbean Basin Trade and Partnership Act. It's clear from the vast array of reliable sources and uses that "Caribbean Basin" is a generic term for the Caribbean Sea and countries in the region. The article as it stands relies on one source to separate out Barbados and the Bahamas as not part of the Caribbean Basin, but most other uses include all regional countries in the term and treat it as an equivalent term to "Caribbean region." It would be original research for an article to rely on a single (and tendentious) definition to somehow conjure "Caribbean Basin" into existence as a separate term. My reason for turning this into a disambig page rather than a redirect is to cover the various U.S. government laws and initiatives employing the term (and that include the Bahamas and Barbados, natch). Dclemens1971 (talk) 22:43, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Disambiguate per Dclemens' sensible reasoning and a lot of the competing definitions which may lead to a WP:POVFORK with Caribbean if this is not done. I think that's the first time I've gotten to vote that in an AfD. BrigadierG (talk) 01:57, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
A DP might be the best solution here. I wouldn't be opposed to that outcome either. NLeeuw (talk) 10:03, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep : I've expanded the article with reliable sources. Based on the sources I've seen which I've added to the article (see article), this appears to be a specific geographical region, which in part, but not exclusively, is determined by political and economic considerations. In someway, similar to the Middle Belt, and other regional articles, etc. The subject is notable in its own right, with plenty of WP:RS discussing the topic in dephth, and maybe we should be mindful not to confuse the general reader between a geographic region/basin (which are notable), and an economic or trade program like Caribbean Basin Initiative, instituted by statute law like Caribbean Basin Economic Recovery Act of 1983. There is a huge difference between these and perhaps we should be mindful not to lump this article to other articles which would be wrong, and might also confuse the reader. In my view, to merge with another article would be like discussing two separate unrelated subjects in the same article. In the end, it may push the community to have to create the same article which was previously created and deleted, just to separate the two topics, and would send us back to square one. I haven't even scratched the surface, but from the sources I've seen so far, I believe this article can be expanded even further. On a side note, would the nom kindly transclude this AfD to to alert Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Africa so that Wikipedia:WikiProject African diaspora are also automatically alerted? African Diaspora get their notifications from Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Ethnic groups or Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Africa. Many thanks.Tamsier (talk)
These additions don't deal with the fact that there is no consensus among the sources on what defines the "Caribbean Basin" versus just the "Caribbean." As the current revision of the article notes, the US Caribbean Basin Initiative excluded Cuba and Nicaragua. One sentence says "This means countries like Barbados and The Bahamas, which are culturally and politically Caribbean, are not included.[2]" (And the list in the article does indeed exclude them.) Later on, a statement in the article says "It is customary to include Bermuda and the Bahamian Archipelago within this region, although they are located in the Atlantic Ocean outside the arc, since they share the cultural and historical legacy of the countries of the Lesser Antilles." So what is it? The more the article gets developed, the more it will just turn into a content fork of Caribbean. Dclemens1971 (talk) 19:42, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Excellent observation. NLeeuw (talk) 19:50, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Dclemens1971, I think that is a matter for the reliable secondary sources to decide, not for us to define it, as to try and do so here would constitute WP:OR. We report on what the reliable secondary sources say with respect to weight, and leave it to the general reader to make up their mind. If we go down the route of trying to define it here, that would constitute WP:OR. The differences in definition as per sources, however, should not be grounds for deletion. In situations like that, we simply report per weight as per Wiki guidelines.Tamsier (talk) 20:09, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
But if the reliable sources don't even have a common agreement on what "Caribbean Basin" means or if it's different from "Caribbean," why bother having an article about it? Do we need an article to debate the semantics of the term "Caribbean Basin," because that's what we have now. Dclemens1971 (talk) 20:34, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think there is general agreement. Part of the problem is that the agreement doesn't match what's currently in the actual article. SportingFlyer T·C 23:14, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- But this still isn't really a "specific geographical region" in that the geographical area/first sentence isn't even accurate in most cases. The book you added "The Caribbean Basin: An International History" does include Barbados and the Bahamas, as well as El Salvador. Certainly we can acknowledge that Caribbean island nations are historically and politically related to the Central American and northern South American countries, but I don't feel like we need a stand-alone article to say that. We could draftify the page, but I'm not sure what sort of expansion you say can be done actually has to be done here – and not somewhere like History of Central America or History of the Caribbean – that wouldn't just be duplicative or an unnecessary content fork. Reywas92^Talk 21:33, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  But why does there need to be a specific definition in order to show notability? Why can't we say some sources say X and some say Y and have it be notable? Why is an editing decision coming in the way of notability? SportingFlyer T·C 06:03, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  It's less about notability and more about the WP:CONTENTFORK issue. If the article really encompasses any number of countries associated with the Caribbean region and/or the Caribbean sea, then the term should disambiguate/redirect to "Caribbean." That covers the territory. We only need a freestanding article if there is evidence that the term "Caribbean Basin" means something specific and different from "Caribbean." Dclemens1971 (talk) 12:15, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  
  I liked reading this link from the article. It comes from an ecological perspective but the point is that many different organizations, discliplines, or analysts may use several names with different and inconsistent definitions for the region and subregions. You could make a big complex Euler diagram out of them. But just because each of these names is used in depth does not mean there's something more to say that justifies the need for a separate article. So sure, maybe Caribbean Basin is notable and I am making an editing decision – there's just not enough to say that this is needed as another article (WP:NOPAGE). Perhaps a page similar to Terminology of the British Isles could break out the differences when sources say X or Y. Reywas92^Talk 17:14, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  Such a terminology article only seems warranted when a simple disambiguation page is not enough to point readers to what they are looking for. I think a DP is the proper place to start. NLeeuw (talk) 21:13, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  
  I still don't really agree - there's lots of scholarly and international sources which use the term "Caribbean Basin" and the book Politics and Development in the Caribbean Basin: Central America and the Caribbean in the New World Order (Grugel, 2015) discusses how the term was used by the United States government in the 1980s to give a specific geographic definition to an area where "Caribbean" is not necessarily a specific geographic identifier. That book also notes El Salvador is included in spite not touching the Caribbean, as confirmed by this paper. There's something geographically notable here - it's not just a superfluous term. SportingFlyer T·C 23:13, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment As noted above in my earlier comment, it is outside the remit of Wikipedia editors to try to define terms which are not already defined or covered by reliable secondary sources. Our notability guideline is very clear as to what deserves a stand-alone article and what doesn't. In my view, as the one who expanded the article and added other reliable sources, I believe this article meets WP:GNG. Our policy on WP:WEIGHT makes it absolutely clear as to how to give weight to sources with differing views. The issue of weight is not a ground for deletion as noted above. The content fork argument does not apply here, because the scope is different from the other articles mentioned by other editors. This article focuses more on a particular geographical region/basin which in part, but not exclusively is motivated by economic/trade, instituted by US law. I contend that, moving this article to another would end up causing more harm to that article and confuses the reader. Sending a fully sourced notable article to a disambiguation page not only defeats the purpose of our disambiguation process, but also cheats the general reader looking for this article. Of course the article can be expanded even further and much better, but that is not a ground for deletion, neither is variation in definition which can be resolved by adopting out weight policy.Tamsier (talk) 02:12, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I appreciate your efforts, but I don't think your additions have made the term "Caribbean Basin" as such any more worthy of a stand-alone article separate from Caribbean and Caribbean Sea.
- You've not changed the definition in the opening line either, so let's do a close-reading comparison:
"Caribbean Basin" according to Caribbean Basin: the Caribbean Sea and any territories in or touching the Caribbean Sea.

"Caribbean" acccording to Caribbean: a subregion of the Americas that includes the Caribbean Sea and its islands, some of which are surrounded by the Caribbean Sea and some of which border both the Caribbean Sea and the North Atlantic Ocean; the nearby coastal areas on the mainland are sometimes also included in the region.

"Caribbean" acccording to Caribbean Sea: The entire Caribbean Sea area, the West Indies' numerous islands, and adjacent coasts are collectively known as the Caribbean.

I still don't see a difference.
- The "Geographic area" section you added is wholly WP:UNSOURCED.
- The sentence about the Caribbean Basin Initiative indicates that the 1983 U.S. govt law excluded Cuba and Nicaragua from the definition, so the 1983 U.S. govt law cannot be used to support the definition or the "Caribbean Basin region" altname. It is also at odds with your WP:UNSOURCED "Geographical area" section, which explicitly includes Cuba.
- The Mount/Randall source is invoked to say the Caribbean became "an American lake". But if "the Caribbean" is something else than "the Caribbean Basin", this whole sentence is irrelevant and out of place in this article, or very sloppily added.
- The Pastor source is similarly invoked to say the USA never saw itself as a Caribbean nation, and ...all the nations in and around the Caribbean Sea seemed to have..., which is irrelevant as well if those words mean something else than "Caribbean Basin". If they do mean the same, then you have just proven our case that "Caribbean Basin" does not merit a stand-alone article, but is just a synonym of "Caribbean", namely: the Caribbean Sea, its islands and the continental coasts of the Caribbean Sea.
I rest my case. NLeeuw (talk) 16:09, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's clearly not a synonym - it's a specific geostrategic definition. I've added additional sources to the article and cleaned up the lede to note that El Salvador is generally included, which completely negates your argument, and I have not yet included the footnote from this article which clearly defines why this term is of practical importance. SportingFlyer T·C 03:08, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It's a specific geostrategic definition for a particular source. Quote from page v, note 1 of the Rand paper you linked: "Throughout this study the term 'Caribbean Basin' will be defined as the geographic area of the Caribbean Sea, including all the rim islands, all littoral states (from Mexico to Venezuela), and three countries not geographically contiguous to the Caribbean: El Salvador in Central America, and Guyana and Suriname on the Atlantic (see map facing p.1). Thus used, 'Caribbean Basin' denotes a specific geostrategic region that has special importance for the United States. This differs from the reference used in the Caribbean Basin Initiative, which has an economic focus on the smaller, less-developed countries of the region, thereby excluding Mexico, Colombia, and Venezuela." That source is highlighting the fact that there is no single definition of "Caribbean Basin" and choosing one for its own research purposes. This gets to the point that @Nederlandse Leeuw and @Reywas92 and I have been making: this is a widely used term that means different things in different contexts but that generally aligns with the regional definition of "Caribbean." Dclemens1971 (talk) 13:24, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Well said, Dclemens1971. I think that attempts to find more sources on "Caribbean Basin", although certainly done in good faith, have so far amounted to little more than WP:REFBOMB of the "lacking significant coverage" i.e. brief namechecking type (no. #1), "verify random facts" type (no. #2), and "name-drop" type (no. #4). There is no good case for a stand-alone article (nor for outright deletion, but I have given up that proposal already), but there is a good case for a disambiguation page now. NLeeuw (talk) 13:37, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No, these arguments are completely ridiculous - something is notable if it's been covered significantly by multiple sources, and many, many different sources use the definition to discuss an otherwise arbitrary geography. There's absolutely a good case for a stand-alone article - the article covers a term used to define a specific region, used in scholarly articles, that does not overlap any other term, and the books and articles that have been written on this area absolutely demonstrate that. That is what notability is - there's no WP:NOT. You just don't like it. SportingFlyer T·C 21:09, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, I always love a good article on a term or concept that hasn't been properly covered elsewhere. I write such articles all the time (or at least, I try to). I'm open to "Caribbean Basin" meriting a stand-alone article, but I'm afraid I do not see it happening based on the arguments and sources provided on the one hand, and our policies and guidelines on the other. NLeeuw (talk) 22:00, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There's no policy and guideline which excludes this, and it passes GNG as a regional geographic definition, including in sources not yet cited such as the New Third World, which contains a chapter on Caribbean Basin countries, again noting the inclusion of countries such as El Salvador. The arguments for deletion so far assume it's a generic term, which it is clearly not, and dismiss the sourcing. SportingFlyer T·C 22:52, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There's no policy and guideline which excludes this Well, I started this AfD by invoking WP:OR/WP:SYNTH, and WP:UNSOURCED, and later WP:REFBOMB. Subsequently, others have invoked WP:POVFORK, WP:CONTENTFORK and WP:NOPAGE. Our arguments are based on solid policies and guidelines.

(For the sake of completeness, you and Tamsier are the only ones arguing for a keep, invoking WP:BEFORE, WP:GNG, WP:WEIGHT and WP:NOT. Of course, the quantity of policies and guidelines invoked does not necessarily say anything about their quality and relevance for this AfD.) NLeeuw (talk) 08:14, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 05:22, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Independent Investment Advisors[edit]

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

Does not meet WP:GNG or WP:NORG. All sources provided in article are either linked to the subject (1, 5-9) or passing mentions (2-4).

User is likely COI, created a similar article in draftspace at Draft:Independent Investment Advisors which was rejected three times before they ultimately created a mainspace article directly by moving from userspace. Triptothecottage (talk) 06:35, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Finance, Organizations, and Oregon. Triptothecottage (talk) 06:36, 26 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!} 05:06, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Credibly (company)[edit]

AfDs for this article:

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

I guess this has been recreated—wasn't quite sure what had happened here initially, but as I was planning on commenting on the previous AFD I guess I may as well nom it. I couldn't find anything useful in my own search. Editing history of the creator also seems a bit odd but I'm not too familiar with that kind of thing. Alpha3031 (t • c) 16:24, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Finance, Companies, and Michigan. Alpha3031 (t • c) 16:24, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per my rationale at the previous AFD. The only indepth sourcing is not from reliable sources. ~ A412 ^talk! 20:02, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Ineligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 05:57, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Created the article as good faith. I believe the subject passes GNG on the basis of independent references. JSS24 (talk) 17:37, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Good faith is irrelevant. To a first approximation all articles, no matter how lacking in notability they may be, are created in good faith. Athel cb (talk) 09:03, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Probably not all articles, heh. It's possible the range p-block on the IP is just collateral though. I mean, I wouldn't bet money on it but it's possible. Alpha3031 (t • c) 17:16, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:06, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Evidences are available to prove subject's Notability Guidelines. And passes GNG. 2409:40D0:10CE:A5F:1C4F:A30E:B72D:E5DA (talk) 05:33, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"This user is currently blocked." What more is there to say? Delete. Athel cb (talk) 09:06, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete This is a company therefore references need to meet GNG/WP:NCORP criteria for establishing notability. Nothing I can find meets the criteria, mostly just PR and company announcements and profiles, all generated either by the company or regurgitating company provided/generated information, nothing that meets WP:CORPDEPTH/WP:ORGIND. HighKing⁺⁺ 09:47, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delta Air Lines Flight 520[edit]

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

The definition of WP:NOTNEWS. Losing an inflatable slide mid-flight isn't something that's gonna get sustained coverage, and I know (not "I don't think", I know) it's gonna fail the ten-year test. LilianaUwU ^{(talk / contributions)} 04:56, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

why not request speed delete if you mr. einstein think you know (not "i don't think", i know) that this will 100% fail that nonsense test? like those random plane crash articles from the 90's that would definitely fail that 10 year test?? GeekyAviation (talk) 05:08, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Per WP:NOTNEWS and WP:LASTING. The aircraft involved is 33 years old, this isn’t a brand new aircraft that was recently delivered. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 05:11, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - No fatalities or serious injuries, only minor damage to the airframe, and unlikely to result in changes to procedures, regulations or processes affecting airports, airlines or the aircraft industry. I agree that this is unlikely to pass WP:10YT. Maybe this incident will maintain some traction with sensationalist sources due to a Boeing aircraft being involved, but I fully expect all reliable sources to stop covering this story long before it would be considered lasting coverage. - ZLEA _T\^C 05:38, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - agree with everything above. If this does attract continued coverage (as unlikely as that seems) then it can be resurrected.--Gronk Oz (talk) 09:47, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Incident seems unnotable. No fatalities, no injuries, just like any other minor incident. Also WP:NOTNEWS CreatorOfMinecraftHerobrine (talk) 13:09, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Aviation and New York.
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 15:51, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete run-of-the-mill incident, per WP:NOTNEWS. Rosbif73 (talk) 16:54, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kelly Metzger[edit]

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

This is a non notable voice actor. The article doesn't even meet WP:THREE. The only source I see is for a convention that sources one of her works.

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 26. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 04:23, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Women, Theatre, Comics and animation, and Canada. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:06, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following more topics: Anime and manga, and Video games. MKsLifeInANutshell (talk) 05:36, 26 April 2024 (UTC) [reply]
Delete: Could find no sources to establish notability. Esw01407 (talk) 16:35, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. As always, the notability test for actors and actresses is not automatically passed just by listing roles, and requires the provision of WP:GNG-worthy reliable source coverage about her and her roles, but none is present here and I've had about as much luck as the above commenters at finding anything better. Bearcat (talk) 17:59, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - fails per WP:NACTOR, WP:GNG, and WP:THREE. Videogameplayer99 (talk) 22:48, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The subject specific guideline for voice actors has been met. WP:NACTOR states: The person has had significant roles in multiple notable films, television shows, stage performances, or other productions. https://www.imdb.com/name/nm3045630/ She played one of the three Power Puff girls in all 52 episodes of Powerpuff Girls Z. She played Nya in Ninjago: Masters of Spinjitzu for 100 episodes. Wikipedia:Notability clearly states "It meets either the general notability guideline (GNG) below, or the criteria outlined in a subject-specific notability guideline (SNG)". You don't have to do both. Also those linking to WP:THREE, kindly ready the personal essay you are linking to, it states don't list more than three sources in an AFD or no one will bother looking them over. Dream Focus 12:14, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Subject played a significant role in all episodes of one notable work (PPGZ), voiced a primary character in the English version of all episodes of Tara Duncan (TV series), and played one character over 200 times in various iterations of Ninjago. By my reading, this is a clear pass of NACTOR, even for a voice or translation actor. User:Dream Focus and I often disagree, but we agree here WP:THREE is an essay with no relevance to this discussion, and the subject meets the SNG with lots of significant (even repeating) roles in their field. It's a BLP, so I'd like reliable sources about the person, but WP:ENT is met, IMHO. BusterD (talk) 22:54, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting as there is disagreement over WP:NACTOR is met.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:52, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Aquarius Musikindo[edit]

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

Nothing notable, nor relevant per GNG. No SIGCOV. The author is blocked for evading the block Gavrover (talk) 20:44, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Music, Companies, and Indonesia. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:15, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment if we can verify the article's claim that it is the second largest record label in Indonesia, it's definitely worthy of inclusion. Chubbles (talk) 14:26, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep It's definitely the second-biggest.[44][45][46][47] WC gudang inspirasi (talk) 04:09, 23 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) 03:07, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. One source on one page of a book is the definition of failing WP:SIGCOV. Bearian (talk) 01:09, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:44, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Doyle Owl[edit]

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

No indication of notability outside of the college. I am unable to find significant discussion of this mascot in independent sources. ... discospinster _talk 03:02, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Animal, Education, and Oregon. ... discospinster _talk 03:02, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:12, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect or merge to Reed College. Sources are not independent. Neocorelight (Talk) 06:48, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per WP:HEY, good sources improvements have been added and made since the nomination. Randy Kryn (talk) 13:53, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per WP:HEY. Bearian (talk) 01:11, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:43, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Richard L. Albert[edit]

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

Lacks significant coverage, though his company Design Projects is an extremely generic name. No possible redirect as his company does not have an article. He seems to have worked mostly on B movies. —Kaliforniyka^Hi! 01:55, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. —Kaliforniyka^Hi! 01:55, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Advertising, and United States of America. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:09, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Design Projects Incorporated was formed on February 10, 1978 in California, (see https://bizfileonline.sos.ca.gov/search/business) and was closed on June 1, 1994.

Design Projects first client was Universal Pictures, and also did advertising, design and packaging for 20th Century Fox, Warner Home Video, Columbia Pictures, as well as international distributors, starting with Best International Films and Producers Sales Organizations, and including Goldcrest and ad campaigns for Sanrio Films while they had a Los Angeles branch office.

It also created ad campaigns for many independent film distributors, such as Group One, New World, Film Ventures International. We also

Prior to 1978, I worked as a freelance designer for Universal Pictures, Filmways, as well as Universal Music.

Richard Albert RLA2024 (talk) 17:50, 26 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!} 04:42, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mun Kyong-nam[edit]

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

Article fails WP:GNG. Simione001 (talk) 04:09, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of North Korea-related deletion discussions. Simione001 (talk) 04:09, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Simione001 (talk) 04:09, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. Simione001 (talk) 04:09, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Li Chan-myung[edit]

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

Article fails WP:GNG. Redirect 1966 North Korean World Cup squad. Simione001 (talk) 04:07, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of North Korea-related deletion discussions. Simione001 (talk) 04:07, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Simione001 (talk) 04:07, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. Simione001 (talk) 04:07, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The starting goalkeeper of the historic 1966 North Korean World Cup team. Source three states that his life story is chronicled in-depth in the book 동방의　첫　축구강국; he is also known to have been featured in the documentary The Game of Their Lives ([48]), which is also highly likely significant coverage. There's also a significant source I located here from NK Chosun, which notes among other things that he later was the head coach of the national team that competed at the 1976 Summer Olympics. He also frequently seems to be mentioned in articles regarding the team and NK football, e.g. [49] and [50]. We also need to take into consideration how outrageously difficult it is to find coverage on historic North Koreans. We have a decent bit of coverage, know more exists, and know that through his "spectacular saves" (per mentioned Telegraph source) the North Korea team was able to produce one of the greatest upsets in World Cup history. This should be kept. BeanieFan11 (talk) 16:32, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep – Per sources presented by @BeanieFan11. Svartner (talk) 16:42, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep -- Thanks to User:BeanieFan11 for actually conducting a WP:BEFORE search. Subject clearly meets GNG and SPORTCRIT. JTtheOG (talk) 17:13, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kang Jin-hyok[edit]

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

Article fails WP:GNG. Simione001 (talk) 04:04, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of North Korea-related deletion discussions. Simione001 (talk) 04:04, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Simione001 (talk) 04:04, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. Simione001 (talk) 04:04, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jang Ok-chol[edit]

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

Article fails WP:GNG. Simione001 (talk) 04:01, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of North Korea-related deletion discussions. Simione001 (talk) 04:01, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Simione001 (talk) 04:01, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. Simione001 (talk) 04:01, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Etchegaray (pelotari)[edit]

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

Fails WP:GNG and WP:SPORTSCRIT #5. It is unlikely sources can be found, as we know virtually nothing about him; not his first name, not his date and place of birth, not his date and place of death. BilledMammal (talk) 03:43, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. BilledMammal (talk) 03:43, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I thought that there might be more on the French page, but there isn't. There is no Basque page (not that I can read Basque, but Google Translate can). Athel cb (talk) 09:51, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Olympics and France. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 15:52, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nano Nuclear Energy[edit]

AfDs for this article:

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

Fails WP:NCORP. Almost all sources are routine coverage and/or "contributor" or non-independent. Some articles about the broader technology mention the company in passing, but no real coverage of the company itself. Bestagon ⬡ 02:29, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and Science. Bestagon ⬡ 02:29, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as TOOSOON to tell if this company will someday become notable. Chiswick Chap (talk) 07:57, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 15:53, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nodar Kancheli[edit]

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

No independent notability apart from two collapsed buildings. Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 01:48, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Artists, Architecture, and Russia. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:10, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: meets WP:CREATIVE #3. In addition to the two buildings mentioned in the article, he contributed to the Kolomna Speed Skating Center, per this source: [51], as well as other significant projects. E.g. he designed the dome of the Cathedral of Christ the Saviour: [52]. Sufficient for a referenced stub. -- K.e.coffman (talk) 10:53, 26 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!} 02:27, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Artur Khachatryan[edit]

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

Boxer whose only reference is a database entry. There is a draft for a diplomat, Draft: Artur Khachatryan, which will otherwise require disambiguation. The need for disambiguation is not a reason to delete, but the lack of sports notability is Robert McClenon (talk) 22:16, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Boxing, and Armenia. Robert McClenon (talk) 22:16, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There's more content at the Russian and Polish wikis that should be checked. BeanieFan11 (talk) 22:20, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed with above comment. I'd lean to a procedural keep if those sources help demonstrate WP:N. Archives908 (talk) 22:34, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 00:13, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Fails to meet WP:NBOX, WP:ANYBIO, or WP:GNG. The AIBA database entry shows he had 4 wins and 5 losses in his short career. His bronze medal at the European championships qualified him for the 2011 world championships where he lost his first fight (in the round of 64). I saw no significant independent coverage of him and no indication of meeting any WP notability criteria. Papaursa (talk) 14:41, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: We need to have an editor review those sources at other Wikipedias and provide some concrete information or this discussion will likely close as Delete.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:27, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: The sources offered by the Russian and Polish articles are just database win/loss listings. StreetcarEnjoyer (talk) 03:21, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sohaib Al-Malkawi[edit]

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

Does not meet WP:NJOURNALIST. Couldn't find any articles or independent information about him online. The article is mostly puffery. Probably a COI - draftifying might be an alternative, though I can't find any coverage about him at all. Clear friend a ^💬 02:14, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Journalism, and Jordan. Shellwood (talk) 10:36, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 15:53, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ganbare Goemon Kirakira Dōchū: Boku ga Dancer ni Natta Wake[edit]

AfDs for this article:

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

Does not meet WP:NGAME. Not enough coverage in reliable secondary sources. Does not need its own article. Clear friend a ^💬 02:01, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Meets WP:GNG, articles by reliable sources Destructoid (by staff editor see: [53]), Hardcore Gaming 101, plus Japanese language version of the article lists 2 print reviews: [54] - Mika1h (talk) 10:22, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There's also this Italian magazine that seems to have reviewed the game: [55] - Mika1h (talk) 10:22, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

And here's a short review in a Spanish magazine: [56] - Mika1h (talk) 10:32, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep as above, there are several secondary sources that refer to the game.

Oz346 (talk) 10:36, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 10:35, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Very clear evidence that the article passes WP:GNG. I would suggest the nominator withdraw. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 11:52, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Software industry in Madurai[edit]

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

I don't see a reason why this article should exist -- none of the sources (that aren't broken) talk about the software industry in Madurai as a broader trend. This failed a PROD for being potentially notable, but absent any evidence to support that potential, I think this article should be deleted. HyperAccelerated (talk) 01:26, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Business and India. Shellwood (talk) 10:36, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 15:54, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hum Awards pre-show[edit]

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

Fails WP:GNG. One of many pages related to Hum Awards likely created to promote Hum TV. This one can easily be included on the main Hum Awards page assuming there are references that can be found to support it. CNMall41 (talk) 01:08, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, Awards, and Pakistan. CNMall41 (talk) 01:08, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Agree- fails WP:GNG. The pre-show details of the Hum Awards can be covered into the relevant pages. --—Saqib (talk | contribs) 15:38, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files[edit]

Categories[edit]

NEW NOMINATIONS[edit]

Category:Swedish emigrants to Japan[edit]

Propose merging Category:Swedish emigrants to Japan to Category:Swedish emigrants and Category:Immigrants to Japan
Propose merging Category:Australian emigrants to the Netherlands to Category:Australian emigrants and Category:Immigrants to the Netherlands

Nominator's rationale: Dual speedy upmerge for now. These categories were deleted due to only having one person it in (and is still the case), which wasn't helpful for navigation. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2023_May_11#More_emigrants Mason (talk) 11:42, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 16:38, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per nom, as contains only one entry. GCarty (talk) 07:29, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Part of a large and established category tree. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:46, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It is not a tree in which every possible combination has its own category. For example there are no less than 33 articles directly in Category:Swedish emigrants and only 30 subcategories. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:37, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Queen of ♡ | speak 18:05, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk · he/him) 16:54, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Battles involving Bengal[edit]

Propose merging Category:Battles involving Bengal to Category:Battles involving the Indian kingdoms and Category:History of Bengal

Nominator's rationale: merge, battles are diffused by (former) countries and Bengal was not a country. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:52, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rename to Category:Battles involving Bangladesh, The battles in the category are involved Bengal region and Bangladesh is created from the a big part of the region. It would be better to rename the category and make specify it for country-wise battle category. Mehedi Abedin 09:07, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- No, that would be highly anachronistic, and some of these battles were in West Bengal. – Fayenatic London 09:56, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Rename to Category:Military history of Bengal. IMHO this is a useful division of Category:History of Bengal. – Fayenatic London 09:56, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ok that is a reasonable alternative, but then still the content should be added to Category:Battles involving the Indian kingdoms too. Marcocapelle (talk) 12:29, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- @Marcocapelle: it should only be a selective merge to that parent, because many of the articles are already in other subcats of that one, and I'm not sure whether the others belong there. I suggest you watch the category and merge any valid missing items yourself if the rename goes through. – Fayenatic London 15:15, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough. Marcocapelle (talk) 15:18, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Input in general would be great, but in particular input on FL's proposal would be appreciated :)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk · he/him) 15:17, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fooian American billionaires[edit]

Propose merging Category:American Italian billionaires (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) to Category:American billionaires
Propose merging Category:Italian American billionaires (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) to Category:American billionaires
Propose merging Category:Arab American billionaires (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) to Category:American billionaires
Propose merging Category:American Hispanic billionaires (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) to Category:American billionaires

Nominator's rationale: Follow-up discussion to Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 April 24#Category:Asian American billionaires. WP:OCEGRS; upmerge all to Category:American billionaires. House Blaster (talk · he/him) 15:15, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Ethnic groups in Europe by language family[edit]

Propose upmerging Category:Ethnic groups in Europe by language family to Category:Ethnic groups by language family
Propose upmerging Category:Turkic peoples of Europe to Category:Turkic peoples

Nominator's rationale: Geography is WP:NONDEFINING for language families. Each of these "ethnic groups" (if we can even call them that) has "members" living on every single continent on Earth, and there is no reason to categorise them by continent. NLeeuw (talk) 14:30, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:United States National Recording Registry albums[edit]

Propose deleting Category:United States National Recording Registry albums (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: The same rationale as last time: Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2022 April 28#Category:United States National Recording Registry albums. I still see no reason for this category to be active and it is still redudant to Category:United States National Recording Registry recordings. Even if all the album articles were listed under the United States National Recording Registry albums category, that would just leave songs and other miscellaneous records under the United States National Recording Registry recordings category. It is really a crime to have all the inducted recordings under one category? QuasyBoy (talk) 18:18, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Good point Espngeek (talk) 18:58, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If not kept, at least merge to Category:United States National Recording Registry recordings rather than delete. Nominator does not make clear what is wrong with Category:United States National Recording Registry albums though. It is not redundant per se, it is simply more specific. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:19, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk · he/him) 13:24, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Sikh terrorism by country[edit]

Propose merging Category:Sikh terrorism by country to Category:Sikh terrorism

Nominator's rationale: merge, redundant category layer with only three (and probably soon only two) subcategories. Marcocapelle (talk) 11:20, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Battles by location[edit]

Propose deleting Category:Battles by location (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Battles of the Middle Ages by location (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose purging Category:Battles by country (this category is by country involved, not by "country in which the battle took place"; we may consider renaming it to Category:Battles by country involved as a separate nomination to avoid future confusion)
Propose purging Category:Naval battles by sea or ocean (this category is in the Category:Battles by type tree, which is about how a battle is fought in relation to its battlespace; it is not meant to identify the exact location where every single naval battle in history took place, but rather naval battles at sea/ocean as opposed to riverine warfare and battles on inland lakes)

Nominator's rationale: Recently created (12 March 2024) trivial intersection between military history and modern geography. We categorise Category:Battles by "country" (i.e. "battles involving country X"), "period", "type" (naval, aerial etc.), and "war", but not location or geography. We should follow precedent and delete any battles category based on location/geography as a WP:NONDEFINING WP:TRIVIAL WP:CROSSCAT.

Follow-up to:

Procedural note: I think it is important to confirm the precedents first, namely that battles should not be categorised by location/geography. But if it is desired that all subcategories be included in this nomination rather than nominated in a follow-up, I will tag them as well. But I expect that they will need a customised case-by-case approach with mergers and renamings, as happened with the Flanders/Wallonia, Drenthe, and Netherlands by province precedents. It would be wise to do so according to the Manescheut principle: Merging to the History of (modern territory) category (Ane), or Merging to the historically applicable territory (Scheut). E.g. Category:Battles in the Azores could be upmerged to Category:History of the Azores (Ane), merged to Category:History of the Portuguese Empire (Scheut), or perhaps renamed to Category:Military history of the Azores; it doesn't necessarily need to be deleted, but the current situation is untenable.

Therefore, to prevent a WP:TRAINWRECK, I'm only nominating the recently created two new categories for deletion, and to purge the subcategories that are in the battle by country (involved) and battle by type (battlespace) trees. NLeeuw (talk) 09:10, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The nomination deserves sympathy, but the proposal is deletion of the parent categories while the subcategories are the bigger issue. By deleting the parents we will merely loose sight of the subcategories. Marcocapelle (talk) 11:00, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Marcocapelle Granted. Then maybe I should start by the roots of the tree first? Alternately, I could simply copypaste the contents of the category here for reference while we clean the tree up, so that we don't lose sight of it.

Incidentally, it does have a main article: List of battles by geographic location. A December 2022 AfD, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of battles by geographic location, decided to keep but split the article by country. Some efforts have been made to do that, but it is far from completed. The argument that the location of a battle may be WP:NONDEFINING or WP:TRIVIAL, or in the words of the nom Second, it is organized by current country, even if the battle took place before the country existed and who in the world is going to look for the Battle of Megiddo (15th century BC) in the Israel section?, did not receive broad support in favour of deletion by the other participants, who seemed only concerned with navigability. Moreover, nobody seemed concerned that the entire list is WP:UNSOURCED.

This does worry me a little. If the mainspace does not object to putting battles in lists by geographic location, does the category space have a good reason to object to it and delete such categories anyway? NLeeuw (talk) 14:02, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
PS: List of battles in Belgium was even deleted on 18 March 2024, shortly after it was split off from the List of battles by geographic location, because it had no sources. The same could happen to all lists of battles by country that have been split off or will be split off in the future. I'm not sure how we should proceed. NLeeuw (talk) 14:14, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Pocatello Army Air Base Bombardiers football seasons[edit]

Propose merging Category:Pocatello Army Air Base Bombardiers football seasons to Category:Pocatello Army Air Base Bombardiers football

Nominator's rationale: Only one page in category. Let'srun (talk) 16:36, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep; standard cat scheme. Jweiss11 (talk) 16:37, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:20, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per nom. Saying something is standard, so we should keep it, is not a compelling reason. Having only one category is not helpful for navigation. Mason (talk) 23:48, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes it is. Parallelism matters and should be considered a central pillar of Wikipedia. If this cat merged as nominated, then 1943 Pocatello Army Air Base Bombardiers football team is lost from the tree at Category:College football seasons by team. User:Let'srun's notations here are becoming tiresome and obstructive. Jweiss11 (talk) 03:57, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with the problem, it should also be merged to Category:College football seasons. Marcocapelle (talk) 04:50, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Marcocapelle, did you mean Category:College football seasons by team? Jweiss11 (talk) 20:52, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No, I mean a new category, of which Category:College football seasons by team should be a subcategory, and to which articles of current one-article subcategories would be moved. Marcocapelle (talk) 02:25, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note that there's already Category:College football seasons in the United States, which is a parent of Category:College football seasons by team. Jweiss11 (talk) 03:13, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I overlooked that. It is quite confusing that the parent category has "in the United States" in the name while Category:College football seasons by team has not. Then Category:College football seasons in the United States should be the new merge target, at least in theory. But the article is already in a year subcategory of it, so then my comment becomes about a second merge target entirely moot. Marcocapelle (talk) 11:08, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 08:21, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Film controversies in India[edit]

Propose purging Category:Film controversies in India (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose purging Category:Hinduism-related controversies in film (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: See Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 May 3#Subcategories of Category:Film controversies by country: this one also has a subcategory which needs purging, so I have elected to nominate it separately to avoid a WP:TRAINWRECK. Purge of all articles about films, leaving only the articles about controversies themselves. House Blaster (talk · he/him) 02:18, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Purge all articles about a particular film, but keep subcategories and articles about controversies, per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 02:28, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Purge per nom. NLeeuw (talk) 08:03, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Film controversies in South Africa[edit]

Propose deleting Category:Film controversies in South Africa (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Follow-up to Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 May 3#Subcategories of Category:Film controversies by country: I don't see a future for this category in its current state. Most of the articles in this category are controversial films, not articles about film controversies. What stopped me from including it in the mass nomination is Films and Publications Act, 1996, which seems does not seem to belong here, either. Even if we grant that it does belong here, after purging the articles about films this would be a single-member category. Delete this category; discussion of the categorization of Films and Publications Act, 1996 can take place at Talk:Films and Publications Act, 1996 House Blaster (talk · he/him) 02:14, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. With regard to Films and Publications Act, 1996, it is unclear to me why it is in this category in the first place. Marcocapelle (talk) 02:31, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Film controversies in Malaysia[edit]

Propose deleting Category:Film controversies in Malaysia (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Follow-up to Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 May 3#Subcategories of Category:Film controversies by country: I don't see a future for this category in its current state. Most of the articles in this category are controversial films, not articles about film controversies. What stopped me from including it in the mass nomination is 1Malaysia Development Berhad scandal, which seems does not seem to belong here, either. Even if we grant that it does belong here, after purging the articles about films this would be a single-member category. Delete this category; discussion of the categorization of 1Malaysia Development Berhad scandal can take place at Talk:1Malaysia Development Berhad scandal. House Blaster (talk · he/him) 02:12, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. With regard to 1Malaysia Development Berhad scandal, it is unclear to me why it is in this category in the first place. Marcocapelle (talk) 02:39, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Subcategories of Category:Film controversies by country[edit]

DELETING:
Propose deleting Category:Film controversies in Argentina (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Film controversies in Australia (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Film controversies in Austria (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Film controversies in Bangladesh (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Film controversies in Belarus (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Film controversies in Belgium (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Film controversies in Brazil (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Film controversies in China (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Film controversies in the Czech Republic (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Film controversies in Finland (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Film controversies in Germany (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Film controversies in Ghana (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Film controversies in Hong Kong (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Film controversies in Hungary (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Film controversies in Iceland (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Film controversies in Indonesia (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Film controversies in Iran (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Film controversies in Ireland (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Film controversies in Israel (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Film controversies in Italy (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Film controversies in Japan (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Film controversies in Kazakhstan (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Film controversies in Kenya (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Film controversies in Kyrgyzstan (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Film controversies in Lebanon (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Film controversies in Mexico (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Film controversies in Myanmar (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Film controversies in the Netherlands (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Film controversies in New Zealand (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Film controversies in Nigeria (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Film controversies in North Korea (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Film controversies in Norway (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Film controversies in Pakistan (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Film controversies in the Philippines (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Film controversies in Poland (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Film controversies in Portugal (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Film controversies in Romania (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Film controversies in Russia (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Film controversies in Samoa (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Film controversies in Singapore (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Film controversies in South Korea (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Film controversies in Spain (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Film controversies in Sweden (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Film controversies in Taiwan (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Film controversies in Thailand (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Film controversies in Tibet (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Film controversies in Tunisia (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Film controversies in Turkey (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Film controversies in Ukraine (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Film controversies in the United Arab Emirates (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Film controversies in Venezuela (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Film controversies in Vietnam (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Film controversies in Yugoslavia (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
PURGING:
Propose purging Category:Film controversies in Canada (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose purging Category:Film controversies in France (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose purging Category:Film controversies in the United States (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose purging Category:Film controversies in the United Kingdom (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Follow-up to Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 April 23#Category:Film controversies in Spain, in which it was decided to nominate the entire tree of Category:Film controversies by country. I would in theory say we should purge the categories of articles about films themselves – leaving only articles about controversies themselves. However, doing that would leave most of these categories empty. Therefore, I have nominated those categories for deletion, with no prejudice against recreating any of these categories if they can be appropriately populated. The ones which do contain articles about film controversies themselves (e.g. Category:Film controversies in Canada contains Natural Born Killers copycat crimes) I have nominated for purging. If, after purging, any category is too small to be useful we can have a discussion about upmerging that category.

I have not nominated Category:Film controversies by country for anything in particular, but I will tag it so it can be discussed here. I personally would advocate for that it be kept, even though most of its contents will no longer exist.

There are also three categories (Category:Film controversies in South Africa, Category:Film controversies in India, and Category:Film controversies in Malaysia) which have considerations specific to that category; I will start separate discussions on those to avoid a WP:TRAINWRECK. Also pinging participants in Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 April 23#Category:Film controversies in Spain: Marcocapelle, Bearcat, Qwerfjkl, and Nederlandse Leeuw. House Blaster (talk · he/him) 02:01, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support per nom and my own rationale in the previous discussion. To summarise: It should not be sufficient to only have a "controversy/controversies" section in an article about the film itself; although it may help establish notability, it is usually WP:NONDEFINING. Nor is it appropriate to label an entire film as "controversial" per WP:SUBJECTIVECAT, and Category:Controversial films has been repeatedly deleted for that reason. And yet, almost the entire tree of Category:Film controversies by country is currently populated with main articles about the films themselves, rather than stand-alone spin-off articles about the controversies they caused. I think that is very inappropriate categorisation practice. I happened to come across it first with the Spain subcategory, but as this is not a Spain-only issue, at the request of fellow editors, I have withdrawn the nomination in favour of a broad discussion about the entire tree. I thank HouseBlaster for preparing this follow-up. NLeeuw (talk) 02:23, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support i.e. purge all articles about a particular film, but keep subcategories and articles about controversies, per nom. And delete the category if it becomes empty after the purge. Marcocapelle (talk) 02:42, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support purging and deleting subsequently empty categories. The same purging appears needed at the parent Category:Film controversies with the rationale Nederlandse Leeuw provides. CMD (talk) 07:14, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Spam filtering[edit]

Propose merging Category:Spam filtering to Category:Anti-spam

Nominator's rationale: These seem to be the same topic - many pages are in both. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 00:51, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per nom. There could be a set category for spam filters but that can be created after this merge. Marcocapelle (talk) 02:44, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirects[edit]

That girl is so dangerous[edit]

That girl is so dangerous → Dangerous (Michael Jackson song) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Redirect from an internal song lyric to a song title, which is (a) not even accurate, and (b) ambiguous even if it were. MJ's song features the line ''The girl is so dangerous", but never once says "That girl is so dangerous" according to lyrics databases, while that girl being dangerous is Kardinal Offishall's thing in his otherwise unrelated "Dangerous". Song-lyric to song-title redirects are not generally useful in most instances -- but even when they are warranted, they need to actually be accurate and exclusive to that song, where this is neither of those things. Bearcat (talk) 14:40, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - besides being inaccurate, song lyrics are also normally copyrighted, which means we should have a very good reason to have them as redirects. This one is not recognizable enough to outweigh the copyright concern and should be deleted. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 14:44, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Neutral: go ahead and delete it if you please. thetechie@enwiki: ~/talk/ $ 16:52, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per Ivanvector's comment. Waylon (was) (here) 16:59, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lady Godiva syndrome[edit]

Lady Godiva syndrome → Exhibitionism (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Lady Godiva is never mentioned or referred to at the target article. Redirect a hyper-specific reference to an apparent synonym where it never is talked about is not very helpful. People looking for exhibitionism would have gotten to that point through just searching Exhibitionism. The current title might just be more helpful pointed at Lady Godiva, if anything, as the presence of a name within the title makes it seem like the name is the most defining aspect. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 04:59, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on the page history?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 06:35, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - The page history just says it's an eponymous synonym for Exhibitionism, which is presumably why it was replaced with a redirect instead. A google search pops up a PubMed article entitled "Lady Godiva syndrome" and while I can't see what the paper says, the "Similar articles" list contains multiple entries all about female exhibitionism, so I find it quite plausible that this synonym is in fact established as a thing in this reliable source. Some non-reliable sources also appear on google stating that it is a synonym, along with "apodysophilia". As an attested synonym, albeit a rare one, I think the redirect is acceptable for wikipedia. The lack of mention at the target shouldn't be a problem, as this is a case of being a direct synonym, and one that is rare enough that it isn't notable. It seems to be reliably sourced, just not interesting enough for article inclusion. Fieari (talk) 06:47, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Keep or retarget? Also notified of this discussion at the proposed target talk.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 14:32, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep but add a sentence explaining it. here's a solid ref in German, citing the same Ohio article. or this in English. Unfair to Lady G of course, who was no exhibitionist. Redirecting to her will just confuse readers. Johnbod (talk) 16:44, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Super Saiyan 6[edit]

Super Saiyan 6 → Dragon Ball (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

This transformation doesn't even exist. No one is going to use it to find "Dragon Ball". Mazewaxie (talk • contribs) 07:27, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete seems to be different fanon creations unrelated to official materials according to my GSearch. My kid self would enjoy SS6 pictures though. --Lenticel ^(talk) 01:17, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on the page history?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 13:42, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

SNOW delete This is just fan made nonsense. Waylon (was) (here) 16:59, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Knightfall (comics)[edit]

Knightfall (comics) → List of DC Comics characters: K (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Knightfall (character) → List of DC Comics characters: K (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Delete. No mention of "Knightfall" in the target article. Mika1h (talk) 11:52, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget "(comics)" to Batman: Knightfall, a DC Comics comic book storyline; when Bruce Wayne Batman broke his back and was replaced by Azrael and then Nightwing as Batman -- 65.92.247.66 (talk) 05:44, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: For an opinion on Knightfall (character). Also notified of this discussion at the current and proposed target talk pages.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 13:01, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rizalito David[edit]

Rizalito David → David v. Poe (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Redirect can be expanded into an article, Target page does not have the biography of Rizalito David. Also found that redirect creator is a sockpuppet of user 23prootie.TheNuggeteer (talk) 12:45, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - at the moment, the information we have on this person is at the current target. If someone wants to write a separate bio the redirect is not stopping them, or they could write it as a draft. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 14:20, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hubert’s Lemonade[edit]

Hubert’s Lemonade → The Coca-Cola Company (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Neither "Hubert" nor, surprisingly, "Lemonade" comes up at the target article. Seems to be a brand of lemonade owned by Coca-Cola, but targeting this specific brand to the overarching company is not useful for people looking for Hubert's Lemonade. If people wanted to read about the Coca Cola company instead, they'd just search for the Coca Cola company directly. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 03:50, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to List of Coca-Cola brands#H. I've added an entry with a couple of citations. --BDD (talk) 15:35, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The title with a curly quote that this has is useless. Feel free to create the correct Hubert's Lemonade. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 02:11, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Toadette^Edit! 18:08, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete or move without creating additional redirect per PPPery Okmrman (talk) 21:03, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget per BDD and create the additional redirect. There is nothing "incorrect" about curly quotes. 1234qwer 1234qwer 4 21:53, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to Blue Sky Beverage Company. Mentioned there. Steel1943 (talk) 18:11, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: A new target has been proposed. Also notified of this discussion at the proposed target talk pages.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 12:32, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to List of Coca-Cola brands#H per BDD's comment. Waylon (was) (here) 16:53, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Головна сторінка[edit]

Головна сторінка → Main Page (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Previous RfDs for this redirect and similar redirects:

Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2015 August 6 § Redirects to Main Page – Delete

I originally WP:G4'd this as this has been previously discussed and deleted at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2015 August 6#Redirects to Main Page, however the creator contested this stating This redirect created for users who trying switch language from Ukrainian to English. Ther always just remove //uk. and input //en. This redirect allow to users going to Main Page dirrectly from Main page of Ukrainian Wiki and We, in the Ukrainian-language Wikipedia, have a similar redirection, and if you erase en and write uk, the user will be redirected to the main page accordingly. Fork99 (talk) 11:54, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment – Ukrainian isn't special in this respect. A similar argument could be made for the redirects from other languages which were deleted in the RfD cited above. (The Vietnamese one reappeared recently, and was deleted again and salted.) Even the main page isn't qualitatively special; one could make a similar argument about a hypothetical redirect from Гірнича промисловість Гаяни to Mining in Guyana, though obviously it would affect a much smaller number of readers (probably zero). Certes (talk) 12:39, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment by nominator: I vaguely remember reading somewhere that what other Wikipedias decide to do has no bearing on what the English Wikipedia does, can anyone confirm this for the second argument made by the creator? If so, I would support a G4 speedy deletion per Certes. Fork99 (talk) 12:50, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment – Friends I also want to appeal, apart from all the rules and instructions, to one of the rules of Wikipedia, which is based on the words of the founder.

"If a rule prevents you from improving or maintaining Wikipedia, ignore it."

Currently, the redirect that I created is intended only so that users from Ukraine who enter from the main page and do not go to the link, but change it in the address bar, can conveniently get to the main page of Wikipedia itself, and not to some 404 page. VollyM (talk) 14:30, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Well no, without this redirect you would not end up at a 404 page, you'd end up at a page that looks like this. If you want to go to the Main Page from there, just click on the Wikipedia logo. -- Tavix ^(talk) 15:47, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That's a good point. To anyone who knows Wikipedia intimately enough to alter its URLs in a productive way, the globe logo is a universal and language-independent symbol for a link to the current wiki's main page. Certes (talk) 17:24, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per the previous discussion. As I explained above, it is simple to get to the English Wikipedia Main Page from the Ukrainian Wikipedia without this redirect. In fact, this would work from anywhere in the Ukrainian Wikipedia, not just from their Main Page. -- Tavix ^(talk) 15:47, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per G4. Waylon (was) (here) 16:55, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thonk[edit]

Thonk → Michael Manring (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Yet another confusing vocabulary word redirect. Apparently "Thonk" was the title of one album this guy made in 1994, but as many of y'all might know, it's also the name of a commonly used emoji (particularly on Discord). I think Thinking, wikt:thonk, or (if mentioned there) List of Generation Z slang would all be better targets than this, but I'm not quite sure - I'd be happy with Michael Manring being mentioned in a hatnote though. Duckmather (talk) 04:28, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Soft redirect to wikit Okmrman (talk) 21:17, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Several targets were proposed by the nom, and it's not entirely clear which one is best.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 06:00, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Soft redirect to wiktionary. mwwv (converse) 11:43, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguate. Between the album (which appears to be titled Thoṅk (with a dotted n)), the We (illbient group) song, and (possibly) Galileo Records, it looks like there's just enough to satisfy WP:DABMENTION. The wiktionary link can also be part of that page. - Eureka Lott 17:05, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Islamist insurgency in Somalia (2007–present)[edit]

Islamist insurgency in Somalia (2007–present) → War in Somalia (2006–2009) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Islamist insurgency in Somalia (2007-present) → 2007 timeline of the War in Somalia (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Not appropriate for a "2007-present" redirect to point to events from a decade ago. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 19:21, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on the page history of Islamist insurgency in Somalia (2007–present)?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 03:31, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think this should be kept as a minimum due to the page history. Another possibility is retargeting to Somali civil war (2009-present), which does cover recent events. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 14:29, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Probably delete per nom. Okmrman (talk) 04:29, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Keep or delete?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 05:58, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Axis victory in world war ii[edit]

Axis victory in world war ii → Hypothetical Axis victory in World War II (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Grossly miscapitalized redirects like this one invite visual edits like this one. Due to a longstanding UI misfeature in the visual editor, links to such bad redirects are made every day. They show up in the report of links to miscapitalized redirects, and I fix them. If we would just delete such redirects, including things like united states, there would be a lot fewer errors to fix. Dicklyon (talk) 02:53, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep or perhaps Keep both since you seem to be suggesting the deletion of united states as well. They are valid Template:R from miscapitalizations. Honestly I fail to see the problem to be solved here. The link in the diff was piped so it doesn't show up for readers so use there was not a problem that needed to be fixed. If there is some problem to be fixed that has not been well explained here then it should probably be done through some kind of centralized RFC to delete all Template:R from miscapitalizations rather than nominating one or two arbitrary examples for deletion. 2601:5CC:8300:A7F0:9D60:98F8:7049:A67E (talk) 04:23, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - these aren't errors, they're {{R from lowercase}} redirects and perfectly valid. If the visual editor is causing problems then the solution is to fix the visual editor, not to also break the redirects. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 14:24, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per above. Perfectly valid {{R from miscapitalization}}. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 15:56, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The problem with such grossly miscapitalized redirects is that they don't serve any purpose, since nobody would type that way, and if they did they'd be better served by seeing a redlink. The problem is compounded by the visual editor UI that offers up such links; I agree it would be better to see that fixed, but so far my attempts to get some attention on it have failed. The result of these things is that every day we multiple new entries in the report Wikipedia:Database_reports/Linked_miscapitalizations, and this report will only ever be useful if we can keep up with fixing things on it (at present I can't do the ones with many links, as I don't have JWB access, but I've been keeping up with the ones with fewer than a dozen links, which is a lot of work every day, partly due to the visual editor offering up such grossly miscapitalized redirects all the time). This one, unlike united states seemed to be so clearly useless that I thought I'd try this step as part of the fix for it. Dicklyon (talk) 17:05, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bonde (disambiguation)[edit]

Bonde (disambiguation) → Bonde (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

I listed this rdr for a G14 because the target, as I stated in my nomination, is now an article with a list of names bearing this title/name. This IPv6 address (2601:5cc:8300:a7f0:9d60:98f8:7049:a67e) reverted my edit as "explicitly" not so, but I want it deleted since it longer serves the purpose for which it was created in the first place. Intrisit (talk) 02:10, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment that is because WP:G14 does not apply when a page "performs a disambiguation-like function (such as set index articles or lists)". As such, "targeting an article with a list of names bearing this name" is never a reason to tag for G14.

With that explained, it is true WP:INTDABLINK is no longer a concern, and permanent hatnoting for other people with the name could be done through say Bonde (surname), though there is the additional complication of its use as one of the estates of the Swedish Riksdag which may justify maintenance retention. 2601:5CC:8300:A7F0:9D60:98F8:7049:A67E (talk) 04:03, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Current text of "Bonde" should be moved to House of Bonde or Bonde family or similar, and there should be a separate list as a way to reach Bill Bonde, Alexander Bonde, Arne Bonde, Line Bonde, James Bonde, William Bonde and a number of other people with that surname. (Disambiguate) --Joy (talk) 07:39, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
~~Keep~~ - anthroponymy pages disambiguate people with the same name. If someone were to look for the disambiguation page for articles titled "Bonde", the current target is it. If we moved Bonde to a different title with similar content, it would still serve this function and the redirect would still be valid. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 14:27, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I also support Joy's solution for those individuals who are surnamed "Bonde" but aren't members of the noble house. The current list is confusing. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 14:31, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
To that end I've created Bonde (surname). Retarget to the newly-created dab page, which links to the House article. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 14:40, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Ivanvector it'd be a two-entry disambiguation page, so I'd just squash the surname list into the base title, and keep the link to the medieval nobility on top. We do that elsewhere, and I don't recall seeing anyone having an issue with that. --Joy (talk) 14:53, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
BTW looking into the history, this actually started off ambiguous twenty years ago, but was reformatted. In the meantime, that other topic mention was deleted five years ago with Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Foundation universe planets. --Joy (talk) 14:58, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Templates and Modules[edit]

Template:Nord Anglia Education[edit]

Template:Nord Anglia Education (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Promotional template for a school group for whom half of these are going to end up redirects to Nord Anglia Eductation Allan Nonymous (talk) 13:03, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

KDE navigation templates[edit]

Template:Kdepim (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:Calligra Suite (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:KOffice (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

These navigation templates contain only a handful of links, some to either non-notable red-links or redirects back to the topic article. Any actually useful links could be put in Template:KDE instead (which needs its own cleaning up).

(created this nom for Template:Kdepim, but edited it for other redundant KDE-related templates)

--TappyTurtle [talk | contribs] 17:10, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The first two seem to have enough blue, non redirect, links to support a navigation template. Gonnym (talk) 19:18, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Kdepim and KOffice navboxes. They contain mostly redirects to the main article. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 15:49, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all per nom. I think it would be fair to merge the handful in to the one template. Probably the weakest delete is for the Calligra template. Izno (talk) 20:17, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting mainly because there is the question of whether these should be merged or just deleted outright.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 12:14, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Drake series[edit]

Template:Drake series (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:Drake (musician) already existed when this sidebar was made. This is like a very ~~ugly~~ orange hat on a hat. —Rutebega (talk) 03:31, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Miscellany[edit]

Deletion review[edit]

v t e Wikipedia community
For a listing of current collaborations, tasks, and news, see the Community portal. For a listing of ongoing discussions and current requests, see the Dashboard.
General community topics	Administration News The Signpost Goings-on In the media Meetups Mailing lists Wikipedians Statistics The Wikipedia Library Centralized discussion Village pump Idea lab Policy Proposals Technical Miscellaneous WMF Holidays Bots
Contents and grading	Requested articles Most-wanted articles Images needing articles Articles needing images Articles for creation WP:AFC/R WP:AFC/C Creation Help Vital articles Articles for improvement Peer review Good article nominations Featured article candidates Lists Pictures Topics Article translation Pages Main Page Errors
WikiProjects and collaborations	Directory Culture and the arts Geographical History and society Science, technology and engineering Wikipedia assistance and tasks Patrols Recent changes Counter-Vandalism Unit Version 1.0 Editorial Team Accessibility Organizations category
Awards and feedback	Reward board Contests A nice cup of tea and a sit down Charitableness WikiLove Compliment before criticism Kindness Campaign Thanks!
Maintenance tasks	Task Center Open tasks Backlog Category Admin category Edit requests Category Database reports Category tracker Dusty articles Special pages New pages Recent changes Controversial issues
Administrators and noticeboards	Administrators' noticeboard Incidents Edit warring Vandalism Admin dashboard Admin requests Closure Page protection User permissions Sockpuppets Open proxies Revision deletion Oversight Request Usernames Changing Title blacklist OTRS Bureaucrats' Requests for adminship and bureaucratship Arbitration Committee Requests Enforcement
Content dispute resolution	Requests for comment Third opinion Dispute resolution noticeboard Biographies of living persons Conflict of interest External links Fringe theories Neutral point of view No original research Reliable sources
Other noticeboards and assistance	Regional notice boards Requests for help Category Asking questions Teahouse Help desk Reference desk Adopt-a-user Copyright assistance Copyright investigations Text problems Media questions Resource requests Mergers History mergers Moves Page importation Spam Blacklist Whitelist Bots Education General sanctions Editor sanctions Long-term abuse
Deletion discussions	Guide Admin Today Articles Templates Files Categories Redirects Miscellany Speedy Proposed BLP Review Undeletion Arguments to avoid Arguments to make Article Rescue
Elections and votings	Requests for comment (meta) Wikimedia Foundation elections WP Democracy Voting is not evil Milestones
Directories, indexes, and summaries	Departments Edit summary legend Editor's index Essays FAQs Glossary Abbreviations Help Manual of Style Simplified Rules Five pillars Policies Guidelines Shortcuts Templates Citation templates Tips Today Tools Wiki markup
Media Category Templates