Wikipedia:WikiProject Biography/Deletion sorting

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

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

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

If possible, please use one of these instead:

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

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

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

Adding a new AfD discussion

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

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

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

Removing a closed AfD discussion

Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.

Other types of discussions

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

Further information

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

Purge page cache

watch

People

Iikka Keränen

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

Doesn't appear notable, redirect to Digital Eel? IgelRM (talk) 19:08, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Video games. IgelRM (talk) 19:08, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Finland and Washington. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 20:42, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Miika Huttunen

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

Doesn't appear notable, redirect to Pelaaja? IgelRM (talk) 19:01, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Journalism, Video games, and Finland. IgelRM (talk) 19:01, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Abdulsalam Haykal

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

Fails notability guidelines, and there are no reliable, independent sources to verify its notability. فيصل (talk) 16:57, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Syria. فيصل (talk) 16:57, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:36, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sultan Sooud Al-Qassemi

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

Fails notability guidelines, and there are no reliable, independent sources to verify its notability. Additionally, the article is written in a promotional tone.-- فيصل (talk) 16:55, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and United Arab Emirates. فيصل (talk) 16:55, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Journalism-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:36, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mohammed bin Musallam bin Ham al-Ameri

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

Fails notability guidelines, and there are no reliable, independent sources to verify its notability. فيصل (talk) 16:50, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and United Arab Emirates. فيصل (talk) 16:50, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:35, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Notable as a member of the Federal National Council. Mccapra (talk) 21:35, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Saleh Al Abdooli

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

Fails notability guidelines, and there are no reliable, independent sources to verify its notability. فيصل (talk) 16:29, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and United Arab Emirates. فيصل (talk) 16:29, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and Technology. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 16:33, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Abhishek Kumar Srivastava

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

I don't see the person passes WP:NPROF as well as WP:GNG. Twinkle1990 (talk) 08:30, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Academics and educators, and India. Twinkle1990 (talk) 08:30, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete- No third party news organisation has reported specifically on him. Changeworld1984 (talk) 09:31, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Uttar Pradesh-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 09:40, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Very obvious case. While he has made a good start to his career, it is rare for associate Profs to meet WP:NPROF. Adequate but not notable publication record, no major awards, no major converage. Ldm1954 (talk) 13:49, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Searching for author AK-Srivastava and keyword corona finds citations that look headed to a successful academic career but are not at the level required for WP:PROF#C1 yet. No other notability criterion is evident. —David Eppstein (talk) 18:48, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ola of Lagos

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

Fails WP:ANYBIO or WP:GNG. Nothing much to add here, but there's just no credible claim of importance here. Mostly a case of WP:TOOSOON. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 23:59, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Entertainment, and Nigeria. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 23:59, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Joshua Broome

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

Soft Delete, so no issue with recreation, however factors do not appear to have changed substantively since Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rocco Reed. No indication Broome meets notability requirements as either an entertainer or a religious figure. Star Mississippi 19:22, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, Entertainment, and Religion. Star Mississippi 19:22, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sexuality and gender, Christianity, California, North Carolina, and South Carolina. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:28, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been added to the WikiProject Pornography list of deletions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:31, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: "Gay porn star to preacher" is an interesting, rather unusual career path. The CBN article now used is a RS, and I have this [1] in Fox News, this NY Post [2] which is a marginal source for entertainment news and this in another christian media [3]. I think we have enough for notability. Oaktree b (talk) 00:18, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Here's a story in a newspaper about him [4]. Oaktree b (talk) 00:22, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pablo Lopez Luz

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

WP:BLP of a photographer, not properly referenced as passing inclusion criteria for photographers.
This is trying for "notability because awards", but that doesn't just indiscriminately hand an automatic notability freebie to every winner of just any award that exists: an award has to itself be notable as an award before it can make its winners notable for winning it. So notability can only derive from awards that can be shown to pass WP:GNG -- that is, the source for the award claim has to be evidence that the media consider said award to be significant enough to report its winners as news, and cannot just be the award's own self-published primary source content about itself. But the award claims here are referenced to a primary source rather than a reliable one, and that's the only source in the entire article, to boot.
Since I can't read Spanish and don't have access to the kind of archived Mexican media coverage that it would take to improve this, I'm willing to withdraw this nomination if somebody with better access to such tools can find enough to salvage it, but nothing stated here is "inherently" notable enough to exempt him from having to have more than just a single primary source for referencing. Bearcat (talk) 14:14, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Photography and Mexico. Bearcat (talk) 14:14, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep: some coverage of this person [5] and [6]. The first mostly gives a critical explanation of his work. Oaktree b (talk) 14:52, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 16:19, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Amit Malviya

AfDs for this article:

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

Fails WP:NPOL, Till date he has not won any election, he is just the head of the IT cell of the ruling party, whose job is to spread fake news all day long. You can also read about his fake news here. Youknow? (talk) 15:42, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Politicians, Politics, India, and Uttar Pradesh. Youknow? (talk) 15:42, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: The previous AfD you nominated was closed as Keep, as consensus determined he meets GNG. There is no need to meet NPOL if GNG is met. What is your opinion on this? GrabUp - Talk 15:53, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hey @Grabup, Thank you for your comment.
Most politicians who contest elections or are at least active in politics meet Wikipedia's general notability guidelines WP:GNG. Therefore, even if they fail to meet the specific criteria outlined in WP:NPOL they should still be considered for having Wikipedia articles.? What is your opinion on this? Youknow? (talk) 16:26, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Youknowwhoistheman: Yes, NPOL is an additional criteria, and the General Notability Guideline (GNG) is the main or core guideline to establish notability. If a person or a subject meets any of additional criteria or GNG, then they will be considered notable. For example, let’s assume this politician does not meet GNG or NPOL, but he wrote some books that received reviews from multiple independent reliable sources. Then he will meet WP:AUTHOR, so the person will be treated as notable even if he fails GNG or NPOL. Hope this clears things up. GrabUp - Talk 16:40, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Youknowwhoistheman: Hey do you agree that the person meets GNG? GrabUp - Talk 07:41, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry to say but your argument is not logical. According to this reasoning, Wikipedia should abolish its criteria for politicians (WP:NPOL). If everyone is to be judged by the same Wikipedia's general criteria (WP:GNG), then what is the need for having specific criteria? Because every local leader also passes the general criteria. Even a person who loses an election meets the general criteria in some way or another. So, should all of them also have a standalone Wikipedia article? Youknow? (talk) 11:52, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Youknowwhoistheman: No, your thinking is wrong. During the general election in India, I saw nearly 50 articles about politicians that were deleted via AfD. Not every politician meets GNG, and not every politician meets NPOL. These criteria are necessary. Here are some examples of past AfDs.
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pratikur Rahaman

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Emaan Singh Mann

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kriti Singh Debbarma

GrabUp - Talk 12:13, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I can show you hundreds of such politicians who are passing the WP:BASIC, but are not on Wikipedia because they are not passing the WP:NPOL. Anyway, there is no point in arguing. Let the rest of the editors decide. Youknow? (talk) 12:36, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as below:

~~Delete~~ : Probably doesn't meet NPOL, but he doesn't seem to be a politician... He also doesn't meet FILM, but he's not a film, so the nom seems incorrect. In addition to the sources from last time, this [7] and this [8] show coverage, more than enough to meet notability, GNG in particular. Oaktree b (talk) 16:17, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Oaktree b: Hey, I think you put the wrong vote. You said he meets GNG, so why did you vote Delete? Maybe it was a mistake? GrabUp - Talk 16:43, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, good catch. I wanted to !keep. Let me fix it. Oaktree b (talk) 16:50, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Clearly meets GNG. It seems the nominator thought politicians must had to pass NPOL to establish notability, even if they pass GNG, which is incorrect. Notability will be established if any of the criteria are met. GrabUp - Talk 16:59, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: meets WP:GNG Madeforall1 (talk) 23:24, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete there are many people who have numerous media sources writing about them but this doesn't makes them notable. The subject in this case seems to be affiliated to biggest political party of India and hence we can see good number of sources about them. However, most of them appears to be paid articles. I recall how one of my article Vikas Shakya was deleted despite having many sources. The reason sought was paid editorials being used as sources. Here, in this case, it is possible that we are witnessing same case. The person is clearly not fulfilling WP:NPOL as he has not been elected to even local level body and I doubt the sources used are free from bias.-Admantine123 (talk) 13:27, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Çomment WP:NPOL is *not* a guideline that can be failed, that is, if a subject does not satisfy the criteria it does not mean they are not notable for Wikipedia. NPOL is an inclusive measure, not exclusionary. NPOL sits separately from the GNG because it provides "presumed notability" - the idea being that a person elected to office is generally likely to have SIGCOV in reliable sources. FWIW, no comments to date have indicated why sourcing presently in the article does not satisfy the GNG. Regards, --Goldsztajn (talk) 00:27, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Didem (belly dancer)

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

Fails wp:np, sources are scarce, and I believe it should be deleted. فيصل (talk) 08:23, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Dance, Fashion, Romania, and Turkey. فيصل (talk) 08:23, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 09:42, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Seems to have been talked about [9] [10] and has influenced others [11] Oaktree b (talk) 14:56, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Per @Oaktree b. She has significant, regular coverage in the mainstream Turkish news media, spanning a large period. Also adding another reliable source.

TheJoyfulTentmaker (talk) 20:55, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Stephen J. Budd

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

We do not need to have an article on every single person who has been convicted of horrendous local sex crimes. All coverage is rotm trial coverage from publications located in Palm Beach, Florida. After he got convicted it was seemingly never mentioned again. This is exclusively a local affair of one city. This is also a BLP, which is an extra sign we shouldn't have this. If the school still had a page I'd say merge there but we don't. PARAKANYAA (talk) 04:22, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Crime, and Florida. PARAKANYAA (talk) 04:22, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Fails WP:NEVENT with no significant coverage outside local sources and no lasting effects. Bsoyka (t • c • g) 04:33, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Coverage is not just local and there is a lasting effect, too. He was a registered teacher in Pennsylvania which revoked his registration in 2017. See these items [12], [13] which are not cited in the article. - Cameron Dewe (talk) 04:56, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That's more database listings than coverage so I find that it doesn't really help the case. PARAKANYAA (talk) 05:06, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There is also this news report. [14] from 2017. - Cameron Dewe (talk) 05:10, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Not really meeting criminal notability, might even be 1E territory, being known for doing horrible things, but nothing otherwise. Oaktree b (talk) 14:57, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Julius Ford

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

It does not appear that this individual is notable independent of the shooting to which most of the article's content is devoted. I'm not sure whether the shooting is itself notable, so am ambivalent between outright deletion of the article versus moving and refocusing on the shooting. Nikkimaria (talk) 03:18, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If you dont know, why are you requesting a delete? 2600:1016:B00A:CEAE:5186:245E:BC5B:563D (talk) 03:40, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Both deletion and moving are appropriate outcomes for AFDs. Nikkimaria (talk) 03:43, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Crime, and Colorado. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:02, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Fails NEVENT. I did a decently extensive search and while there are a decent amount of later mentions in books (because the motive was religious at least in part) and academic studies, not one of these mentions are sigcov, news coverage fell off the radar pretty fast.

I'm kind of surprised this article managed to survive like this for 18 years. PARAKANYAA (talk) 04:08, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Fails WP:NEVENT with no significant coverage or apparent lasting effects after the event. Bsoyka (t • c • g) 04:28, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Benjamin Benedict Apugo

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

An article about a politician that doesn't meet WP:NPOL. Endorsing politicians, and speaking on TV can make you appear on the news but the coverage may be your statements and quotes; same issue here. I want a community consensus on this. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 01:48, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Businesspeople, Politicians, Africa, and Nigeria. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 01:49, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello safari, this man here is a notable man being discussed in schools and very popular. for some reason, he has no social media presence. 70% OF the articles i cited are all on the WP:NGRA. there are far less personalities who worked under this man such as Theodore Orji , Orji Uzor Kalu and many more who have wikipedia articles. and as a young 19 year old girl studying history i ran into this mans story in a book called "Ibeku in igbo History", which i am not sure i can cite on the internet because it's an ancient cultural hard copy book.

If you want this book i can scan it to your email. the book is uploaded on scribd.com by someone and in it, this man was mentioned, but i'm not sure if i can cite that since its a Scribd upload done in 2020 or so.

Some articles i cited also spoke about him as a person and every person growing up here in eastern region of Nigeria knew BB Apugo. You can do more research yourself on this person to see i have put in the work before submitting to wiki and my goal in wiki is not bringing people with huge online presence, but working as hard as possible to include articles that are known about in real life but not spoken about on the internet with every possible info i have.

I will continue to cite more sources and keep working to make sure i include more info and I am sure other people will to by the time they see the article on him. Yinka Williams (talk) 08:58, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Yinka Williams see Wikipedia:Offline sources. You can 100% use offline sources, even if they are difficult to access for other editors. If you decide to use offline sources, we recommend you add identifiers (such as ISBN or WorldCat) so that other editors can more easily access those resources. Broc (talk) 10:21, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you ! can i Include the link to the book on scribd ? and also if i'm using the ISBN how do I ethically include the page and chapter of the book or any more details i wish to help editors with. Thanks Yinka Williams (talk) 11:15, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I would not include the link, as it is unclear whether the content was uploaded to Scribd with the copyright owner's permission, per WP:COPYLINK. Broc (talk) 16:13, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Just got a hold of the ISBN and cited. Thank you. Yinka Williams (talk) 15:10, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep or Draftify: Per the creator, people familiar with Igbo history will recognize that he is correct. Therefore, I suggest either draftifying or keeping the article. Send down the rain (talk) 23:29, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

9MOTHER9HORSE9EYES9

AfDs for this article:

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

This is a plainly crufty and publicity-seeking article for a random, low-profile redditor who was never notable, and certainly hasn't been even plausibly relevant in at least eight years. See the Google Trends for this user: https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=all&geo=US&q=_9MOTHER9HORSE9EYES9&hl=en

Even when this user was receiving a bit of attention from blogs, their notability was highly questionable, and now - years on - it seems to me patently ludicrous that this, frankly, nobody warrants an encyclopedic entry. The tone of the copy is also the sort of overwrought interest common to writers trying to puff themselves (or their friends) up.

On a personal level, I can think of a dozen amateur fiction and fanfiction writers with greater impact than this user, and I wouldn't say they're notable either. Yes yes, Wikipedia:Other things exist, but I'm really shocked this highly unserious bio withstood an AfD the first time around. Garnet Moss (talk) 00:10, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Articles about Redditors require enough citations to garner notability. It would be worth movable to a Fandom wiki, however it cannot mix with CC-BY-SA 3.0 text, it should have been rewritten. Withdrawn. Keep as it has enough coverage of the subject. Ahri Boy (talk) 00:24, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Internet. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 00:57, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep you didn't really provide any good reasons for deleting this article other than you considering him an non-notable nobody, but that's not how it goes. Notability is not based on personal opinion, it's based on if the person was covered by major notable reliable sources, which this person was. Bonus Person (talk) 01:12, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A forum fiction writer getting some blog press does not a notable entry make. There’s no way in hell this user passes the (admittedly non-binding) ten-year rule, and the whole page reeks of recentism and publicity-seeking. Without resorting to vulgar comparison-shopping, if every topic which merited a Gizmodo or Verge article was considered notable, the landscape of Wikipedia would look very different. This is not an encyclopedic article. Garnet Moss (talk) 01:48, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure calling The Guardian, Inverse, Vice, or The Verge "blogs" is a very strong argument. Also not sure recentism really applies when The Guardian article was written 8 (nearly 10!) years ago. C F A 💬 02:29, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The publicity policy you linked says:

"The barometer of notability is whether people independent of the topic itself (or of its manufacturer, creator, author, inventor, or vendor) have actually considered the topic worth writing and publishing non-trivial works of their own that focus upon it—without incentive, promotion, or other influence by people connected to the topic matter."

Sources like The Guardian and BBC News are independent and reliable, they aren't just random crufty press blogs. Obviously this article would encourage people to read the stories, but that alone does not make it publicity.

The recentism page also says
"Similarly, a person who receives a temporary blip of news coverage for a single incident or event is not necessarily an appropriate topic for a standalone biographical article, if their notability claim is not likely to still be of sustained public interest in the next few decades."

This is not about an event or incident, the page is talking about published stories. People in 10 years will know that this is talking about a horror writer, even if they don't know what Reddit is. Bonus Person (talk) 02:34, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Meets GNG. See this story in The Guardian, this article (and this one) in Inverse, this article in Vice, this article in the BBC, this article in The Verge, and this story by Gizmodo. C F A 💬 02:24, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge into List of creepypastas or Reddit#Community_and_culture? The current title is virtually un-navigable and should instead describe the "author's work". IgelRM (talk) 20:14, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment tempted to vote delete WP:IAR. A weird-Reddit commenter doesn't become notable just because he has friends who are lazy journalists (and when there is a piece in The Verge about somebody who started posting weird comments 1 day ago, it is safe to assume there is a pre-existing relationship). There is no claim of sustained coverage. Unless there are sources from after 2016, this should probably be deleted, appeals to GNG be damned. Walsh90210 (talk) 02:45, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A strange argument, but there is coverage after 2016 if that's what you're looking for:

Westling, C.E.I.; Palmer, S.; McKinney, J.; Di Benedetto, S.A. (2020). Immersion and Participation in Punchdrunk's Theatrical Worlds. Performance and Design. Bloomsbury Publishing. p. 177. ISBN 978-1-350-10197-5.
Skains, R.L. (2022). Neverending Stories: The Popular Emergence of Digital Fiction. Bloomsbury Publishing. ISBN 978-1-5013-6493-8.
Stuart, Thomas M. (1 October 2018). "The vast and omnivorous cloud". Horror Studies. 9 (2): 151–160. doi:10.1386/host.9.2.151_2. ISSN 2040-3275.
Crawford, Joseph (1 July 2019). "Chapter 5 Gothic Digital Technologies". Twenty-First-Century Gothic. Edinburgh University Press. doi:10.1515/9781474440943-007. ISBN 978-1-4744-4094-3.

I have yet to see a reasonable reason to delete. C F A 💬 03:01, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, yes, that was the "sustained" coverage I was looking for to show this was something other than a forgotten publicity stunt. Keep. Walsh90210 (talk) 03:03, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If we're talking IAR, sure, let's talk principles. How would deleting this article benefit the encyclopedia? We have enough information to write about, and the subject is a great example of internet phenomena and life in the modern age. Assuming that there's nepotism going on here also doesn't seem very good faith of you (remember, AGF applies to all people, not just editors). Aaron Liu (talk) 03:07, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Welp, (edit conflict). Aaron Liu (talk) 03:08, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per CFA. Aaron Liu (talk) 03:08, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Keep the sources that covered this subject suggests bare notability. Plutocow (talk) 04:53, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I think it should stay because this article has a unique and important part of internet culture with a lot of coverage from trustworthy sources. Removing it would mean losing valuable information about a notable and interesting online event. Yakov-kobi (talk) 09:40, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Subject passes GNG.★Trekker (talk) 14:46, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kalidas Madhu Sadhwani

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

Couldn't find any sources proving existence; only websites mentioning him are Wikipedia mirrors, and a search on Google scholar gives nothing. Written by a user (Reims66) whose only four edits were about this person. None of the sources I went through when rewriting the Sultanate of Bijapur article even gave a passing mention, so even if this person did exist, I doubt many reliable academic sources are mentioning him or giving significant coverage. Flemmish Nietzsche (talk) 18:38, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, History, and Military. Flemmish Nietzsche (talk) 18:38, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 20:59, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. No sources on the page. I am not able to find even any trivial information on the subject from Google book search. It is clear that the subject is not notable even in history to warrant a page on Wikipedia. Fails, WP:GNG and WP:HISTRS. RangersRus (talk) 16:57, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oga Amos

AfDs for this article:

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

This was REFUNDED after soft deletion from the previous AfD. My rationale is still very much intact. This subject fails WP:GNG or WP:NCREATOR. Sources, with a partial exception of The Nation, are all paid and promotional puff. I also suspect UPE going on here. Sources from BEFORE are also paid puff. See source analysis below;

Currently on the article;

Source	Independent?	Reliable?	Count source toward GNG?
Source assessment table:
https://thenationonlineng.net/comedian-oga-amos-wins-best-skit-maker-in-ghana/	~ Even though the "win award" is true, this is paid promotional puff	~ Ditto	~ Partial
https://pmnewsnigeria.com/2024/02/25/from-content-creation-to-philanthropy-inspiring-journey-of-oga-amos/	paid promotional puff	Ditto	✘ No
https://leadership.ng/oga-amos-from-anambra-roots-to-lagos-stardom/	paid promotional puff ("Oga Amos’s commitment and talent haven’t gone unnoticed, earning him well-deserved awards that acknowledge his substantial contributions to the dynamic world of online entertainment.", really? Only one non-notable award?)	Ditto	✘ No
https://pmnewsnigeria.com/2023/01/27/oga-amos-one-of-nigerias-leading-content-creators/	Ditto	Ditto	✘ No
https://www.vanguardngr.com/2023/11/oga-amos-floats-charity-foundation-to-transform-lives-of-his-fans/	paid promotional puff	WP:NGRS, paid promotional puff	✘ No
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{source assess table}}.

From BEFORE:

Source	Independent?	Reliable?	Significant coverage?	Count source toward GNG?
Source assessment table:
https://newtelegraphng.com/oga-amos-cheers-content-creators-for-incredible-creativity/	~	~ Even though WP:NGRS, this is still dependent on the subject	This is not about him directly	✘ No
https://tribuneonlineng.com/oga-amos-floats-charity-foundation-to-transform-lives/	paid promotional puff	Ditto		✘ No
https://www.thisdaylive.com/index.php/2023/11/05/oga-amos-floats-charity-foundation-to-transform-lives-of-his-fans	Ditto	Ditto and WP:NGRS		✘ No
https://guardian.ng/news/oga-amos-floats-charity-foundation-to-transform-fans-lives/	Ditto	Ditto		✘ No
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{source assess table}}.

Vanderwaalforces (talk) 22:29, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Entertainment, and Nigeria. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 22:29, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Same as last time, stuff in non-RS or puff pieces, nothing we can use for notability. The before is the most telling, there just isn't enough about this individual. Oaktree b (talk) 23:08, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jack Colman (author)

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

No independent reliable sources found. Author thus fails WP:NBIO. GTrang (talk) 01:11, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Authors, and England. GTrang (talk) 01:11, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
del No discussions of the person in RS. - Altenmann >talk 16:43, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

De'Anyers family

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

WP:NOTGENEALOGY. I don't think any reliable sources cited or available elsewhere provide significant coverage of the article subject, instead providing lots of tangential mentions that do not by themselves confer notability. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 12:44, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, History, Royalty and nobility, and United Kingdom. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 12:44, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is not an accurrate statement, the sources listed are entirley comprehensive, I ask which ones precisely are 'tangential'.

Notability is sufficent as seen in the extensive sources primary and secondary. Starktoncollosal (talk) 08:21, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am happy to discuss which sources in particular do not provide significant coverage and see where we go from there, I am aware that there are yes a significant number of sources used which may convey this, however are consolidated by a number of reliable and imparital sources used in this article as well as other articles of a similar nature which cover landed families. Starktoncollosal (talk) 08:25, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hiten Dharpure

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

Dharpure has achieved a couple of obscure records recognized by the "India Book of Records" and the "Worldwide Book of Records", neither publication notable enough to have their own Wikipedia articles. Given the number of newspaper clippings posted by the article's author at Commons (now mostly nominated for deletion as copyright violations), it is likely that this is an autobiography. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 11:52, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and India. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 11:52, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete This is exactly the sort of non-notable nonsense that should be removed. Clearly written by the subject themselves or on their behalf. Shrug02 (talk) 18:00, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, it seems to be written by themselves or on their behalf but this what I found on Instagram of Sakal News, with likes of 7,647 people. [15] WikiDan404 (talk) 13:07, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Respected Editor, I was known of that person and I contacted him to collect the Information and made the new Article. If it seems to be Written by himself so, that's wrong. But if it seems like that so no problem. I was also known of him by Social Media Only. The Editor committee (talk) 17:06, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Vanity spam, creating dancing robots is not notable here. Sources about various records that are not notable. Oaktree b (talk) 16:19, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think this should article should exists as what I had read and Checked the Article and found the work done by him at such less age. [16][17] WikiDan404 (talk) 13:14, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Respected Editor, I found this video of his Robots Dancing Altogether [18] and making robot at this age made me to make an Article for him. If it doesn't agree to policies so no problem. The Editor committee (talk) 18:24, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: And the image is tagged as a copyvio, further red flags. Oaktree b (talk) 16:20, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. No notability and blatantly COI. Procyon117 (talk) 17:53, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I found this on Instagram of Sakal News, liked by 7,647 people. [19] WikiDan404 (talk) 13:05, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not only is Instagram an unreliable source, but the amount of people who liked it is completely meaningless here. Procyon117 (talk) 15:45, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Respected Editor, That's Right. Actually I found this in his account on Facebook that he was felicitated twice by Hon'ble Union Minister of Road and Transport, Nitin Gadkari for his achievement that why I have added that.[20][21] The Editor committee (talk) 18:05, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Dance, Technology, and Maharashtra. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:12, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Fails notability. RangersRus (talk) 22:16, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
https://www.instagram.com/p/C8ip_V2hrHq/?igsh=Z2lwOWJ5ODJhZGdk WikiDan404 (talk) 13:16, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Respected Editor, I found this that he was covered by Media and felicitated twice by Hon'ble Union Minister of Road and Transport, Nitin Gadkari that's why I have added an New Article by looking his work with age. [22][23][24][25][26][27] The Editor committee (talk) 18:33, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Not to Delete. I think that it should not be deleted as it was covered by Newspapers. --Wikitopeople (talk) 12:43, 18 July 2024 (UTC)— Wikitopeople (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
Actually it seems to written by themselves or on behalf on someone but from my side I found this [28] which made myself to support this Article. WikiDan404 (talk) 13:32, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Respected Editor, It can also be seen at different platforms. [29][30][31] The Editor committee (talk) 18:35, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Do not Delete. He gained huge popularity as I found that it was published on Instagram of Sakal News, which is liked by 7,647 people. Link to check the Likes on Instagram --WikiDan404 (talk) 12:59, 18 July 2024 (UTC)— WikiDan404 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
Delete One Event applies. Also Not notable and instagram is not a reliable source and it doesn't matter how many likes they have.--VViking_TalkEdits 13:28, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
He was felicitated twice by Hon'ble Union Minister of Road and Transport, Nitin Gadkari.[32] [33] as mentioned by @The Editor committee. WikiDan404 (talk) 18:11, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Respected Editor, I have made this Article on basis of Media Coverage and his twice felicitations done by Hon'ble Union Minister of Road and Transport, Nitin Gadkari.[34][35] The Editor committee (talk) 18:11, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

* Note to Closer. WikiDan404 account created 3 hours ago and Wikitopeople account created 22 hours ago have made no contribution to any other AFD. RangersRus (talk) 15:18, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Fails WP:GNG. Youknow? (talk) 15:29, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Respected Editor, The evidences can be checked and proofed as that make me to write the Article. [36][37][38][39][40][41][42] The Editor committee (talk) 18:40, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Respected Editor @WikiDan61, Thanks for your review. I respect and follow the Wikipedia Rules and Policies, if it seems to be not eligible, so no problem. It's my pleasure that you worked for it. The Editor committee (talk) 17:09, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Not to be deleted. I think it should not be deleted. --The Editor committee (talk) 18:14, 18 July 2024 (UTC)— Note to closing admin: The Editor committee (talk • contribs) is the creator of the page that is the subject of this AfD. [reply]
should not be deleted. The things provided above gives an clear information regarding person. --Unknewed (talk) 18:48, 18 July 2024 (UTC)— Unknewed (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
@RangersRus I am new for Contributions of Information on Wikipedia and this is my first Reply in Discussion as it is seen first and at top. Unknewed (talk) 20:40, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
* Note to Closer. Unknewed another new account created few hours ago and have made no contribution to any other AFD. RangersRus (talk) 19:30, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Fails GNG. 𝐋𝐨𝐫𝐝𝐕𝐨𝐥𝐝𝐞𝐦𝐨𝐫𝐭𝟕𝟐𝟖🧙‍♂️^{Let's Talk !} 11:37, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and do not delete It should not be deleted as everything is true with no false Information as given with Citations and has notability. Wikicontriiiiibute (talk) 12:02, 19 July 2024 (UTC)— Wikicontriiiiibute (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
Delete: Ignoring the sockpuppet investigation and the potential COI. I agree that the sourcing isn't reliable. I think WP: BLP1E applies here as well -- the achievements of the subject have not received coverage that is lasting or significant. Instagram and Facebook are not reliable sources, full stop. HyperAccelerated (talk) 15:34, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Per others, I can't find significant coverage or enough to meet WP:GNG. Mdann52 (talk) 06:39, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: (snow close) Nonsense promotional article. Fails WP:BASIC. Even if there was significant coverage, this is an obvious case of WP:BLP1E. C F A 💬 19:24, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kulwant Singh Rauke

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

Disputed PROD. My rationale still stand, the subject fails WP:NPOL and there's no evidence that there's a passing of the criteria that constitutes WP:GNG either. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 21:41, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Politicians, India, and Punjab. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 21:41, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sikhism-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:32, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: The creator has made multiple similar articles which fail WP:NPOL, this should be deleted as well. Xoocit (talk) 09:13, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Per nom. Fails WP:NPOL. The degree of significance of the subject and of role as politician and activist is not enough to warrant a page on the subject. RangersRus (talk) 22:30, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Per nom, also failed WP:NPOL. Youknow? (talk) 15:27, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Martin Wiesmann

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

I speedy-deleted the article for promotion, and it was then recreated with the promotional material removed. It was then PRODded, but the PROD was removed. On its face (I haven't done WP:BEFORE because I'm lousy at it, especially when most of the sources are non-English), Wiesmann appears to be a senior investment banker but nothing rising to the level of satisfying WP:GNG. Although not dispositive here, Wiesmann doesn't have an article at de.wiki. Bbb23 (talk) 23:47, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Finance, and Germany. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:15, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I can find sourcing about a radiologist/doctor, a German car company and a few other things, but nothing comes up for this particular person. Sourcing used now in the article is either primary, or confirmation of his appointment to one job or another. I don't see notability. Oaktree b (talk) 00:23, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete doesn’t seem to meet WP:ANYBIO. Saw a lot of sources, but most of them basically the same biography. No WP:SIGCOV. Vorann Gencov (talk) 17:36, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Peter Crocker

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

Disputed draftification. Fails WP:BIO. It is difficult with things so long ago. Even so, I am struggling to see what makes this industrious man notable in a Wikipedia sense. He appears to have had a decent, unexceptional life, like so many of his peers. WP:ROTM 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 13:28, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and New York. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 13:28, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have personally done research on this topic as a professional in the field and can vouch for this page to be published, as is.

I’m confused as to what you mean by “unexceptional”. It’s as if you haven’t read the article, where it is mentioned that he was a postmaster, civil war veteran, trustee of Philippi School and city planner.

He was an early pioneer of Sarasota, Florida and is grouped in with his notable peers (A.B. Edwards, William Whitaker, and John Hamilton Gillespie) in various newspapers which I have provided citation to. The cemetery he established still exists and the church he built is on the historical register and owned by the historical society. Two other Wikipedia pages (Crocker cemetery and Crocker church) reference him as the founder. He deserves to have a page where readers of the other pages can find out who he was and what he did. When citizens of Sarasota go to learn more about their history it is important they have a resource (Wikipedia) to learn about this man and his contributions to the early community. A surplus of information is always better than a lack of it.

Your grounds for deletion, not "notable in Wikipedia sense," have no pertinent standing whatsoever. Htystudent (talk) 15:25, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
In addition to the source already listed within the article, here is some verifiable, objective evidence that the subject has received significant attention from independent sources to support the claim of notability. Though, viewing these may be an issue since the database requires a subscription. The links look identical, but they are all individual articles that mention Peter Crocker.

Access Newspaper Archive Institutional Version | Viewer

Access Newspaper Archive Institutional Version | Viewer

Access Newspaper Archive Institutional Version | Viewer

Access Newspaper Archive Institutional Version | Viewer

Access Newspaper Archive Institutional Version | Viewer

Access Newspaper Archive Institutional Version | Viewer

Access Newspaper Archive Institutional Version | Viewer

Access Newspaper Archive Institutional Version | Viewer

Access Newspaper Archive Institutional Version | Viewer

Access Newspaper Archive Institutional Version | Viewer

Access Newspaper Archive Institutional Version | Viewer

Access Newspaper Archive Institutional Version | Viewer

Access Newspaper Archive Institutional Version | Viewer

Access Newspaper Archive Institutional Version | Viewer

Access Newspaper Archive Institutional Version | Viewer Htystudent (talk) 16:12, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the Church article was sent back to draft and the cemetery looks rather non-notable as well. Oaktree b (talk) 23:08, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The church article, if you reviewed the sources, likely meets the notability guidelines and should be published. However, it has not been reviewed. Htystudent (talk) 18:30, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment both Crocker Cemetery and Crocker Church were created by the same editor as this article, in the past week. Their existence on-wiki does not demonstrate anything. Walsh90210 (talk) 15:56, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, but were they moved to articles for deletion? That means they were significant enough to still exist, so this page should be as well. Unless you think Peter Crocker did not make the standard for notability, which I have just demonstrated that he likely does. I will include that information in this reply as well.
In addition to the multiple sources already listed within the article, here is some verifiable, objective evidence that the subject has received significant attention from independent sources to support the claim of notability. Though, viewing these may be an issue since the database requires a subscription. The links look identical, but they are all individual articles that mention Peter Crocker.

Access Newspaper Archive Institutional Version | Viewer

Access Newspaper Archive Institutional Version | Viewer

Access Newspaper Archive Institutional Version | Viewer

Access Newspaper Archive Institutional Version | Viewer

Access Newspaper Archive Institutional Version | Viewer

Access Newspaper Archive Institutional Version | Viewer

Access Newspaper Archive Institutional Version | Viewer

Access Newspaper Archive Institutional Version | Viewer

Access Newspaper Archive Institutional Version | Viewer

Access Newspaper Archive Institutional Version | Viewer

Access Newspaper Archive Institutional Version | Viewer

Access Newspaper Archive Institutional Version | Viewer

Access Newspaper Archive Institutional Version | Viewer

Access Newspaper Archive Institutional Version | Viewer

Access Newspaper Archive Institutional Version | Viewer

Htystudent (talk) 16:15, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Htystudent I have left you advice on your user talk page, Most people find such advice of value. I hope you do as well. On a technical matter, I was not allowed under WP:DRAFTIFY to return this to draft once more. My two options since I was not going to edit it were to send it here, or to ignore it. I chose to send it here for community discussion.

Any editor, you included, is entitled to offer Draftification (please place it in 'bold at the start of the line, and on a new line). The deletion discussion is a direct result of your moving it to mainspace before it was ready. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 16:25, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I am not averse to the outcome of this discussion being to send back to draft for further development. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 18:43, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Military and Florida. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:04, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. I cannot view any of the newspaper links to validate whether they include WP:SIGCOV. I agree that Crocker seems like a WP:ROTM individual, but without being able to view the sources I cannot weigh in with a !vote either way. I have not been able to turn up any other appropriate sources to establish notability. If the page creator were to request draftification I would support that. Dclemens1971 (talk) 20:18, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Dclemens1971 I have told them the same thing on their user talk page 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 21:21, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Served in the army and worked in a lighthouse, this is not notable. Likely better suited to a local history website, I'm not seeing notability for our standards here. Oaktree b (talk) 23:04, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You really are very funny with what you choose to read and ignore. It actually does state in the article that Peter Crocker laid out the roads in the area, was postmaster, founder of a cemetery and a church, trustee of one of the first schools in the area and a commissioner. Htystudent (talk) 03:25, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - I am able to view the Newspaper Archive sources through WP:TWL and I think most WP:XC users can as well (though I'm not positive). I don't plan on going through all of the newspaper links above, but I have looked over the ones in the article currently:

FN3 (December 1911) - Burb placed in the paper by his wife and an acquaintance expressing gratitude for kindness shown by others during his sickness and death.
FN5 (March 1958) - The region's "Oldest Native" is apparently the daughter of Peter Crocker, and he is briefly mentioned as an Albany native, soldier, and Key West lighthouse tender.
FN6 (March 1906) - One mention in the "County Commissioner's Proceedings" as being designated to mark out a road.
FN7 (January 1907) - One mention in a list of "other growers" in the region.
FN8 (August 1977) Mentioned as introducing coffee beans to the region

All told, this individual seems quite WP:ROTM. He is mentioned in the newspapers, sure, but these mentions are almost all plainly trivial; there is no WP:SIGCOV. AviationFreak💬 01:28, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reply: The Crockers; Church, cemetery bear family's name - Document - Gale Power Search Htystudent (talk) 16:03, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The daughter spoke in depth about her father, Peter Crocker, so I don't see how that cannot count. Htystudent (talk) 18:31, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I have now been able to access the newspaper archive. I have not checked every archive relating to the subject, and I have taken into account the stye of the era - brevity. Even with this taken into account I only find passing mentions, public notices etc. WP:SIGCOV is not fulfilled. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 08:29, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The ones linked directly to the article discuss him more in length, as I mentioned. Htystudent (talk) 13:37, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I see some news/coverage in media, but not GNG here. LusikSnusik (talk) 10:26, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
https://go.gale.com/ps/retrieve.do?tabID=T004&resultListType=RESULT_LIST&searchResultsType=SingleTab&retrievalId=951a568c-e995-41e5-b445-f4c298ac82f7&hitCount=10&searchType=BasicSearchForm&currentPosition=1&docId=GALE%7CA74049424&docType=Article&sort=Relevance&contentSegment=ZGPN&prodId=GPS&pageNum=1&contentSet=GALE%7CA74049424&searchId=R2&userGroupName=sara65726&inPS=true

This whole article is solely about him and his family Htystudent (talk) 12:24, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Simply not notable by Wiki standards. Intothat darkness 12:30, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Intothatdarkness and other commentators above. Original author does not seem to have a firm grasp on notability and sourcing guidelines. Kazamzam (talk) 05:05, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rewant Ram Danga

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

Clearly fails WP:NPOL. He contested the Rajasthan Assembly Elections in the year 2023 from Khinwsar Assembly constituency. In which he was defeated. Youknow? (talk) 06:55, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Politicians, India, and Rajasthan. Youknow? (talk) 06:55, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

https://www.livehindustan.com/assembly-elections/rajasthan-elections/constituency/khinwsar-110/

Check this news to verify that he contested the Rajasthan Assembly Elections in the year 2023 for Khinwasar Assembly Constituency. TejalGraphics (talk) 07:22, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@TejalGraphics The point is that he contested but didn’t win. Politicians aren’t presumptively notable by virtue of their candidacy in an election. They have to, at least, win the notable position they contested for. If they don’t win and they pass the general notability guideline, then that’s a different case. Neither is the case for Danga. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 10:03, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Clearly fails NPOL. 𝐋𝐨𝐫𝐝𝐕𝐨𝐥𝐝𝐞𝐦𝐨𝐫𝐭𝟕𝟐𝟖🧙‍♂️^{Let's Talk !} 09:11, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Fails WP:POL and WP:GNG. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 09:59, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Does not meet notability criteria Xoocit (talk) 08:48, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Fails WP:NPOL. The degree of significance of the subject and of role as politician and farmer leader is not enough to warrant a page on the subject. There is no in-depth significant achievement notable. RangersRus (talk) 14:54, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:16, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Paul Suni

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

References are a mile wide and an inch deep, primarily including the subject's own LinkedIn page, writings, patents, and grants. BD2412 T 20:43, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Finland, and California. BD2412 T 20:43, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: An inventor with patents, is not notable... I can find this reference [43] but it could just be a similarly-named individual. Otherwise, I don't find any sourcing for this person. Oaktree b (talk) 21:32, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Engineering, Medicine, and Technology. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:00, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I do not understand how this page survived so long. It has massive peacock claims, none of which are verified by sources that are searchable. For instance the only mention I see in Google for [4] is in fact this page! As just one other, the claim of "Father of Digital Radiography" is unsourced, and not in the Digital radiography page. The onus is on the editors of the article to provide properly verifiable sources for the various claims, WP:BURDEN. Unless they do this, and it seems it has not happened for many years, this should be a Speedy delete. Ldm1954 (talk) 21:07, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was redirect‎ to List of mayors of Compton, California. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:18, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Frank G. Bussing

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

Bussing isn’t presumptively notable as a politician WP:NPOL. Mayors from Compton shouldn’t be presumptively notable by virtue of their positions, they have to pass other criteria. Bussing also fails WP:NPOL since he didn’t get elected for HoR. Also fails WP:GNG in general. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 20:03, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Politicians, and California. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 20:03, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to List of mayors of Compton, California.Djflem (talk) 14:53, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to List of mayors of Compton, California, where the subject is listed. We do not presume notability for local elected officials. --Enos733 (talk) 16:15, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge/Redirect into List of mayors of Compton, California. Information on the article would be fine included within the target article. Bussing is not notable on his own per available information, per nom. Royal Autumn Crest (talk) 21:33, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to List of mayors of Compton, California. Fails NPOL. LusikSnusik (talk) 10:34, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to List of mayors of Compton, California. Bussing does not appear notable enough to merit his own article. Fails WP:NPOL as per nominator. A redirect is appropriate. GhostOfNoMeme 19:04, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

Sir Charles Firebrace, 2nd Baronet

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

Baronets are not normally notable and there doesn’t seem to be anything that would amount to a claim of notability with this subject. Mccapra (talk) 19:50, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and England. Mccapra (talk) 19:50, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Royalty and nobility-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 21:22, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. First Baronets are certainly notable, but not necessarily their successors. -- Necrothesp (talk) 10:33, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Firebrace baronets per WP:AtD. Baronetcies are notable but individual baronets not always, and this one apparently not (in Wikipedia terms, at any rate: real life is different). To assert that "baronets are not normally notable" is overstating it somewhat, however. Ingratis (talk) 17:51, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:18, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Miraboi

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

A biographical article about a Nigeria man that doesn't meet WP:GNG. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 19:18, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Businesspeople, Lists of people, Music, Africa, and Nigeria. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 19:19, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Critically fails WP:NCREATIVE or WP:GNG, utterly nonsense and promotional article that serves no purpose whatsoever than to promote the subject. No credible claim of importance. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 19:30, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Netherzone (talk) 20:51, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Keep : as per nomination by various editors in terms of the same GNG Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Yung Miraboi Mark (2nd nomination). Clean up is just required which I would be contributing later due to my time schedule. In 2021 appeared at the Ghana national TV as a musician with one of his top song featuring Peruzzi [44]and no longer do music. In 2022, he was dragged by Nigerians for a political act [45] further details nomination 2 can be cited [46]. Nominator 2 has also been a block user for 4 years now I just noticed that. Theirs no point AFD nominator replying. Look forward to other editors as I will be busy. --Gabriel (talk to me ) 00:45, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Gabriel601, I don't understand this sentence: Nominator 2 has also been a block user for 4 years now I just noticed that. Theirs no point AFD nominator replying. Look forward to other editors as I will be busy. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 19:27, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep : Passes WP:SIGCOV.--Afí-afeti (talk) 00:57, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You need to explain how it meets WP:SIGCOV; the sources are promotional and bears the subject's quotes like "how I am being motivated by God–Miraboi", etc. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 19:29, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. The sourcing is kind of ridiculous -- a Commons photo purporting to be an award he received is not a reliable source -- and what in-depth coverage exists appears to be tabloid coverage, which, per WP:SBST is not WP:SIGCOV. Other sources appear to be WP:INTERVIEWs and thus ineligible as primary sources. Even though many sources appear in major Nigerian news outlets, the nature of the coverage limits their use to qualify for WP:GNG and WP:NBIO. (I see no evidence he meets any criterion under WP:CREATIVE.) Dclemens1971 (talk) 01:46, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:21, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Interviews and him giving money to charity aren't the kind of sourcing we're looking for. More of the typical Nigerian media hype for an otherwise non-notable individual. I don't see anything here we can use. Oaktree b (talk) 03:16, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Chris Okagbue

AfDs for this article:

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

I don’t see how this subject passes WP:GNG. The only thing here was that he won the Gulder ultimate search. The rest are just biography with no source. No evidence he won those awards.Since 2023 the issue tag was placed no fixed has been made. Even when I had to google. The news source fails independent as they are likely stating his quote. Gabriel (talk to me ) 00:50, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, and Nigeria. Gabriel (talk to me ) 00:50, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy keep: The subject has enough for a stub and likely C-class article. He has been a subject of the news since (possibly) 2020. This and this are interviews in RS verifying the Gulder Ultimate Search win and it is also stated here. One can sum up SIGCOV with all the pieces, This model and actor was born on June 23; this piece details how the subject shot into fame and here are some of the productions they were featured on. This source is also in RS, but it's such a shame I cannot translate its content. Passing mention here.
Note that every source I have provided above is listed at Generally reliable sources for Nigeria-related information. dxneo (talk) 12:19, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Meets WP:NACTOR and WP:GNG. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 19:24, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:34, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Chris Okagbue is a well-known Nigerian actor and he is notable enough to deserve an article on WP. The article uses reliable sources. Therefore I think the article should be kept. Yakov-kobi (talk) 09:40, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jazz Henry

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

No sources given that meet WP:GNG (her father's website, herself talking, some name drops, and dubiously reliable articles), I didn't find any better ones, and the article also fails WP:NMUSICIAN or WP:ANYBIO. — Alien333 (what I did & why I did it wrong) 18:30, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Bands and musicians, and Music. — Alien333 (what I did & why I did it wrong) 18:30, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Women, Television, and Louisiana. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:33, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 20:56, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Non-notable musician outside of the Band mentioned, I'm not sure a redirect would do much.. I find no sourcing strictly about this individual, only about the band. Guest star roles in TV shows are not what we're looking for for notability either. Oaktree b (talk) 00:07, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Imre Vallyon

AfDs for this article:

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

I'm nominating this page for deletion again because the initial discussion lacked sufficient engagement and the sources provided were inadequate in both quality and quantity. There's a notable absence of substantial coverage of Imre Vallyon, his work, or his organisation in multiple reliable secondary sources. Meeting notability criteria typically requires presenting at least three such sources. The article from Stuff, while primarily focused on his legal issues, appears to be the only source that meets these criteria. Without it, the page is mostly information sourced by primary sources and a list of his self published books and ebooks.

In terms of Vallyon's notability as a writer, the two book reviews presented by Oaktree b in the previous discussion are clearly poor sources, as they seem to be paid content from freelance writers on unreliable websites. Additionally, Vallyon does not meet the criteria for notability as a criminal according to Wikipedia guidelines on crime perpetrators, despite the only significant coverage of him focusing on his legal issues. His organisation, FHL, does not seem to meet the notability standards either. Ynsfial (talk) 16:55, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Authors, and New Zealand. Ynsfial (talk) 16:55, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Hungary-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:07, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep has enough to meet WP:GNG. NealeWellington (talk) 10:13, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment for Ynsfial - it seems pointless making multiple attempts to have this article deleted as the previous Afd covered the arguments in sufficient depth. I suggest you look at the deletion review process if you consider there is an issue. NealeWellington (talk) 10:13, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No, deletion review is the wrong avenue here. It was a no consensus close, and closed over 2 months ago. It is perfectly fine to bring it back for another look. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 13:59, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Exactly. Thank you.Ynsfial (talk) 18:40, 19 July 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) 18:31, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

’’’Keep’’’ He’s a convicted pedophile. Where’s the good in deleting this? Meets WP:GNG. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A01:E0A:E9F:8340:51A7:F4CD:CE5C:4B8B (talk) 18:30, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as thin as it is, the media coverage in New Zealand and the Netherlands establishes WP:GNG in my opinion. David Palmer//cloventt ^(talk) 01:33, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Emperor Geezy

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

This fails WP:NCREATIVE, and overall, WP:GNG based on WP:SIGCOV and WP:MILL. The award they won is not significant enough to help them pass, if they had 'won' their 'nomination's, that would be a different case, just merely being nominated at NEA isn't significant enough. The noms are unsourced while the piece the award they won is sourced to is an unreliable one from a marginally reliable publication (WP:NGRS). Taking a close look at the sources, they are mostly WP:RUNOFTHEMILL and unreliable pieces and do not provide WP:SIGCOV. I am skeptical about the notability of G-Worldwide Entertainment itself. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 15:42, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Businesspeople, Entertainment, and Nigeria. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 15:42, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 16:49, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: winning a non-notable award isn't notable, the rest of the sources are puffy entertainment/lifestyle sources, not really helping notability. Oaktree b (talk) 20:55, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: nominated for a notable award twice in 2015 and 2017.--Afí-afeti (talk) 07:34, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Passes WP:SIGCOV(both in the Nigerian media and in foreign ones). At least you can look at the Nigerian Wikipedia article and find several sources. I’m not sure about WP:NMUSIC, but it’s not the main criteria anyway. Tau Corvi (talk) 08:43, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Tau Corvi You clearly don't know how the general notability guideline works. For an subject to have a standalone page on Wikipedia, they have to be the subject of discussions from multiple secondary sources that are independent of the subject, reliable and provides a substantial coverage of the subject. These are needed to pass WP:GNG, a subject doesn't just pass SIGCOV to qualify for a standalone page. Even the SIGCOV you claim it passes is even not exactly correct because that is not the case. I understand you're a new user, you may need to familiarise yourself with the policies and guidelines before venturing into AfDs. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 09:49, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment : If an Award has been reviewed, has a Wikipedia page and meets the WP:GNG then it’s notable. But reference from reliable source that are independent of the subject are needed to be cited for proof. The fact he has Won, being Nominated for notable awards, contributed to the notable movie Suga Suga (film) as an executive producer makes him passes WP:ANYBIO and notable. Per source cited on the article, subject passes WP:GNG. If the award section can be addressed then my vote is a Keep. Please to the AFD nominator theirs no point responding to me. I’m not here to argue unreasonably or pick sides. My word still stands per Wikipedia article guideline.--Gabriel (talk to me ) 19:57, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:17, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Khan Sir

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

This stub about an Internet personality whose channel is education based was recently accepted at AFC. I believe it to be a borderline acceptance, which is fine of itself. AFC reviewers role is to accept drafts which they believe have a better than 50% chance of surviving an immediate deletion process. As a fellow AFC reviewer I believe that the subject is not verified to pass WP:BIO, and that the draft was below the acceptance threshold. On that basis I would not have accepted it. The referencing is independent, yes, but the content of the references is gossip column-like trivia, which simulates significant coverage, but which is not. I see the only way of resolving this is for the community to discuss it, hence AfD 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 13:36, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Education, Internet, and India. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 13:36, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I am not going to vote here since my stance is clear, as I accepted the draft. At the time I saw the draft, it was not passing GNG, but I know the personality well and thought he might already have a Wikipedia article. When I found out he did not, I started to find significant coverages and added many that are currently cited. I respect Timtrent’s judgment, and we already discussed it on my talk page. We would like to get the community's views on the article. Lastly, I want to add that if the article can’t be kept, we can draftify it, as it has good sourcing, and the subject may gain more coverage to establish notability in the future. Happy editing. GrabUp - Talk 13:58, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Draftification is a perfectly acceptable outcome to me as nominator. I ought to have said that in the nomination. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 16:38, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Keep per WP:DONOTDEMOLISH - Subject has a reasonable claim to notability, and I don't see what draftifying would accomplish. ~Politicdude (About me, talk, contribs) 18:30, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I have done some research to find Hindi sources and interestingly found many that may establish notability.
*BBC Hindi | *News18 Hindi | *NewsNation | *AmarUjala | *News18 Hindi and *Dainik Jagran Hindi
In my opinion, the BBC Hindi one is a very powerful source with significant coverage. I will leave it to the community. Thanks. GrabUp - Talk 08:14, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think its the time for voting Keep. Grab</spanw>Up - Talk 08:22, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – Joe (talk) 17:17, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

~~Delete~~ : I can only find coverage about "criminal" activities [47], [48], but they don't seem notable and rather tabloidey... I don't find coverage of his streaming career, so there just isn't enough for notability. Oaktree b (talk) 23:14, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Oaktree b: Hey, can you comment on these Hindi sources I mentioned above, especially BBC Hindi? GrabUp - Talk 00:43, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep The BBC source translates fine, seems like substantial coverage. With the rest of them, should be ok for notability.Vote amended above. Oaktree b (talk) 22:58, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - The BBC source says, to me at least, that the subject of the article does indeed pass WP:BIO. We have plenty of articles on internet educators, and this person is plenty notable in India. — That Coptic Guy^{ping me!} (talk) (contribs) 03:58, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dokibird

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

All the coverage in the article is from February 2024 when she left the entertainment company Nijisanji. Beyond that, I've found two reliable sources that do not cover this topic (Siliconera 1, Siliconera 2). Wikipedia's notability criteria discourages articles on people notable for only one event, which this article seems to cover. Most of the content featured in the article also seems to be a content fork of the article Nijisanji. I suggest deleting the article or turning it into a redirect to the Nijisanji article. ArcticSeeress (talk) 08:47, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Women, Entertainment, and Internet. ArcticSeeress (talk) 08:47, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 09:21, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:47, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rewrite to remove all references to her previous identity as Selen. Otherwise, redirect to Nijisanji. Hansen Sebastian (Talk) 04:49, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Alexander Heid

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

References, when reliable, do not provide significant coverage of the subject to meet WP:BASIC.

Rolling Stone primarily covers HackMiami, mentions Heid in passing as an organizer of the event.
Financial Times quotes Heid in relation to the 2017 Equifax data breach.
Ars Technica doesn't mention Heid in the article at all. Brandon (talk) 05:15, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Computing, and Florida. Brandon (talk) 05:15, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, seems to meet WP:GNG per these two sources [49][50] which give sigcov but are not cited in the article. The RollingStone could also be of support because the subject is mentioned in at least three paragraphs. But almost all sources cited in the page fail notability requirement as the subject received zero mentions. Ednabrenze (talk) 07:48, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: This needs more participation from editors.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:18, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, seems to meet WP:GNG per the above referenced sources [1][2] which give significant coverage, the subject was the lead involved in all media interations for the content of the articles. The RollingStone article was coordinated by Heid as he is the founder of the HackMiami organization and the lead media liaison, and assisted in the entire process all the way through fact checking with RollingStone editors - additionally, as reverenced above the subject is mentioned in at least three paragraphs in the RS article.

Re: Financial Times - Heid was not only quoted in Financial Times but his discoveries were published in Forbes and referenced by a Senate Commission which names his employer at the time, and he was also the lead PR liaison with that as well - disclosing his discoveries directly to the press.

The Ars Technica article's content was based on a cybersecurity publication authored by Heid during his tenure at Prolexic, which received significant coverage. Infosecwiki (talk) 12:14, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You've added Youtube videos to the article but those are not considered reliable sources. I had removed the ones previously in the article. Please do not continue to add these. Lamona (talk) 00:52, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to HackMiami. The sources in the article are WP:TRIVIALMENTIONS of Heid, or else WP:PRIMARYSOURCES like patents or official bios and WP:PROMO fluff like "top 1000-cited papers on blockchain" (look closer: his paper on this list was cited just twice). The sources identified by Ednabrenze do not qualify. The Russ Banham article is self-published. (While it might otherwise count as WP:EXPERTSPS, given his reputation, the policy is very clear to "Never use self-published sources as third-party sources about living people, even if the author is an expert, well-known professional researcher, or writer.") The Caplin News article is published by Heid's alma mater FIU and written to spotlight him as an alumnus; it fails the test of independence. The sources not holding up to standalone notability, a redirect is an appropriate AtD. Dclemens1971 (talk) 14:16, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Reference the JSTOR, the Blockchain paper was cited over 38 times and has been circulating for over 11 years. Infosecwiki (talk) 16:05, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

~~Vote to Keep:~~ The Caplain News article is not an article highlighting alumni, as Heid never graduated from FIU and only attended for a few years in the early 2000s. The Caplain News Article was written by an independent journalist, Antonio Gimenez has authored numerous pieces on cybersecurity luminaries such as YTCracker, his interview subjects have no affiliateion to FIU unless it is coincidence. FIU will not claim the subject as a graduate, hence proof this is not an alumni fluff piece.

The Russ Banham article is not self published, as the self publishing requirement would dictate that the subject need write the article on their own - Russ Banham is a third party journalist who interviewed the subject and the article was synicated on various outlets. Infosecwiki (talk) 16:12, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No, please read WP:SPS. It doesn't only refer to material by the subject, it refers to any self-published source and Banham is publishing the article on his own site like a blog. I agree, he's an expert reporter, but the policy explicitly restricts self-published sources from being used on BLPs. As for the FIU piece, it specifically describes Heid as a former student (alumnus does not necessarily mean graduate) and it's thus not independent. Finally, please stop !voting "keep" with every comment. You've !voted three times and it appears that you are trying to throw off the conversation. One !vote is enough. Dclemens1971 (talk) 16:53, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the feedback. I will put it into practice. I updated the reference to include more than just the Caplain article. Infosecwiki (talk) 22:25, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Sourcing in the article is patents, and articles that mention the person in passing. Nothing found for notability otherwise, some PR items. Oaktree b (talk) 14:28, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Patent links removed, replaced with relevant notable content such as documented association with John McAfee. Citations updated for missing citation on conferences. Infosecwiki (talk) 16:02, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
In regards to above, i vote for ~~Keep~~ Infosecwiki (talk) 16:03, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Infosecwiki, you can only "vote" once so I struck your duplicate votes. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:19, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. Infosecwiki, do you have a WP:CONFLICTOFINTEREST that you need to disclose? Above you state that Heid is "the lead media liaison, and assisted in the entire process all the way through fact checking with RollingStone editors." You also state that "he was also the lead PR liaison" on the Financial Times piece. Neither the Rolling Stone nor FT pieces say that Heid coordinated the PR process, and the HackMiami site does not say that either. That's the kind of information that, if true, could only be obtained by someone affiliated with or otherwise close to Heid and HackMiami. That plus the fact that you have only edited on these two topics raises concern that you may have an undisclosed conflict of interest. Can you address this? (P.S. If Heid was involved, as you say, in the production of these articles, that would argue against them being able to meet the independence standard required for notability.) Dclemens1971 (talk) 20:45, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I am referring to old Twitter discussions that I remember observing from years ago when the articles were released, I do not have any proof of these claims in present day 2024. I openly disclose I not only edited this article, but I created it over a decade ago. I am fully willing to disclose that I am the original author of this article as well as the HackMiami article. The subject of this piece has had notable accomplishments outside the realm of HackMiami and had a page created, and for the last decade it has stood the test until recent inquiries. I fully support the regular review of this article for continued inclusion, as such diligence is what makes Wikipedia the global standard of information. Infosecwiki (talk) 22:07, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Reminder that editors can only cast one bolded vote.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:21, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Prashanth Venkataramanujam

AfDs for this article:

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

Non-notable BLP. Sources relate either to Patriot Act or Hasan Minhaj. – Broccoli & Coffee ^{(Oh hai)} 21:11, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Patriot Act with Hasan Minhaj, you mean? And he might mean WP:CREATIVE as creator/writer of this series... -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 13:07, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Television. – Broccoli & Coffee ^{(Oh hai)} 21:11, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Illinois-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 22:04, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 19:59, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Not eligible for Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:19, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:25, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Patriot_Act_with_Hasan_Minhaj#Production: which seems to be what he is notable for so far. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 20:31, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with the redirect proposed above. Drmies (talk) 22:46, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Faris Mannekkara

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

Likely to fail WP:NBIO - sourced to PR/puff pieces.
Earlier draft: Draft:Muhammed Faris Mannekkara KH-1 (talk) 00:50, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. KH-1 (talk) 00:50, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and Kerala. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:16, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete The editor who wrote this article made a Draft:Muhammed Faris Mannekkara on 08:13, 22 June 2024 and kept it and later made a new article with a slight change in the title, which is a wrong trend and does not prove WP:NBIO. ~ Spworld2 (talk) 04:00, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Although the editor who made this page did a mistake by creating a draft and then again creating it into the main space, maybe he is a newbie that's why....but if we look at the person's page, he was awarded the community Leader Award from the Kerala State Women's Development Corporation which is a state award from the person's home state which is in Kerala and the Fulbright Foundation’s Global Changemaker Award in 2023 which is a International award given by the US Government which i believe at least qualify the award category of the people's notability guidelines according to the guidelines written in Wikipedia. This guy also has a significant coverage in The Times of India, Economics Times , Ahmedabad Mirror which i believe is considered reliable in Wikipedia. So we have 2 of the 3 basic criteria except the national dictionary thing ....also While reading the content of these articles i don't see any kind of sponsored post written or a disclaimer in the news coverage these are just my analysis. SATavr (talk) 16:19, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It may be ignorance / new editor who wrote the draft and then made a new page, but destroyed the first edits in the first draft and deleted it in a completely unrecognizable form, added another person to it and added it to his date of birth and created a misunderstanding because of lack of knowledge?? Draft:Muhammed Faris Mannekkara Difference between revisions [51], Draft:Muhammed Faris Mannekkara 2nd Difference between revisions[52] Spworld2 (talk) 06:03, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I do agree with you. It was a stupid mistake done by this new editor and i think he lacks the patience for it and just wanted to go directly with a shortcut way for publication. Thats why he change the draft content to a different person and he thought we would'nt know lol..... I believe he has learned a lesson not to do it again and i hope he has got to know that things doesnt workout like this. SATavr (talk) 09:10, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep A before search comes up with many sources. (e.g. [1] [2]. Numerous articles featuring the names appear, the most of them in Hindi and English. Tiger-in-Action (talk) 08:13, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

PR/churnalism doesn’t count. Both articles are just advertorials for his car company.-KH-1 (talk) 10:37, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

These articles discuss his side automobile firm, yet his Wikipedia biography hardly ever mentions this information. The autogenerated nature of these stories is not disclaimed, as is typically the case. The name of the publisher, Sunil Chaurasia, is also mentioned in The Economic Times. His social work is the subject of major pieces that don't appear to be PR or churnalism. They include original research, such as his participation in and thorough coverage of the Sankesh Foundation and the Smiles Foundation. - [3] which is covered in the Ahmedabad Mirror. Another example is his relationship with Shyalash C, his mentor, which isn't mentioned on his Wikipedia page but is confirmed as original research in Punjab Kesari - [4]. Tiger-in-Action (talk) 09:09, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. It would be nice to hear from some more experienced editors about whether sourcing is sufficient to establish notability.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:04, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The person is currently serving as a Global Peace Ambassador under UN75. He has been awarded the Fulbright Award and a State Government Award from Kerala. He meets the basic criteria of WP:GNG and WP:BIO. With regards to his sources the news articles on his social work looks fine but the same cannot be said for some of his articles written about his second-hand car business found in google but considering that his Wikipedia page does not cover his car business, overall, it looks fine to me. Master rollo (talk) 11:29, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I am seriously asking for experienced editors who frequent AFD discussions to review this article.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:39, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: I only get two pages of Gnews results, most are by "staff" or puff pieces/advertorials. The Fullbright sounds promising, but without sourcing we can't confirm, nor do we have enough for notability. Oaktree b (talk) 00:51, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Best I could find was this [53]; GTranslate seems to say it's a staff piece, so likely about as unreliable as the rest of what's already in the article. Oaktree b (talk) 00:52, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I would suggest searching by his full name, Muhammad Faris Mannekkara, to find additional articles about him. Also, please check the sources listed on his Wikipedia page. it maybe possible that his articles are ranked poorly in google search engine. that's why less result are been shown but if you try his full name which act like a keyword you will find the news article. Regarding his Fulbright award, it is published in this source as well. [5].

When i am doing the Google Translate for this article - [3] it is referring the person as "she" instead of "He" and is not translating the words in a properly manner. Also the article mentions the author's name as well - Gaurav Tiwari which means it contradict the claim that it was written by multiple staff. Also there aren't any disclaimer that says this story is autogenerated. Blackwatch007 (talk) 15:44, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was redirect‎ to List of Gloucestershire County Cricket Club players with no prejudice to recreation as an article if further sources develop in the future. Barkeep49 (talk) 02:38, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Joe Phillips (English cricketer, born 2003)

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

Subject person played only 1 List-A and 2 First class match. Does WP:GNG surpasses WP:NCRICK? Twinkle1990 (talk) 15:42, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sports and Cricket. Twinkle1990 (talk) 15:42, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and England. Twinkle1990 (talk) 17:13, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:59, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Twinkle1990: - can I just point out NSPORT states that "Failing to meet the criteria in this guideline means that notability will need to be established in other ways (for example, the general notability guideline...) - so all NSPORT is saying that people who meet those criteria are considered notable, but not meeting those criteria doesn't automatically make them non-notable. Mdann52 (talk) 20:50, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - meets GNG. Mdann52 (talk) 20:50, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Doesn't appear on the cricket delsort - tryingto add that again first Blue Square Thing (talk) 05:53, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Cricket-related deletion discussions. Blue Square Thing (talk) 05:53, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
At worst this is an obvious redirect to List of Gloucestershire County Cricket Club players where his name needs to be added. A note should also be added, as has been done for others. Beyond that I have no particular view here - there are some sources, but not so many. I suspect he is likely to be covered in others as well fwiw Blue Square Thing (talk) 05:56, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to List of Gloucestershire County Cricket Club players. He does not meet GNG - this is the one qualifying source. Gloscricket is obviously not independent coverage. -- asilvering (talk) 18:13, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Given the delsort issues, more eyes won't hurt.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 18:13, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, but he may be notable in the future, i.e. WP:NOTNOW. SWinxy (talk) 01:14, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@SWinxy, in this case, wouldn't a redirect be more appropriate? That way, if he becomes notable in the future, someone won't have to start the article from scratch. -- asilvering (talk) 18:27, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, borderline decision but given the rhythms and vagaries of the English county cricket season we are approaching the part where younger players are used to a greater extent, precisely the time this page will be useful to people who follow the game to refer to. Hildreth Gazzard (talk) 06:47, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to List of Gloucestershire County Cricket Club players. References are currently insufficient for GNG. Frank Anchor 18:04, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep. Passes WP:NCRIC as a cricketer who has played at the highest domestic level. I would add [54] and maybe [55] to the references. Tau Corvi (talk) 14:18, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: No clear consensus yet.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 19:26, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - This AfD was initiated after an AFC discussion. I don't see any rationale AfD discussion here. Twinkle1990 (talk) 16:00, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
can you please clarify what you mean here, or adjust the link to point to a discussion? Star Mississippi 16:23, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Link corrected now. Sorry for the confusing link. Twinkle1990 (talk) 01:56, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

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

People proposed deletions

Academics and educators

Abhishek Kumar Srivastava

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

I don't see the person passes WP:NPROF as well as WP:GNG. Twinkle1990 (talk) 08:30, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Academics and educators, and India. Twinkle1990 (talk) 08:30, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete- No third party news organisation has reported specifically on him. Changeworld1984 (talk) 09:31, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Uttar Pradesh-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 09:40, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Very obvious case. While he has made a good start to his career, it is rare for associate Profs to meet WP:NPROF. Adequate but not notable publication record, no major awards, no major converage. Ldm1954 (talk) 13:49, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Searching for author AK-Srivastava and keyword corona finds citations that look headed to a successful academic career but are not at the level required for WP:PROF#C1 yet. No other notability criterion is evident. —David Eppstein (talk) 18:48, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

S. Brent Morris

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

Fails WP:NAUTHOR. No clear notability. Longhornsg (talk) 18:51, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Military, Organizations, Mathematics, and United States of America. Longhornsg (talk) 18:51, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:29, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Notable for work on Freemasonry and mathematics. Xxanthippe (talk) 23:16, 20 July 2024 (UTC).[reply]
Weak keep. I found 11 published reviews of 4 books (one mathematics, three Freemasonry). That would ordinarily be enough for a full keep from me, except that three of the books are edited rather than authored and that doesn't count for as much. —David Eppstein (talk) 00:38, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Add later: I also found one more review of an authored work but in a Freemasonry journal (nine of the other reviews are in mainstream publications). Perhaps that counts less? —David Eppstein (talk) 18:50, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bent Flyvbjerg

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

GNG - non-notable researcher lacks significant coverage, in both reliable and non-reliable sources. Article seems autobiographical, with 20/25 sources being written by the subject. Couruu (talk) 12:32, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Sources do not establish notability. Also note that this person is the subject of an extensive promotional campaign of citespam and other articles (see Making Social Science Matter on his book). See Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Sonderbro/Archive for more info on the socks, including the creator of the biographical article. - MrOllie (talk) 12:39, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators and Denmark. Shellwood (talk) 12:44, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Although this article needs significant alteration and removal of unreliable sources in places, the subject is the Villum Kann Rasmussen Professor, a named professorship, at IT University of Copenhagen. This seems to me to meet C5 of WP:NPROF, which is sufficient to establish notability. Again, the article needs substantial editing but the subject appears to be notable. Qflib (talk) 13:30, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Philosophy, Economics, Geography, and Technology. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:59, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not to Delete The article should not be removed as the citations are available. Wikicontriiiiibute (talk) 11:40, 19 July 2024 (UTC) — Wikicontriiiiibute (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

Speedy keep WP:SK3 totally faulty nomination fails to even consider the appropriate notability criterion, WP:PROF, which is independent of GNG. Massive citation counts give him an easy pass of WP:PROF#C1 and named professorships at two universities pass #C5. He also appears to pass WP:AUTHOR with multiple published reviews of his books. —David Eppstein (talk) 19:41, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I don't see how he's notable under WP:GNG, nor do I believe there should be an exception for academics. It's also promotional - it's not really an encyclopedia article. SportingFlyer T·C 22:28, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Your failure to abide by established Wikipedia's guidelines and consensus is nobody's problem but your own, and is misplaced here, where to have any weight arguments should be based on those things and not on personal opinion. But, to be explicit: there are many published works that go in depth into his work (in particular the book reviews I alluded to above). Or are WP:BEFORE and WP:DINC, and the existence of sources beyond what is already in the article, another part of the established guidelines and consensus that you reject? —David Eppstein (talk) 00:18, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Because the article is horribly promotional and I agree with the citespam comment. He probably does pass WP:NAUTHOR on a second look, but WP:TNT should apply. SportingFlyer T·C 07:09, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Also, being able to have articles on cricketers who appeared in any first class match were once Wikipedia's established guidelines and consensus. Consensus can change. SportingFlyer T·C 07:09, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: In addition to the clear WP:NPROF pass through both citations (80,000 citations, including twelve over 1,000 and one over 20,000) and holding a named chair, there is also a good argument for an WP:NAUTHOR pass as a brief spot-check returned a number of reviews for his books. Academics generally do not receive coverage in the same way as celebrities and politicians, but (especially for those like this, who are at the absolute top of their field) are mission critical for us to cover. Curbon7 (talk) 00:36, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thomas Lockley

AfDs for this article:

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

Does not seem to pass GNG or even SNG. His work may be notable, he is not. Slatersteven (talk) 13:21, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It appears that the deletion proposal has been compromised by it trending on Twitter/X, as I found out about the proposed deletion of this page through my Twitter/X feed.

Example: https://x.com/GiveMeBanHammer/status/1814652541755662480 Obversa (talk) 15:13, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Actually should have CSD'd as its been deleted before. Slatersteven (talk) 13:23, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The first deletion seems to have happened 6 years ago, back when his Yasuke book was yet to reach the other side of the pond. He and his work have since become much more notable since then, for better or worse. It's better we keep this page for that reason alone. --Jnglmpera (talk) 13:34, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The deletion proposal also appears to have been compromised by it trending on Twitter/X: https://x.com/GiveMeBanHammer/status/1814652541755662480. Due to this, I also think it is better to keep the page for now due to possible interference by non-Wikipedians for or against the deletion of the page. Obversa (talk) 15:15, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If outsiders notice it, it's fine, and not really a reason in and of itself for one course of action or another. Most people here are names I recognize. SWinxy (talk) 18:09, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. There is significant coverage and reviews of African Samurai: The True Story of Yasuke including in the Washington Post, The Houston Chronicle, Library Journal, Booklist, and a large number of other places. Author meets the notability guidelines at WP:Author.--SouthernNights (talk) 14:16, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Just want to point out that I think this policy is REALLY wrong-headed or at least used in ways not intended. The wording for 1-4 are vague and utterly subjective, and you can make a case for literally every author ever since almost every book gets a review somewhere at some point, and the definition of a PhD is to create new knowledge, and academics write on subject matter. It amounts to saying the person is an academic. It's a carte blanche to make thousands of Wikipedia pages on nobodies who no one has ever heard about. There absolutely has to be SOME requirement that SOME news source SOMEWHERE covered the actual person and not just some review of the book. Like it or not, Tia Tequila is more notable than 99.9% of humanity. Harizotoh9 (talk) 21:28, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The policy is actually 100% on point. The notability of creative people like artists and writers is determined by what they create. Many creative people also avoid publicity and the limelight, which is one of the reasons why this policy was developed. As for reviews, the gold standard are reviews from notable media sources like Publishers Weekly. As a result, we don't just accept any random review out there. SouthernNights (talk) 10:35, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The policy as written seems to be meant for a very, very, small niche of elite people, whereas it's more or less used that any author and academic deserves a Wikipedia page. In fact I'm hard pressed to see how ANY author or PhD would fail this test. If someone gets a PhD or writes a book on a subject, they're defacto an expert, and if they publish any work it's gonna get reviews. So we end up with thousands upon thousands of perma-stub wikipedia pages on utter nobodies. So somehow it doesn't matter that there's literally never been a SINGLE article anywhere on this person or a complete dearth of biographical information other than a 1-2 sentence bio from the publisher.

"Many creative people also avoid publicity and the limelight" ie 100 non-notable. And that notability isn't derived from their works, so if a book gets reviews it's the BOOK that should get a page, not the author! The advocates of this policy seem to cite morality, that it's a moral good to have pages on "important" figures like academics and scientists because otherwise the site would be filled with biographies on celebrities. And there's some projects that seem to make it their lifes mission to make these kind of pages to right some historical wrong. But that is just how notability works. Tia Tequila is more notable than most of humanity, and that is fine. These academics should be seen as SOURCES not subjects for Wikipedia. Harizotoh9 (talk) 17:12, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I really don't think having a single well reviewed book is enough to pass WP:AUTHOR. By this standard almost any academic who has published a book (which tend to be frequently reviewed in academic journals) would be notable. His citation record is quite weak [56] Hemiauchenia (talk) 04:40, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed on keep due to now increased notability as mentioned here and by Silver seren. SmallMender (talk) 11:02, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, United Kingdom, and England. Shellwood (talk) 17:05, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. Thibaut (talk) 18:44, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Meets WP:Author as explained by SouthernNights. His work is notable, and his authorship of one of his works has been widely recognized - this is enough to establish notability. Qflib (talk) 13:47, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Deleting this article is much less intellectually honest and useful than documenting how (Redacted). Wikipedia is ought to be an encyclopedia, and an encyclopedia is ought to tell the truth. 122.213.236.124 (talk) 02:29, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete/refocus article on book. Google scholar profile shows citations are nowhere near enough to pass WP:PROF [57]. A single book is not enough to pass WP:AUTHOR, though the book clearly passes WP:NBOOK. I would recommend this article be reworked to focus primary on the book, similar to the result of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Abigail Shrier. Hemiauchenia (talk) 04:45, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hemiauchenia, there's a major difference between a book that received just a few reviews and one that received a ton internationally. Which is why WP:AUTHOR doesn't refer to multiple books being the sole requirement of #3, but that a well-known work singular can be enough. Anyways, here I go.

And that's just from a Google search and ProQuest (and the main WPL one, which I didn't expect to find anything at all, surprised about the Geographical result), without even trying any variant searches or anything to tease out deeper stuff. Silver seren^C 07:13, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Also, you know, the second book and stuff I pointed out just below. Silver seren^C 07:13, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Lockley has a second book that came out as of two months ago, A Gentleman from Japan, and though it is still rather new, there's still a fair number of reviews out, even in that short time period. Interestingly, there's also an older article from several years back covering his research on this newly released book. As for him personally, there's plenty of articles related to his first book release that include biographical details about him, such as this article from the Mainichi Shimbun. So I fail to see how he doesn't meet the requirements of both the WP:GNG and, if it matters, WP:AUTHOR. Heck, per #3, I would say his first book more than blows out of the water the "significant or well-known work" requirement, as the amount of reviews of the book across international media are really too many to count. The list would be incredibly long. Silver seren^C 06:19, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The many reviews of both Yasuke and A Gentleman linked above by Silver seren meet my usual standard for WP:AUTHOR: multiple published reviews each of multiple books. There appears to be a lot of race-related drama over this subject on the net, in Japanese media [58] [59], and at WP:ANI, on which I have no informed opinion, but that should not compromise our standards for notability. To the contrary, if any of that can be backed by reliable sources it would only increase notability. —David Eppstein (talk) 07:38, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per David Eppstein. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 11:57, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The person in question is currently the focus of the current Assassin's Creed Shadow's controversy with relevant discussions bombarded with near-live updates from sketchy twitter sources about the author to discredit him. There have been reports exclusive to unreliable sources and twitter that he has been either fired or is under investigation by Nihon University - but he is still listed on Nihon's website and this week was part of an editorial comission for Britannica's page on Yasuke. I do not wish to derail this into a wallpost of whether Lockley is a reliable source or not (there is already an RSN for that), but rather to show that the subject of the article is currently undergoing a media frenzy where a lot of claims made are fabricated or unverified, relevant wiki discussions are being flooded with SPA's that violate BLP at this person, and to ultimately suggest that Lockley's page should follow a 'wait-and-see' approach until (at the earliest) the ANI has concluded, sanctions on the topic are imposed, or it gets raised to Arbcom as has been suggested as a possibility. Relm (talk) 12:02, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. The off-site links posted above show a lot of interest in this page and the Yasuke page, for whatever reasons. I worry that this off-site interest will just cause headaches. I say keep it as is, until all of this current popularity is gone. Then reassess if needed, which I'm not sure of; based on other comments about the authors upcoming works and general notability. Hooples (talk) 16:22, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Juan Carlos Cusi Martinez

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

Academic who appears to be a research scientist, with not many publications, no wider coverage and no major awards. Notability was tagged by a different editor in May, nothing has been done. Hence time for an AfD as he seems to be far short of WP:NPROF Ldm1954 (talk) 19:41, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Ldm1954 (talk) 19:41, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Peru-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 21:07, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Does not meet any criterion of WP:NPROF. Way too early in this scientist's career to establish notability through NPROF. Qflib (talk) 13:37, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pál Csokán

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

I couldn't find sources to add proving he meets WP:PROF / WP:GNG. Boleyn (talk) 16:15, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators and Hungary. Shellwood (talk) 16:42, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. He seems to be virtually unknown to chemists outside Hungary. Google Scholar lists six publications, five in Hungarian and one in German, with a total of four citations. The Hungarian version of the article says that "More than 200 scientific articles and 17 books, university notes and book excerpts have been published," (from Google Translate), so maybe Google Scholar has it wrong. Athel cb (talk) 17:05, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I don't think Google Scholar has it wrong. My searches aren't showing any support for any criterion of WP:NPROF being met. Qflib (talk) 17:52, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:01, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. We're talking about a scholar who likely retired decades before the WWW existed and published primarily in Hungarian – Google Scholar is definitely wrong. – Joe (talk) 18:14, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:24, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Paulette Flint

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

Does not meet WP:AUTHOR and WP:BIO. Many of the citations are primary as her employer is The Observer (Gladstone). Not seeing indepth third party coverage to meet WP:BIO. Also an orphan article. LibStar (talk) 04:08, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, History, and Australia. LibStar (talk) 04:08, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: although being an orphan isn't a reason for deletion, there's not enough WP:RS to meet WP:GNG, and none of the WP:AUTHOR criteria apply. — Alien333 (what I did & why I did it wrong) 09:49, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: In a Newsbank database search (deeper and wider than Google) I found many articles by her but few about her, insufficient to meet WP:ANYBIO,WP:AUTHOR or WP:PROF (in her capacity as a Gladstone regional historian). She seems to be a WP:RTM Gladstone regional journalist. Cabrils (talk) 01:22, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators and Authors. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:43, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

Kade Ferris

AfDs for this article:

Articles for deletion/Kade Ferris

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

I believe this article should be deleted because it clearly fails WP:NOTE. OldDiddlyBop (talk) 11:35, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators and Archaeology. Shellwood (talk) 11:55, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The cited sources are a bit thin but I wouldn't say it's 'clear' either way. Did you look for sources? The article lists several books authored by the subject, did you look for reviews per WP:NAUTHOR? – Joe (talk) 13:00, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah I can't find anything to meet the Wikipedia notability guidelines. I still stand by deleting this article. OldDiddlyBop (talk) 16:08, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nope this article fails notability guidelines for authors too. It seems this page was made by friends of the article's subject. OldDiddlyBop (talk) 16:12, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What makes you think it was made by friends of the subject? Belbury (talk) 08:49, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. His books appear to be self-published but that would be ok if there were reliably published reviews of them. I couldn't find any. The sources in the article now include a book review, but of someone else's book and mentioning Ferris only in passing. The only in-depth source that we have is a local-news obituary, appearing to be a family-written obituary rather than a work of independent journalism. That's not enough. —David Eppstein (talk) 17:33, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@David Eppstein Kade Ferris is the author. Charles Albert Bender = Chief Bender and is the subject of the biography. There are other reviews of that book too. Anyway I'm leaning keep. Cielquiparle (talk) 22:28, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Chief Bender meets notability guidelines for his sports career while Ferris does not meet any Wikipedia notability guidelines. OldDiddlyBop (talk) 00:15, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Are you telling me that the book Métis and the Medicine Line: Creating a Border and Dividing a People, with the author listed as Michel Hogue on the cover, is really by Kade Ferris? Because that is the book whose review I was referring to. —David Eppstein (talk) 00:20, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@David Eppstein Right. I clocked that the first time I read your comment, but the second time I read it, I read it the other way. I can add the other book reviews (of his book) and also quote from at least one other book I found. Cielquiparle (talk) 05:26, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This article still seems to fail WP:NTEMP and WP:SUSTAINED OldDiddlyBop (talk) 16:12, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Minnesota, and North Dakota. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:50, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. I see that the review in American Indian Children's Literature got removed from the article as a source. I am adding it back. While the site itself could be construed as a blog, the reason this particular blog qualifies as a reliable source per WP:BLOGS, is that it is produced by Debbie Reese, who is an established subject-matter expert, whose work in the relevant field has previously been published by reliable, independent publications. Cielquiparle (talk) 05:47, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - I expanded it to include more about the impact of his tribal history preservation work and the impact that has on reservations, ND and MN educational standards and added information about his mapping skills. oncamera _{(talk page)} 08:59, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I still don't see how this article ceases to fail WP:NOTE WP:NTEMP and WP:SUSTAINED. OldDiddlyBop (talk) 16:11, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
His written work as an author and oral traditions that he embedded within his maps, blogs, and recorded videos for the state of North Dakota established notability. He was a respected tribal historian and elder knowledge keeper and professional work reflects that. oncamera _{(talk page)} 21:07, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The article has now been puffed up with some 30 footnotes, most of which do not seem to be the sort of in-depth independent and reliably-published coverage of the subject that could be used to pass WP:GNG. Of the ones that actually mention Ferris or his works in their title, "Kade Ferris's Gift" is an interview (not usually counted as independent), the Red Lake Nation News obituary reads like a family-written obituary (not independent), the Mendoza book review is in a blog (not reliably published), Teachings of Our Elders is by him not about him, and Archaeologist presents has no depth of coverage of Ferris. Perhaps, per WP:THREE, advocates of keeping the article could save us the effort of similarly evaluating all 30 of the footnotes and point us to three sources that are actually in-depth, independent, and reliably-published? I'm looking for a small number of high-quality sources, at most three, not many low-quality sources. —David Eppstein (talk) 23:16, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that it would be helpful to hear the three best sources. It seems like notability is marginal at best and it's hard to see through all the passing coverage. – Joe (talk) 08:12, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Joe Roe, thanks for asking. I'd say that these sources are strong: 1) Obit from the Indigenous news press, BobaaMaajimowinan (Telling of the News in Different Places) Red Lake Nation News [60]; 2) Obit in the peer-reviewed academic journal, Minnesota History (can be read on JSTOR via WP:LIB) [61]; 3) The Extra, a newspaper covering Red River Valley, eastern North Dakota and northwestern Minnesota areas, on Ferris' book on Charles Bender [62]; 4) The Indigenous radio program, Minnesota Native News on Ferris' contributions to children's literature [63]; 5) Voice of America [64]; 6) Book review in American Indians in Children's Literature (which unfortunately is published thru blogspot, so it may not count since it's a blog) [65]; among others....please have a look at the improved article along with the current sourcing when you find a moment (sorry I don't have the time right now to list more). However there is less coverage but still solidly sourced: 3-minute PBS (Arizona) discussion with Ferris re: Indigenous reconciliation and cultural healing. The book review on Hogue's book on the Métis includes a quote Ferris as an expert on Métis culture. Some of the other sources are primary sources, such as press releases, or Indigenous human rights and environmental justice publications where he is called up on as an expert, for example this [66] from the Minnesota government's website. To my way of thinking he is clearly notable, and especially so in Indigenous Native American communities as an important leader and thinker, which is just as important as "mainstream American" culture. Netherzone (talk) 17:44, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Strong keep. This article was already extremely well cited, but I added an infobox and a little bit more. His notability stems from his tribal historic preservation work which is interdisciplinary (history, anthropology, archaeology, policy making, language advocacy, etc.) Yuchitown (talk) 16:34, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Can you please address the discussion above about lack of high-quality sourcing, rather than merely asserting that "This article was already extremely well cited" when clearly it isn't? It has many sources but that misses the point. We need a small number of high-quality sources, and continuing to add larger numbers of low-quality sources only makes notability harder to discern by hiding the good sources in a big pile of dross. It would be better to remove both the low-quality sources and the material sourced to them so that we can focus on the essentials. The sources you added (his own dissertation and a web page about someone else that mentions him in passing) do not contribute to notability according to Wikipedia's standards for notability, which are not based on the work the subject might have done but rather on the depth of coverage of the subject in sources that are independent of him and meet Wikipedia's standards for reliable publication. —David Eppstein (talk) 18:55, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't appreciate the suggestion that tribal newspapers are "low-quality sources." Like I wrote, his notability is based on being a THPO, so it's interdisciplinary. He was not just a writer. While several pieces (Red Lake Nation News, Minnesota Native News) focus on him specifically, even if these didn't exist, Wikipedia:Notability (people) states: If the depth of coverage in any given source is not substantial, then multiple independent sources may be combined to demonstrate notability. He has contributed "part of the enduring historical record" of the Métis people. Yuchitown (talk) 02:06, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Tribal newspapers are as reliable as any other newspaper. But when a local newspaper (tribal or not) runs an obituary that reads like the sort of obituary written by a family member to announce a death, rather than the kind of obituary that major newspapers write themselves when famous people die, it doesn't count much towards notability. For one thing, if it is indeed written by family, it is not an independent source. —David Eppstein (talk) 06:06, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
.... even if these didn't exist, Wikipedia:Notability (people) states: "If the depth of coverage in any given source is not substantial, then multiple independent sources may be combined to demonstrate notability". He has contributed "part of the enduring historical record" of the Métis people. Yuchitown (talk) 13:55, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
So much a part of the enduring historical record that the only Wikilink to him from any other article is a an unsourced sentence about him in an article about a village in Lebanon, stating that he is also of Lebanese descent, something that appears nowhere in the Kade Ferris article itself? —David Eppstein (talk) 19:10, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If that's an issue to you, you can help expand topics on Turtle Mountain, the Ojibwe or Metis history and credit/wikilink his article from those edits. Wikipedia needs more editors in that area. oncamera _{(talk page)} 10:27, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I definitely think the Métis have an interesting history that deserves to be better-known, but I have no special expertise in that area, and I have even less knowledge of Turtle Mountain or the Ojibwe.

Incidentally, I can find no evidence that Kade Ferris had any connection to Lebanon, outside of a few unreliable web sources. I have removed the link to him from the Lebanese village article. His mother was from Minnesota and his father was originally from the Turtle Mountain Reservation. I suspect his father, Albert Ferris, may have some notability as an artist. —David Eppstein (talk) 19:14, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - I just came across this AfD and don't entirely feel experienced enough with guidelines to vote either way, but I'd like to note that Ferris' work on map decolonization and geographic technologies (as THPO for the Red Lake Nation) was significant enough that he gave a full-fledged presentation at the Council for Minnesota Archaeology's 2023 annual conference, entitled "Creating a Virtual Database for Regional Tribal Resource Management and Consultation". I don't know if, for example, a program (with an abstract of his talk) from the conference (the most important one on Minnesota archaeology, as far as I know) would count towards GNG, but I do have such a document if uploading it somewhere could prove useful. Thanks. SunTunnels (talk) 21:41, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think that giving a lecture or presentation at a conference is a stand-out event. Doing that is an ordinary part of an academic's job. The only exceptions would be instances where being selected to give the lecture is itself a high honor, like when a national academic society invites someone to do the Annual So-and-so Memorial Lecture. That can be an indication that the field regards the person's work as particularly important. XOR'easter (talk) 21:02, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Please address the question of notability per cited sources.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 15:52, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Recheck the article. It's completely fine now. Yuchitown (talk) 03:26, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

False. There are still zero WP:GNG-contributing sources: sources that provide in-depth content about Ferris, are written independently of their subjects, and are reliably published. None of the previous keep comments have even attempted to address those requirements of GNG. —David Eppstein (talk) 19:59, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Kade Ferris was a distinguished archaeologist, anthropologist and historian, one of the first Indigenous archaeologists in the U.S. I've made some improvements, including adding a book review and an obit in an academic journal. He clearly meets criterion #2 of WP:ANYBIO, WP:BASIC and also nows meet GNG. As an aside, I find it really quite odd that the nominator would assume that It seems this page was made by friends of the article's subject especially given the fact that such a new editor, with only 40 total edits (the majority of which were to the article or this AfD) would make such a comment. I guess I'm also a little curious how they learned by their 20th edit how to produce an AfD so quickly. Nominator, do you yourself have a connection to the subject of the article and why would you make such a statement? Netherzone (talk) 17:50, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Adding "Strong" in front of your !vote, or casting aspersions at the nom, will not give your view more weight. Highlighting sources that provide WP:SIGCOV will.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 19:27, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. An obituary in a history journal and status as one of the first indigenous archaeologists are compelling. Good articles like this go a long way toward correcting long-standing biases on Wikipedia. 172.9.46.64 (talk) 02:11, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What biases are you referring to? Are you implying that this is bias instead of this figure not meeting notability guidelines? Do you have any evidence of bias or is this a baseless accusation? This article was not nominated for deletion in bad faith. OldDiddlyBop (talk) 21:52, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There has been discussions on here and elsewhere in response to a scholarly paper written about the bias against topics about Indigenous people and history. Wikipedia Signpost. And Netherzone did bring up questions about how this account with limited edits would know how to nominate for deletion which was not addressed by the OP. oncamera _{(talk page)} 22:29, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Additionally, there is one "delete" vote and three "keep" votes plus one "leaning keep." The article has been vastly improved since nomination. This conversation has dragged on for more than two weeks now. Yuchitown (talk) 01:52, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I never interacted with, knew, or worked for Ferris, but for a brief period I watched some of his work from afar. The history journal obit that IP 172.9.46.64 linked to is in my opinion good evidence of what I anecdotally have observed, which is that Ferris did some groundbreaking work that was recognized by his archaeologist and historian peers. Unfortunately for his Wikipedia article, Ferris also worked in an often-overlooked discipline (tribal historic preservation) that doesn't frequently make it into the kind of secondary sources that Wikipedia values for notability purposes. I think a good chunk of that is due to broader systemic biases, absolutely, but I suppose that's not what we're discussing here. Wikipedia's notability standards are likely different from what we as individuals may think makes a person notable. Even so, I think the journal Minnesota History writing "Kade was one of the first THPOs and native archaeologists in the country [....] His dedication to the work in the fields of history, archaeology, and tribal preservation led to his assistance in the development of many THPOs across the region" demonstrates notability by Wikipedia's standards. I can absolutely see how others may disagree, however. SunTunnels (talk) 16:07, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Keep. The article has clearly been improved since it was nominated and I'm suprised it hasn't been closed yet. I can't really fathom any reason to delete it now that it has a massive number of sources and clearly meets GNG.

PersusjCP (talk) 20:24, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletions

Robert C. Koons (via WP:PROD on 17 July 2024)

Actors and filmmakers

Joshua Broome

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

Soft Delete, so no issue with recreation, however factors do not appear to have changed substantively since Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rocco Reed. No indication Broome meets notability requirements as either an entertainer or a religious figure. Star Mississippi 19:22, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, Entertainment, and Religion. Star Mississippi 19:22, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sexuality and gender, Christianity, California, North Carolina, and South Carolina. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:28, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been added to the WikiProject Pornography list of deletions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:31, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: "Gay porn star to preacher" is an interesting, rather unusual career path. The CBN article now used is a RS, and I have this [67] in Fox News, this NY Post [68] which is a marginal source for entertainment news and this in another christian media [69]. I think we have enough for notability. Oaktree b (talk) 00:18, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Here's a story in a newspaper about him [70]. Oaktree b (talk) 00:22, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Khais Millen

AfDs for this article:

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

Immediately refunded after soft deletion in 2023 but no change to address concerns in first AfD. Film writer/director who does not pass WP:GNG, WP:NCREATIVE, WP:NBIO. Most sources are [WP:TRIVIALMENTIONS]] if they mention him at all; there's an interview that's a WP:PRIMARYSOURCE and a single example of WP:SIGCOV that exhibits all the hallmarks of unreliable content of WP:NEWSORGINDIA. Not enough to pass. Dclemens1971 (talk) 15:44, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: fairly meets WP:DIRECTOR AND WP:CREATIVE with at least 3 2 notable films directed and 3 2 written (not mentioning the fact he produced. 2); the said films are notable creations that received independent and in-depth coverage mentioning him. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 16:18, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What part of WP:DIRECTOR are you referring to with "three notable films"? (Only two films he has been involved in even have en-wiki pages and only one of those he directed.) The only criterion I could plausibly see cited is "The person has created or played a major role in co-creating a significant or well-known work or collective body of work," but there's no evidence that any of his works are "significant or well-known." Dclemens1971 (talk) 16:23, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I consider his debut film as director notable enough. See coverage about it online. It has no page yet on WP, true. Added 2 links to the article. Writer: my bad, I had counted Lipstick, which is a short. Even if it's only two or even if it it was only one, he would pass both SNGs because these works can be considered significant, as coverage shows. I'll leave it at that as he is a really clear pass imv.-My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 16:38, 16 July 2024 (UTC) (number of significant films; clarification: 3 or 4 films including 2 directed (Thala; and I count Aakashvani), 2 written (Adithattu and Thala, to which one can add again Aakashvani)); the 1st has received a significant award and is clearly significant imv).-My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 16:51, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, India, and Kerala. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 16:19, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment on the opening assertion in the nomination: sorry but no change to address concerns in first AfD is an inaccurate statement.-My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 16:38, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Fine, no substantive change. The addition of WP:TRIVIALMENTION citations does not address the concerns in the AfD. Dclemens1971 (talk) 16:57, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I beg to differ. If those mentions (trivial or not) allow to verify he had an essential role in notable productions they do address the concerns, especially as one mentioned the award for Best Second film that was not mentioned before, unless I am mistaken. I remember checking them (or even adding some) myself back then. I should leave it at that that, as I had said, sorry. Thanks, anyway. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 17:07, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Iain McKee

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

Does not appear to meet WP:GNG - a WP:BEFORE search turned up no focused coverage, just passing mentions in coverage about projects he was associated with in some way. Also does not appear to meet WP:NACTOR as his roles are mostly non-significant. ThadeusOfNazereth(he/him)^{Talk to Me!} 14:08, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. ThadeusOfNazereth(he/him)^{Talk to Me!} 14:08, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 14:27, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete cannot establish WP:NACTOR as well. Even the roles he is “famous for” are supporting. Vorann Gencov (talk) 14:19, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Anthony Akinwunmi Richards

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

There are no enough reliable sources to establish WP:PRODUCER. Ibjaja055 (talk) 12:52, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Bands and musicians, and Nigeria. Shellwood (talk) 13:04, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: He wrote a book which is currently used as a text/guidebook at the study centre in PAU, this should help him pass WP:NAUTHOR 4c or thereabout. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 13:10, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete : Subject fails WP:GNG. No significant coverage from reliable source that are independent of the subject. The only reliable source here was that he donated a non notable book to a University. Book sources are even looking like a WP:FORUM.--Gabriel (talk to me ) 14:16, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Gabriel601, I noticed that you make speedy keep and speedy delete !votes these days, have you read the guidelines on how and when to use these? Best, Reading Beans 02:33, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Will go through that again but not this days like it’s been happening. Thanks for the word anyways. Corrected.--Gabriel (……?) 08:32, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Chris Okagbue

AfDs for this article:

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

I don’t see how this subject passes WP:GNG. The only thing here was that he won the Gulder ultimate search. The rest are just biography with no source. No evidence he won those awards.Since 2023 the issue tag was placed no fixed has been made. Even when I had to google. The news source fails independent as they are likely stating his quote. Gabriel (talk to me ) 00:50, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, and Nigeria. Gabriel (talk to me ) 00:50, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy keep: The subject has enough for a stub and likely C-class article. He has been a subject of the news since (possibly) 2020. This and this are interviews in RS verifying the Gulder Ultimate Search win and it is also stated here. One can sum up SIGCOV with all the pieces, This model and actor was born on June 23; this piece details how the subject shot into fame and here are some of the productions they were featured on. This source is also in RS, but it's such a shame I cannot translate its content. Passing mention here.
Note that every source I have provided above is listed at Generally reliable sources for Nigeria-related information. dxneo (talk) 12:19, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Meets WP:NACTOR and WP:GNG. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 19:24, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:34, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Chris Okagbue is a well-known Nigerian actor and he is notable enough to deserve an article on WP. The article uses reliable sources. Therefore I think the article should be kept. Yakov-kobi (talk) 09:40, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jazz Henry

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

No sources given that meet WP:GNG (her father's website, herself talking, some name drops, and dubiously reliable articles), I didn't find any better ones, and the article also fails WP:NMUSICIAN or WP:ANYBIO. — Alien333 (what I did & why I did it wrong) 18:30, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Bands and musicians, and Music. — Alien333 (what I did & why I did it wrong) 18:30, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Women, Television, and Louisiana. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:33, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 20:56, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Non-notable musician outside of the Band mentioned, I'm not sure a redirect would do much.. I find no sourcing strictly about this individual, only about the band. Guest star roles in TV shows are not what we're looking for for notability either. Oaktree b (talk) 00:07, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Akin Gazi

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

Non notable actor. Does not meet WP:NACTOR or WP:GNG. Cowlibob (talk) 14:48, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers and England. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 15:46, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, @Cowlibob: I suppose that WP:NACTOR is more likely to apply. Regarding its criteria: 'Such a person may be considered notable if:

1) The person has had significant roles in multiple notable films, television shows, stage performances, or other productions; or

2) The person has made unique, prolific or innovative contributions to a field of entertainment.'

I think 1) is more likely to apply. I can see from his page that he has appeared in almost two dozen films and television shows which are sufficiently notable to have their own article. Do you accept that they are notable? If so, is your case simply that his roles are not significant? How do you believe that a significant role is defined for the purposes of notability in WP:NACTOR? Is there a guideline or 'case law' supporting this? Thanks.

Jontel (talk) 01:03, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Weak KEEP Gazi's article seemingly meets the criteria of WP:NACTOR i.e. 'Such a person may be considered notable if the person has had significant roles in multiple notable films, television shows...' in that he has appeared in multiple (around two dozen) productions which have their own articles (and so are presumably notable) and his generally mid ranking in credited roles are presumably sufficiently significant. The case for keeping the article is strengthened by a career duration at this level of almost two decades WP:SUSTAINED. However, without searching through the reviews of his productions, there appears to be little independent reliable secondary coverage of him, which would be required to pass WP:BASIC. The key guiding text appears to be: 'People are likely to be notable if they meet (WP:NACTOR)...(However)...meeting (WP:NACTOR) does not guarantee that a subject should be included.' i.e. WP:NACTOR alone is not sufficient for notability. Given his roles in so many notable productions, is there a case for giving editors time to find the coverage necessary to meet WP:BASIC, as suggested in WP:ATD, by leaving it for a period? Jontel (talk) 21:58, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 20:50, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Luca Verhoeven

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

After conducting a WP:BEFORE search, it seems to me that this actor/producer does not meet either the general notability guideline or notability guideline on entertainers. DanCherek (talk) 16:53, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers and Germany. DanCherek (talk) 16:53, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Michael_Verhoeven#Biography: (father; mentioned there; or to Senta Berger#Personal life (mother; also mentioning him) -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 17:19, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! @DanCherek, I actually found the information on the German Wikipedia page. If you believe the article [[Luca Verhoeven]] does not meet the guidelines set by WP:GNG, you can move or delete it accordingly. 𝒮-𝒜𝓊𝓇𝒶 17:20, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: A redirect doesn't really make sense to me, someone expecting an article on Senta Berga would type in Senta Berga - not her son's name. -- D'n'B-t -- 18:29, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 18:54, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support: Hello! Wikipedians, I found the information on the German Wikipedia page. If you believe the article Luca Verhoeven does not meet the guidelines set by WP:GNG, you can move it or delete it accordingly.𝒮-𝒜𝓊𝓇𝒶 20:06, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Niharika Lyra Dutt

AfDs for this article:

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

Notability issue Thewikizoomer (talk) 08:05, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Women, Dance, Television, Theatre, and Delhi. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:55, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep: I do not really see any notability issues here. The subject person has officially credited lead roles in TV series like Paatal Lok[71], Choona[72], and an upcoming series Call Me Bae[73], as well as supporting roles in projects like Music Teacher[74] and Sutliyan[75], which clearly fulfills the NACTOR#1. Besides, The Hindustan Times interview, as well as sources from Times of India, Indian Express, and Yahoo! News that are currently cited in the article have also clearly demonstrated that the subject person has fulfilled GNG. It does not even require a BEFORE, as the information presented in the article is already sufficient to show that the subject person has fulfilled two notability guidelines. —Prince of Erebor（The Book of Mazarbul） 11:38, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Strong delete, interviews do not help establish notability. Also, Times of India is not suitable for a biography. — 48 JCL 16:46, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

NACTOR has clearly been fulfilled but not addressed. And yes, a single interview source itself does not establish notability. But if there are multiple interviews covering a breadth of different topics, this can count towards notability per WP:IV. I am not sure about Times of India, but even if it is excluded, there are still multiple interviews from The Hindustan Times, The Indian Express, or Mid-Day[76], which have fulfilled this requirement imo. Still an obvious keep to me. —Prince of Erebor（The Book of Mazarbul） 19:24, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment— I agree wholeheartedly with Prince of Erebor. These are absolutely reliable sources. She is a main cast member in the television show mentioned in the article.
9t5 (talk) 04:50, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment -- She is 'way down the cast list (not in the top 6 actors listed) in either Paatal Lok or Choona, or in the streaming/web projects, so not an obviously notable career on the face of it. I am not sure whether any of the articles cited are really WP:RSs. -- Ssilvers (talk) 17:28, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The sources I provided show that she is credited as main cast, and they are from The Indian Express, The Hindu, and Variety. I do not believe these three sources have any concerns regarding their reliability. —Prince of Erebor（The Book of Mazarbul） 19:24, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment — The subject is clearly a member of the main cast. If you want to argue that a recurring or guest appearance isn’t notable, that’s understandable. However, this actress is a main cast member. The article needs strengthening not deletion.

9t5 (talk) 23:00, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ssilvers, I've done a source assessment. — 48 JCL 23:37, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Keep - (after having reevaluated 48JCL‘s arguments)- I (still) strongly disagree with 48JCL. If someone is interviewed by the New York Times, that would make a person mighty notable. You cannot say “interviews don’t prove notability” when that is plainly untrue.

9t5 (talk) 22:36, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment, @9t5, they were not interviewed by the New York Times.
[1] -- From WP:TOI: "The Times of India is considered to have a reliability between no consensus and generally unreliable. It has a bias in favor of the Indian government and is known to accept payments from persons and entities in exchange for positive coverage." Seeing how promotional the article is, I think it is fair to say that this does not help establish notability.
[2] -- From WP:IV#Independence: "Alice Expert talks about herself, her actions, or her ideas: non-independent source." This is basically what the Hindustan Times article discusses. It is fine for a WP:BLP (I think) but It does not establish notability.
[3] -- Another interview.
[4] -- IMDb, not reliable. Per WP:IMDb
[5] -- Another interview.
[6] -- Another interview.
[7] -- Passing mention.
[8] -- Passing mention. — 48 JCL 23:35, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment— so you’re saying if it were the NYT then interviews can count? You wrote, and I quote, “interviews do not help establish notability.” It seems that you made a wildly incorrect assertion as justification for your delete vote. Have you done the proper research into the Indian outlet to determine that it is not reliable?

9t5 (talk) 04:46, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

48JCL Then tag the article with {{verify}}? This is a ridiculous use of AfD. 9t5 (talk) 04:57, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I still do not see any address on NACTOR. The subject person has at least three officially credited main roles. GNG does not override SNG. They are companion guidelines, and fulfilling either one is already sufficient in the first place.

I am also unclear on the purpose of your source analysis. I have already analysed them when I cast my !vote and explained why I believe the interviews can serve as evidence of notability per WP:IV. Besides, you have misidentified sources 7 and 8. They are clearly proving the subject person's involvement in certain projects, and are being used to flesh out the article, not to demonstrate SIGCOV on the subject person, just like the five sources I provided in this discussion. I believe I have made a strong case for why this is an obvious keep, and I have not seen any rebuttals directed to my arguments at all, despite the various comments. (Probably because it is inarguable that the subject person has significant roles, given their numerous credited main parts.) —Prince of Erebor（The Book of Mazarbul） 05:21, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

And I think 9t5 was raising a hypothetical question, asking what if someone has been interviewed by a reputable source, instead of claiming that the subject person has been interviewed by the NYT. I do not fully agree with this, given that interviews are generally regarded as PS and do not necessarily count towards notability on their own. However, if a person has been interviewed by multiple reputable media outlets like NYT+WSJ+WaPo, this could serve as evidence of notability, and I think this makes sense. You may go ahead and argue that WP:IV is an essay or whatnot, but I doubt that would be a strong and well-reasoned position. —Prince of Erebor（The Book of Mazarbul） 05:39, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Prince of Erebor I simply interpret policies a lot more leniently than 48JCL, and am allowed to do so as per WP:5P5. I have been involved in debate with 48JCL before. We are a pretty equal match. Just two different points of view. I respect their dedication to the project. 9t5 (talk) 06:47, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
9t5 and Prince of Erebor, I completely agree that WP:IV makes sense. However, from WP:IV: but a person does not pass GNG if interviews are the only kind of sourcing they have. Also, Prince of Erebor, those sources you provided are passing mentions and do not count towards notability. — 48 JCL 11:56, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@48JCL: I have already mentioned three times in this discussion - the sources I provided are to prove that the subject person has officially credited main/supporting roles in the respective projects, instead of providing SIGCOV about the person. The five roles I have listed already showed that the subject person has fulfilled NACTOR#1, and a Keep is the only reasonable conclusion. The interviews are only additional evidence of notability, since I have noticed many Wikipedians often bring up "coverage" in cases where the subject person has already fulfilled SNG, and this part is to satisfy their concerns. I still do not see any rebuttals on why the subject person fails NACTOR in your multiple replies, and the fact that you now agree the interviews can count towards notability even makes this case not borderline, but a strong Keep. Are you sure you do not want to change your stance, given that your arguments seem to be quite affirmative to a keep rather than a delete? —Prince of Erebor（The Book of Mazarbul） 12:23, 14 July 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) 09:42, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep It not be deleted. Wikicontriiiiibute (talk) 11:51, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You have a bizarre contribution history. Typical of a sock puppet. WP:SOCK 9t5 (talk) 06:27, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Shabana Shajahan Aryan

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

Previously deleted and salted as Shabana Shajahan/Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shabana Shajahan * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 00:46, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Women, Television, and Maharashtra. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:56, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: 2 lead roles In notable series have her clearly meet WP:NACTOR. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 16:36, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 16:38, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: I concur with Mushy Yank. At least two co-leading roles in the television series Sembaruthi and Mr. Manaivi. Fulfills NACTOR#1. —Prince of Erebor（The Book of Mazarbul） 16:42, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting as the previous AFD was closed as Delete and it seems like many sources concern her personal life, not her career.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:42, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jacqueline Lovell

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

No significant coverage found. She had three supporting roles in Full Moon Features films that have articles, but that does not seem to be enough - especially with no significant coverage. SL93 (talk) 19:56, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Women, and California. SL93 (talk) 20:09, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: meets WP:NACTOR for her significant roles (including lead roles) in at least Hideous!, Head of The Family and The Killer Eye, that are notable productions. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 20:29, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The exact guideline says "Such a person may be considered notable if:", not that they are automatically notable. SL93 (talk) 20:31, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

And? -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 20:34, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

And she is not automatically notable from three roles in three films when none of the roles received significant coverage. SL93 (talk) 20:36, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

But do you allow me to think she is and to !vote according to the applicable guideline? -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 20:37, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, but do you allow me to voice my thoughts because AfD is not merely just a vote? SL93 (talk) 20:38, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think your thoughts were pretty clear in your rationale, but feel free, of course. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 20:41, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete While she does meet WP:NACTOR, I cannot find a single source mentioning her other than movie databases, so she does not pass WP:GNG. Gödel2200 (talk) 20:55, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Added some sources. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 21:02, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The sources are either not independent (words from co-star, an interview) and trivial coverage. One of the sources says, "This film (along with the aforementioned Hideous!) stars the beautiful Jacqueline Lovell, whose career came to screeching halt shortly after this film." Not only is a sentence not significant coverage but I would say that her career coming to a screeching halt shortly after a B-film speaks towards non-notability. SL93 (talk) 21:04, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
In less than 2 minutes, you've read all the sources added? Wow, I confess I am impressed. Anyway, begging to differ; even if her career as a b-movie star stopped it's sufficiently notable; and anyway again, I've added even more, and more exists, not that it is necessary imv. I disagree with almost everything you said but will leave it at that, thanks. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 21:22, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Why would I need to read the full sources when I just need to use CTRl+F to search for "Jacqueline Lovell"? Why would I need to read full sources to know that something is an interview? Same with knowing that something is just a film database like IMDb and TV.com? SL93 (talk) 21:24, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The sources added (by the time of your first reply to me, I will check the new sources now) do not constitute significant coverage. Here is an analysis of them:

[77] Only two passing mentions
[78] This is unreliable per WP:IMDB
[79] This is an interview, so it is not independent
[80] This is a movie summary, and only makes three passing mentions of her
[81] Only one passing mention
[82] Only one passing mention
[83] Only one passing mention
[84] This is a movie, which is not independent of the subject
[85] Only two passing mentions
[86] Again, this is a list of movies, so not significant coverage
[87] This is another movie, which is not independent of the subject

Gödel2200 (talk) 21:25, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Here is an analysis of the five new sources added, which still do not constitute significant coverage.

[88] Only two passing mentions
[89] This is an encyclopedia of movies, with only two passing mentions
[90] This source does devote a few sentences to talking about her, but this is only a review of her performance
[91] Only two passing mentions
[92] Only two passing mentions

Gödel2200 (talk) 21:40, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: I tend to agree with the source analysis above; the best I could find was [93], it's not quite enough for notability. Delete for lack of sourcing, not meeting ACTOR. Oaktree b (talk) 00:10, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: meets WP:NACTOR for her significant roles (including lead roles) in at least Hideous!, Head of The Family and The Killer Eye, that are notable productions. There is no added need to also satisfy GNG. The two are companion guidelines, GNG is not a trump card. duffbeerforme (talk) 02:51, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Delete This is not a clear cut case, but it is more on the delete side with not enough WP:RS coverage to meet WP:GNG guidelines. Go4thProsper (talk) 19:41, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Passes NACTOR through Head of the Family, Hideous! and The Killer Eye. Also has SIGCOV in Femme Fatales here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here and here. Somebodyidkfkdt (talk) 14:03, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:07, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This article has significantly changed since its AfD nomination. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 12:10, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Meets requirements and has been improved since the nomination.♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:20, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ginny Holder

AfDs for this article:

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

Non notable actress, Bar Holby City her roles have all been one-bit/minor roles, Cannot find anything in-depth on Google News (all are gossip/mentions), Fails WP:NACTOR and WP:GNG –Davey2010^Talk 18:14, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Women, and United Kingdom. Shellwood (talk) 18:32, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:50, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep In addition to her recurring role in Holby City, she also made recurring appearances in Death in Paradise (TV series) (this is not cited in the article, but see this source, for instance). Thus, because she has had significant roles in these two series, she satisfies the criteria of WP:ENT. Gödel2200 (talk) 21:14, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Probably not enough coverage... I find this [94] and a bunch of articles in Hello! about celebrity gossip, but nothing to use for notability. Oaktree b (talk) 00:39, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Meets WP:NACTOR indeed, with at least 2 significant roles in notable productions, as Gödel2200 explained.-My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 08:34, 9 July 2024 (UTC) Update: at least 3 (see page).-My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 09:22, 9 July 2024 (UTC) Update; 6 (PLEASE see 1st Afd, where other productions and sources are mentioned...and that was closed as a clear and fair Keep)....-My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 09:27, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete This is a tough one because while she does have a fair amount of credits, she herself has no significant third-party coverage despite being in the business for three decades, which is evident by her article having no content since the beginning, literally consisting of two sentences and a filmography. She is merely a byproduct in content focusing on Death in Paradise, and "meet the cast"–type articles do not meet SIGCOV. 💥Casualty ^{• Hop along. •} 08:50, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Added a few things to the page.-My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 09:40, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Satisfies WP:NACTOR per above. -- Necrothesp (talk) 10:05, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: I disagree with Casualty's statement, which seems to have mixed up GNG and SNG. The subject person has officially credited main roles in the television series Death in Paradise and The Capture, as well as a recurring role in Holby City which earned her a nomination for Female Performance in TV at the Screen Nation Film and Television Awards. This means the subject person has at least three significant roles in notable projects, which clearly fulfills NACTOR#1 and should be kept. —Prince of Erebor（The Book of Mazarbul） 16:50, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, as she had recurring roles in multiple shows — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sterencio (talk • contribs) 22:56, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting as there is a disagreement on whether the subject passes or fails NACTOR.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 18:13, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This article has significantly changed since its AfD nomination. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 17:15, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yabani

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

I am not sure but want a definitive consensus on the notability of this TV series. First off, the article doesn't meet our guideline per WP:NFP–there is totally a decline of SIGCOV, or maybe because I didn't find either, but I tried searching only to see release dates announcements, etc, and thus, doesn't satisfy WP:SIRS.

On another note, I found out that the additional criteria WP:NFO, and WP:NFIC may push for the userfication, given thoughts that it may still meet notability at the highest release (seems like it has been released), and because it started notable actors and actresses. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 06:54, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Film, Television, Entertainment, and Turkey. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 06:55, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Added a few things for verification; a lot of so-so coverage exists (in Turkish, English) and, although not great, it seems to show some attention to the production. Notable cast. A redirect to ~~producer/~~network is imv warranted, so very opposed to deletion.-My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 14:26, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, if there was a Redirect, what would the target article be?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:25, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The target if redirect is chosen could be NOW_(Turkish_TV_channel)#Weekly_series.-My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 17:12, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, it was one of most popular shows of the last season of Turkish TV. Don't have time to look now but I'm sure episodes received significance reviews, attention etc. Tehonk (talk) 04:43, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You need to provide the reviews. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 15:53, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Also, redirect is better. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 05:58, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:27, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Prashanth Venkataramanujam

AfDs for this article:

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

Non-notable BLP. Sources relate either to Patriot Act or Hasan Minhaj. – Broccoli & Coffee ^{(Oh hai)} 21:11, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Patriot Act with Hasan Minhaj, you mean? And he might mean WP:CREATIVE as creator/writer of this series... -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 13:07, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Television. – Broccoli & Coffee ^{(Oh hai)} 21:11, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Illinois-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 22:04, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 19:59, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Not eligible for Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:19, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:25, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Patriot_Act_with_Hasan_Minhaj#Production: which seems to be what he is notable for so far. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 20:31, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with the redirect proposed above. Drmies (talk) 22:46, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Isha Malviya

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

The article heavily relies on unreliable sources as per WP:ICTFSOURCES. Single significant role in Udaariyaan. Does not meet WP:SIGCOV and WP:N. Editingmylove (talk) 08:15, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Women, Beauty pageants, Fashion, and Madhya Pradesh. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 08:31, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: At least one significant award won and 3 significant award nominations have her meet WP:ANYBIO imv. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 10:23, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
~~Comment~~ - Delete - Eye raising nomination, but that aside, I think this is close. There is a lot of fancruft references, interviews, general announcements, WP:NEWSORGINDIA, etc. And, winning an award or appearing on a television show does not give inherent notability (I think the Indian Telly Awards individual categories may not meet notability either). However, there are at least two references that are bylined and not just routine announcements here and here. ~~I'll reserve a !vote at the moment in hopes someone can point out coverage that isn't routine.~~ --CNMall41 (talk) 19:09, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have not seen anyone provide coverage that would show notability so changing to a delete !vote. --CNMall41 (talk) 15:49, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

weak delete: most coverage is about the TV show Big Boss [95], I wouldn't call it extensive coverage. This is a RS, but what's used in the article are all marginal reliability sources per Cite Highlighter, so I'm not sure we have enough to keep the article. Oaktree b (talk) 22:46, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: The user who has nominated the page for deletion is a new account created solely to ensure the page is deleted. The previous two nominations have also been a result of fandom war. As for the notability, it has been established the last 2 times as well. She has done 2 lead roles, one major reality, show, numerous music videos, a web series in post production, notable award nominations and wins. [FYI, Indian Telly Awards and Indian Television Academy Awards are two of the most notable ITV Awards regardless of whether the pages are well updated on Wikipedia or not.] The actress has sufficient coverage, apart from all her work and has more on the way. Hasty deletion to fulfill online fan wars makes no sense. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 157.39.32.83 (talk) 10:55, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Looking at your contibutions which is only this comment and anyone can say that you are the account created to this comment only. Columbidae5 (talk) 15:03, 1 July 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 June 24. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 06:16, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – Joe (talk) 09:48, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: The article is looking like fan made article who is doing undo removed content. Neutral point of view is also missing in the article. It looks like promotional content. Columbidae5 (talk) 12:58, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Notable personality. Filmography with different credits. Nominations and wins in terms of two known awards. Additionally, this seems to be another potential attempt by online supporters of other actors. The previous deletion discussion of this page was quite similar and was started by a fan of another ITV actress. This seems to be yet another example of social media hate propaganda. OCDD (talk)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Cocobb8 (💬 talk • ✏️ contribs) 21:21, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep as she is a notable actress and model who has gained significant recognition for her role in the popular television series "Udaariyaan," contributing to her widespread popularity. Additionally, her career achievements and public interest make her a relevant figure in the entertainment industry --RodrigoIPacce (talk) 17:54, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Per nom and Columbidae5's comment above. M S Hassan (talk | contributions) 09:28, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist. Please do not focus on the nominator and instead consider whether NACTOR is met and assess the quality of the sources.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:34, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: The sources are all passing mentions within routine announcements and contain zero biographical detail. Inclusion on Wikipedia is determined by sourcing, not by number of awards, award nominations, popularity, public interest or strong fanbase. The actress clearly doesn't meet WP:NACTOR.--Ilovetvshows (talk) 16:00, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: This is decent coverage, but it's quite short. [96], Still not quite enough. Oaktree b (talk) 00:30, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete: Not seeing enough in-depth coverage that's not from poor quality sources or paid/churnalism. Ravensfire (talk) 21:06, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletions

Comment on the talk pages of the articles, not here.

Sportspeople

Ju Jong-chol

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

Article fails WP:GNG. Simione001 (talk) 22:09, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of North Korea-related deletion discussions. Simione001 (talk) 22:09, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Simione001 (talk) 22:09, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. Simione001 (talk) 22:09, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Doesn't seem to pass WP:SPORTCRIT—I only see database sources, no significant coverage. Bsoyka (t • c • g) 22:43, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Michal Klec

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

This Slovak men's footballer played in his country from 2013 until 2016 before moving to lower leagues in the Czech Republic and Poland. Secondary sources analysis from my searches through translation:

Žilinský Večerník is a blogspot containing an interview with just secondary content in the opening paragraph.
SME seems to be a decent source mentioning Klec scoring a hat-trick.
Dnes24 is a transfer announcement of him moving to Třinec on loan.
Dziennik Polski is another transfer announcement to Puszcza Niepołomice.

In my opinion, none of those sources above actually approach WP:SIGCOV that are required for encyclopedia. I have checked corresponding articles on him in other Wikipedia languages, but all of them likewise provide match reports, primary sources, and database. ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 13:46, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Slovakia. ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 13:46, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Poland-related deletion discussions. Geschichte (talk) 19:52, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Doesn't look like he meets WP:NSPORT or WP:GNG. I haven't found any reliable RS about him.Tau Corvi (talk) 20:24, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mélanie Charles

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

Fails WP:SPORTSCRIT. No third party sources. A google news search comes up with a namesake jazz musician who seems more notable. LibStar (talk) 10:09, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Women, Handball, France, and Australia. LibStar (talk) 10:09, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Not notable. Apart from already cited article, nothing comes up. Changeworld1984 (talk) 11:10, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. There is only one source listed in the article, and I couldn’t find any others. If you manage to do this, please ping me. Tau Corvi (talk) 20:34, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I agree with the above. Bduke (talk) 23:32, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Arturo López Castro

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

could not find secondary sources besides the BoxRec website that's already used as (the only) source LR.127 (talk) 06:11, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Boxing, and Mexico. LR.127 (talk) 06:11, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. I didn't find anything that said passing WP:GNG or WP:NBOX. I also don’t know where the article can be redirected. Tau Corvi (talk) 20:47, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rudy Orea

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

Fails WP:GNG and WP:SPORTCRIT. Only one source, which is partly a primary source, about him "going back" to amateur football. Only made one cup appearance for Bordeaux as a regular B team player. Paul Vaurie (talk) 11:52, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and France. Paul Vaurie (talk) 11:52, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Doesn't pass WP:SIGCOV. Tau Corvi (talk) 19:31, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 10:59, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 11:07, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Vladimír Kinier

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

Redirect to 1990 FIFA World Cup squads#Czechoslovakia because I could not find any in-depth coverage of this former men's footballer to meet WP:GNG. I've checked Wikipedia articles in other languages, but most of them only provide database sources. Corresponding article on Slovak Wikipedia, which may help copy over English article, is slightly longer and listed the clubs he has/had played for... but SKwiki likewise does not provide any decent coverage. ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 09:48, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Slovakia. ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 09:48, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The WP:BEFORE on this AFD looks quite pitiful. The top Google hit is one example of the FIFA World Cup player meeting WP:GNG and WP:SUSTAINED. Geschichte (talk) 10:38, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect as above. I've only found one secondary source that talks directly about him [97]. I think this is not enough to confirm the significance. The source Geschichte cites is an interview, that is, a primary source. Tau Corvi (talk) 19:59, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, per Geschichte. The source contains enough independent commentary on the subject to qualify as significant coverage. The source found by Tau Corvi is significant as well. A FIFA World Cup player is virtually certain to pass GNG, and its worth noting that we do not have access to 1990s Czechslovak newspapers. BeanieFan11 (talk) 20:54, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Additionally, per Slovak Wikipedia Kinier totaled 260 top-tier appearances. BeanieFan11 (talk) 20:56, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  - Comment Geschichte's source is an interview with Kinier where the only independent info is clubs/countries he played for and not playing in the 1984 Olympics. Tau Corvi's source is better but they aren't enough for a GNG pass. https://kramerius5.nkp.cz/ has Czech newspapers and https://dikda.snk.sk/ Slovak newspapers. His 260 top flight appearances are irrelevant. Dougal18 (talk) 09:05, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    - His 260 top flight appearances are irrelevant. – Common. sense. For modern European players (I'm talking internet era), where we have full-access to sources, can you find anyone with 260 top-flight appearances who is non-notable? Can you find a single modern European FIFA World Cup player for which there is no sigcov? Why would the 1980s be any different? Tau Corvi's source satisfies WP:SPORTCRIT, which should be all that is needed to allow this to be kept given the subject. (As for the links you provide, I've never seen those websites before. How in-depth are their 1980s newspaper collections?) BeanieFan11 (talk) 16:09, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 10:59, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per sources above which show notability. GiantSnowman 11:07, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- To be fair, Dougal18 and Tau Corvi are correct. WP:SPORTSBASIC #5 states: Sports biographies must include at least one reference to a source providing significant coverage of the subject, excluding database sources. The source given by Tau Corvi looks like SIGCOV thing, but GNG requires multiple in-depth coverage as possible overall instead of just one. Even if the paywalled Sme newspaper contains SIGCOV, that is still not equivalent to GNG. ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 14:49, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nick Floyd

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

Nominating based on lack of notability. Only references are with brief text in minor and local sports news coverage, biography external link is dead. User:WoodElf 16:59, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Louisiana, Mississippi, and North Carolina. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:14, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Please note that the locality of the sources is irrelevant. As long as it is significant coverage and independent of the subject it can go towards establish notability of the subject. This for instance should be considered significant coverage. However, the subjects needs sustained coverage, that is coverage from another time period than around his hiring at Louisiana–Monroe in July 2017. Alvaldi (talk) 17:17, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. A fair bit of SIGCOV over a 30-year career. See [98], [99], [100] [101], [102], [103], [104], [105]/[106]. Cbl62 (talk) 16:06, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Esmaeil Gholizadeh

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

Reviewed during NPP. No indication of wp:notability under GNG or SNG (which says that these must meet GNG) Of the sources, 2 are just database listings and the other is about a game where he is mentioned. North8000 (talk) 20:42, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Iran. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 20:56, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 08:35, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 08:36, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - the only remotely RS I can find are brief mentions of him in reports of matches. It sounds like he might become notable as his career progresses, but right now is TOOSOON. StartGrammarTime (talk) 12:05, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lisa-Anne Smith

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

Fails WP:SPORTSCRIT and WP:NOLY. Only primary sources provided. LibStar (talk) 13:09, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Olympics, and Australia. LibStar (talk) 13:09, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 14:29, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Shooting at the 2000 Summer Olympics – Women's trap: Subject does not have the needed WP:SIGCOV to meet the WP:GNG. The current sources are all primary and a cursory search didn't reveal anything better. Let'srun (talk) 16:15, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Shooting at the 2000 Summer Olympics – Women's trap#Qualification round. I found no evidence of passage WP:GNG. Tau Corvi (talk) 19:32, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Helmut Michel

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

Doesn't seem to have received significant coverage. All I could find on this player was a 1961 Chicago Tribune newspaper article that he was playing in goal for an amateur team participating in the National Amateur Cup, which is barely a passing mention. Another site suggests a date of birth for this player, but that's all I could find, other than a Czech namesake who ran for political office in 1989. C 679 13:31, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and United States of America. C 679 13:31, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. C 679 13:33, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Illinois-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 16:50, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to List of United States men's international soccer players as possible search term. Giant Snowman 17:24, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect as above. I didn't find any secondary RS. Tau Corvi (talk) 19:41, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to List of United States men's international soccer players: Subject does not have the needed WP:SIGCOV to meet the WP:GNG. Redirect as a WP:ATD. Let'srun (talk) 22:12, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mostafa Makhlouf

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

No indication the subject meets the general notability guideline. Only source indicates he is the fifth-choice goalkeeper for his club and he has not played at senior level. C 679 11:48, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Egypt. C 679 11:48, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. C 679 11:48, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

He was in the first team in the past 2 years

And entered the African list for Al Ahly this year so he must have a Wikipedia page Mohamedmokhtar22 (talk) 11:53, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete or Draft According to soccerway he hasn't played any games. So those trophies? Are they really earned? If the article was improved with better sourcing I might send to draft, in it's current state I would delete. Also @ Mohamedmokhtar22 Why do you have two accounts? Govvy (talk) 13:19, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Not enough coverage for this individual. All I can find [107], a few brief words about him. Oaktree b (talk) 16:54, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
First, I have only One account but I changed the username.

Second, In African Championships if he entered the saquad in any match the whole championship it will be earnd for him Mohamedmokhtar22 (talk) 17:04, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 17:24, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
https://www.yallakora.com/egyptian-league/2795/news/447474/%D8%AA%D8%B1%D8%AA%D9%8A%D8%A8%D9%87-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%AE%D8%A7%D9%85%D8%B3-%D9%81%D9%8A-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%A3%D9%87%D9%84%D9%8A-%D9%85-%D9%86-%D9%87%D9%88-%D9%85%D8%AE%D9%84%D9%88%D9%81-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%B0%D9%8A-%D8%B8%D9%87%D8%B1-%D8%A8%D8%B3%D8%A8%D8%A8-%D9%81%D9%8A%D8%B1%D9%88%D8%B3-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%AD%D8%B1%D8%A7%D8%B3-

This link from Yallakora the famous site about Mostafa Makhlouf Mohamedmokhtar22 (talk) 22:08, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete. He doesn't seem to pass WP:SIGCOV. I found several sources, but but neither seem reliable [108][109][110][111]. Tau Corvi (talk) 20:09, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Zahir Vasquez

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

I am unable to find enough coverage of this American soccer player to meet WP:GNG. JTtheOG (talk) 20:53, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Utah. JTtheOG (talk) 20:53, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. I didn't find any articles about him in RS, only statistics and news on the website of the club for which he plays. Tau Corvi (talk) 14:55, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 18:22, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 18:23, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Martin Liška

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

Redirect to Slovakia at the 2004 Summer Olympics as ATD because I could not find any in-depth coverage of this athlete to meet WP:GNG.

This AfD might be exactly the same issue as with Peter Kondrát I nominated back in January under my old username (CuteDolphin712). Since Martin Liška was born in Brno, Czech Republic, but represents Slovakia, I don't know which language of source is primary.

The only decent site I found in Slovak language is SME but it looks nowhere near significant.
Oddly enough, Czech media IDNES (2016, 2018, 2022) and Czech Television have articles of a horseback rider of the same name. However, the first source by IDNES tells said jockey turned 39 thus clearly not the same men as this cyclist. Without evidence of cyclist Liška being a horse jockey in his hometown, this case fails WP:V.

⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 12:00, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Cycling, Czech Republic, and Slovakia. ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 12:00, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Olympics-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:09, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ravindra Lakmal

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

Although subject may be covered by WP:NCRICKET (Additionally, cricketers who have played at the highest domestic level [...] may have sufficient coverage about them to justify an article, but it should not be assumed to exist without further proof), with a single appearance for a club side more than 20 years ago, there is no indication the subject has received significant coverage to pass the general notability guideline. C 679 10:19, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Cricket, and Sri Lanka. C 679 10:19, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I am also nominating the following related page for the same reason:

Comment - either one article is the problem or thousands. And if we isolate individual articles - in both English and non-English speaking countries - this does nothing to solve the problem we've landed ourselves in. Bobo . 17:30, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. I haven't found any WP:SIGCOV confirmation. Tau Corvi (talk) 15:12, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kris McLaren

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

Does not meet WP:SPORTSCRIT, Sports biographies must include at least one reference to a source providing significant coverage of the subject, excluding database sources. C 679 07:28, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Motorsport, and Australia. C 679 07:28, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: no significant achievements either in a very short career. ww2censor (talk) 09:22, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: No indication or evidence of the WP:SIGCOV needed to meet the WP:GNG. Let'srun (talk) 02:32, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Alex Guerrero (lineman)

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

Does not meet WP:SPORTSCRIT, Sports biographies must include at least one reference to a source providing significant coverage of the subject, excluding database sources. - Although subject may meet WP:NGRIDIRON as stated in the last AfD (2011), this does not establish sufficient notability. C 679 06:22, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and American football. C 679 06:22, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:48, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There is a good deal of SIGCOV. e.g., [112], feature pt 1/ feature pt 2. Cbl62 (talk) 16:41, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I added an initial piece of WP:SIGCOV. Cbl62 (talk) 19:21, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: The Idaho Statesman feature now in the article is certainly WP:SIGCOV, combined with sources such as [[113]] I'd say there is enough to meet the WP:GNG. Let'srun (talk) 13:56, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Let'srun: Did you mean to mention a second source, other than The Idaho Statesman? C 679 11:52, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I meant to add [[114]] in addition to the other Idaho Statesman source. Let'srun (talk) 14:19, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: The subject meets WP:SPORTSCRIT with WP:SIGCOV from a reliable source. JTtheOG (talk) 08:06, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keiichi Misawa

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

Does not meet WP:SPORTSCRIT, Sports biographies must include at least one reference to a source providing significant coverage of the subject, excluding database sources. Previously deleted by PROD. C 679 03:45, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Japan. C 679 03:45, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. C 679 03:48, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment A "small" HTML tag was left unclosed. This has been fixed. –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 04:51, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 18:24, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Fails in WP:GNG. Svartner (talk) 19:05, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Not enough accomplishments or sources for an encyclopedic article. Geschichte (talk) 07:57, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nomination. Corresponding article on Japanese Wikipedia is slightly longer, but it does not provide any significant coverage on him. ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 13:48, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Eric Iloski

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

I am unable to find enough independent coverage of this American soccer player to meet WP:GNG. JTtheOG (talk) 02:04, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and California. JTtheOG (talk) 02:04, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 18:23, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 18:25, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. He hasn't played at the highest level and doesn't pass WP:SIGCOV. Tau Corvi (talk) 15:59, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Chris Driver

AfDs for this article:

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

Fails WP:SPORTSCRIT. 2 sources provided are primary. Found nothing searching ["Chris Driver" mauritius -wikipedia] LibStar (talk) 01:18, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, Mauritius, and Australia. LibStar (talk) 01:18, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 18:22, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 18:24, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I haven't found RS that could confirm his notability. Tau Corvi (talk) 16:10, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Lejsek

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

Redirect to Czech Republic at the 2022 Winter Olympics#Luge as I could not find enough in-depth coverage of this athlete to meet WP:GNG. I've checked corresponding Wikipedia article in other languages, especially the Czech one that might help copy over English article, but none of them provide significant coverage on him. One-time Olympics participant, Lejsek was not even one of the three luge medalists in pre-mentioned tournament either. ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 15:34, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Olympics, and Czech Republic. ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 15:34, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. World Championships participant in 2019, 2020, 2021, 2023. European Championships participant in 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023. (According to Whatlinkshere, haven't clicked them yet.) Geschichte (talk) 20:49, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect as above. I also didn’t find any RS that would show passing WP:SIGCOV. Tau Corvi (talk) 16:29, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Czech Republic at the 2022 Winter Olympics#Luge: Subject lacks the needed WP:SIGCOV to meet the WP:GNG. Redirect as a WP:ATD. Let'srun (talk) 16:08, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hayate Usui

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

I have carried out WP:BEFORE on this article about a martial artist, and added two references, though one is a passing mention. I do not think Usui meets WP:GNG, WP:ANYBIO or WP:NMMA. Tacyarg (talk) 08:48, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Martial arts and Japan. Tacyarg (talk) 08:48, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 10:10, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as per nom. Lekkha Moun (talk) 16:29, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fails to meet WP:NMMA and I didn't find the significant independent coverage required to meet WP:GNG. Fight results and databases are not enough to show WP notability. Papaursa (talk) 02:10, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fails WP:NMMA. Highest Rank: #60 acc. to FightMatrix [115]. Vorann Gencov (talk) 07:10, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ainer Cleve

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

Fails WP:GNG and WP:SPORTBASIC #5 (Sports biographies must include at least one reference to a source providing significant coverage of the subject, excluding database sources.")

I created the article in 2020 when the old WP:NGRIDIRON presumed notability for NFL players -- we have database sources showing that Cleve appeared in 19 NFL games as a back and end from 1921-1924. When the presumption was reversed, User:Hey man im josh correctly tagged the article due to the need for additional sources. I thought that someone who appeared in 19 NFL games would have WP:SIGCOV, but my follow-up searches in 2022 didn't find any. I searched again today but didn't find anything rising to the level of SIGCOV. (FWIW: I did find some passing references where his given name was listed as "Ainar" [116] and others as "Einar" [117] [118].)

Despite my efforts, the article still does not comply with our guidelines, so it's time for me to throw in the towel -- unless someone can dig up SIGCOV that I've been unable to find. Cbl62 (talk) 00:37, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Newspapers.com is unavailable and will continue to be unavailable for the vast majority of users (including me) for an unknown amount of time. Could we at the very least draftify this? I can't even search for sources. BeanieFan11 (talk) 00:46, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No objection to that. Cbl62 (talk) 14:57, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, American football, and Minnesota. Hey man im josh (talk) 00:53, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Draftify per nom and Beanie’s comments above. Beanie and Cbl62 both have a reputation of working very hard to find coverage of lesser-known topics if it’s available, so if either (or both) of them are interested, this is a very reasonable ATD. Worst case is there is no coverage available when newspapers.com is back online and the draft gets abandoned/deleted. Frank Anchor 02:20, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Draftify: Finding sources about Ainer Cleve that meet WP:SPORTBASIC and WP:GNG is proving difficult. This approach would allow more time for research to prove that Cleve is notable (which is better than removing the content from the platform).--AstridMitch (talk) 06:51, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Draftify: Searching newspapers.com and the LOC, I'm not finding the needed WP:SIGCOV to meet the WP:GNG. The only sources in the article are stats databases, and all I could find after trying multiple searches with different spellings was passing mentions such as [[119]] and [[120]]. Draftify as a WP:ATD to allow for interested editors to find more time to find significant coverage. Let'srun (talk) 14:04, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kodjo Aziangbe

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

Contested PROD; subject fails WP:GNG and WP:NSPORT due to lack of WP:SIGCOV. Sources are limited to databases and routine match coverage. Dclemens1971 (talk) 15:16, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Africa. Shellwood (talk) 15:18, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Much of the sourcing would be in Arabic, Ukrainian and Japanese. Not exactly easy for an English speaker to search Geschichte (talk) 07:11, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 20:36, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Drafify - not currently notable, but might be in future. Giant Snowman 20:38, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I would accept draftify as an AtD. Dclemens1971 (talk) 20:53, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Draftify – Per above. Svartner (talk) 19:10, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep‎. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:13, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kristofer Karlsson

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

Fails WP:SPORTSCRIT. The links provided are all primary. Could not find third party coverage of this individual. LibStar (talk) 01:27, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Handball, Sweden, and Australia. LibStar (talk) 01:27, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
~~Delete: No independent sources available. — Alien333 (what I did & why I did it wrong) 09:42, 15 July 2024 (UTC)~~ Keep: After Julle's additions, enough WP:SIGCOV for WP:GNG. (I wonder how many articles are deleted because of wrong language settings) — Alien333 (what I did & why I did it wrong) 09:09, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Doesn’t meet WP:GNG, no reliable references, the author should consider seeking more references, a lot is written on the article but nothing to show or prove notability.Madeforall1 (talk) 14:24, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I've expanded the article and added references from Yle, Vestmanlands Läns Tidning, sv:Enköpings-Posten. Some of these are shorter news pieces, but a couple of them have more substance. /Julle (talk) 21:20, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ping Alien333 and Madeforall1 in case you want to take another look. These sources were a bit difficult to locate if one doesn't speak Swedish (and in a couple of cases required access to newspaper archive to find them). /Julle (talk) 21:22, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Per sources from Julle 🤾‍♂️ Malo95 (talk) 17:53, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep: Did a quick Google Translate on the snippet from the YLE source added, it seems to talk about this person. I'll assume the others are of a similar quality, we have enough for a basic article anyway. Oaktree b (talk) 00:34, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Julles additions AlexandraAVX (talk) 16:26, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

Zaine Kennedy

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

Fails WP:SPORTSCRIT. Almost all the sourcing is not third party but speedway related. LibStar (talk) 01:30, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Motorsport and Australia. LibStar (talk) 01:30, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:52, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. The fact that the sources are related to the speedway does not make them non-independent. Per WP:GNG "Independent of the subject" excludes works produced by the article's subject or someone affiliated with it. These sources could be considered affiliated with him if, for example, he were their owner. I would add a few more secondary sources [121] [122] [123] Tau Corvi (talk) 22:01, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have set up a discussion here Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard#Speedway_related_sources. LibStar (talk) 23:48, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I saw the RSN discussion first, so I do not plan to vote, but to give my opinion from my limited perspective. Having taken a look at Scunthorpe Scorpions, which looks like two different teams on one article, I can count about five dozen riders that have articles. Of the "Notable riders," most of them use "speedway related sources" in their articles with British Speedway cited between two and three dozen times. (More problematic, but farther outside of the discussion is that at least one article is citing sources that are MREL and GUNREL.)

Overall, the issue over the specific sources is going to have an effect on other articles. If deemed a problem, then there will need to be more AfD discussions in the near future; while if deemed acceptable could lead to additional article creations. I am of the opinion that redirects to the team articles could be more preferred than deletion and that some information might be includable in the various team articles. That said, I am unsure if the sources are a problem on these rider articles. --Super Goku V (talk) 06:19, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 02:31, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Archie Vaughan

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

So what exactly makes this guy notable? Being the son of Michael Vaughan, is all I can tell. He hasn't played cricket at a senior level and hasn't done anything of note in cricket to warrant inclusion. No amount of WP:ROUTINE refbombs can hide that he is a WP:GNG fail. AA (talk) 17:14, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Cricket-related deletion discussions. AA (talk) 17:14, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and England. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:44, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Not notable, fails WP:GNG. Delete. Go4thProsper (talk) 19:38, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. I don’t understand whether he has already played for Somerset and the England U19 to pass WP:NCRIC, but signing a contract with the club and being called up to the U19 team is being covered in the media, which indicates the passage WP:SIGCOV. I will list several secondary sources, you can easily find more [124][125][126] Tau Corvi (talk) 14:09, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

But why is that notable? Plenty of people get signed by major sports teams and never go onto do anything. Is the bar really set this low? Again, if his father wasn't a famous cricketer, he would not get any coverage. AA (talk) 22:10, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Article was moved to mainspace via Afc. Subject has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. Hildreth gazzard (talk) 00:48, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 17:16, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Widespread coverage in established media including BBC, Sky Sports, The Times, The Daily Telegraph The Independent, ESPNCricinfo etc. Yes the articles often mention his father in the headline or the article themselves but that is going to be the case his entire life unless he manages to totally surpass what his father achieved which is a high bar to set. The articles themselves are about him, not his father, and as such he easily passes the coverage test. Shrug02 (talk) 20:15, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ilya Syrovatko

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

Does not meet verifiability guidelines per WP:SPORTSPERSON. 333fortheain (talk) 04:16, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Basketball, and Russia. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:23, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Does not fail WP:V thanks to various databases, but an article cannot be built on databases only. Geschichte (talk) 12:50, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. The article needs to add more information and sources. Passes WP:SIGCOV, it’s easy to find reliable secondary sources in Russian that talk about his career and personal life [127][128][129][130][131][132][133][134][135] Tau Corvi (talk) 15:22, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete article lacks in sources and in any information. The sources i found, including the ones presented by @Tau Corvi (Thank you for providing those) are, in my opinion, not enough to prove notability as per WP:SPORTCRIT - those are just narration of transfers, some tabloid coverage and game results. Vorann Gencov (talk) 15:41, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:08, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Lacks notability and reliable sources, the article does not meet Wikipedia's standards and therefore should be deleted. Yakov-kobi (talk) 13:25, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was redirect‎ to List of Gloucestershire County Cricket Club players with no prejudice to recreation as an article if further sources develop in the future. Barkeep49 (talk) 02:38, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Joe Phillips (English cricketer, born 2003)

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

Subject person played only 1 List-A and 2 First class match. Does WP:GNG surpasses WP:NCRICK? Twinkle1990 (talk) 15:42, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sports and Cricket. Twinkle1990 (talk) 15:42, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and England. Twinkle1990 (talk) 17:13, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:59, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Twinkle1990: - can I just point out NSPORT states that "Failing to meet the criteria in this guideline means that notability will need to be established in other ways (for example, the general notability guideline...) - so all NSPORT is saying that people who meet those criteria are considered notable, but not meeting those criteria doesn't automatically make them non-notable. Mdann52 (talk) 20:50, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - meets GNG. Mdann52 (talk) 20:50, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Doesn't appear on the cricket delsort - tryingto add that again first Blue Square Thing (talk) 05:53, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Cricket-related deletion discussions. Blue Square Thing (talk) 05:53, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
At worst this is an obvious redirect to List of Gloucestershire County Cricket Club players where his name needs to be added. A note should also be added, as has been done for others. Beyond that I have no particular view here - there are some sources, but not so many. I suspect he is likely to be covered in others as well fwiw Blue Square Thing (talk) 05:56, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to List of Gloucestershire County Cricket Club players. He does not meet GNG - this is the one qualifying source. Gloscricket is obviously not independent coverage. -- asilvering (talk) 18:13, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Given the delsort issues, more eyes won't hurt.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 18:13, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, but he may be notable in the future, i.e. WP:NOTNOW. SWinxy (talk) 01:14, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@SWinxy, in this case, wouldn't a redirect be more appropriate? That way, if he becomes notable in the future, someone won't have to start the article from scratch. -- asilvering (talk) 18:27, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, borderline decision but given the rhythms and vagaries of the English county cricket season we are approaching the part where younger players are used to a greater extent, precisely the time this page will be useful to people who follow the game to refer to. Hildreth Gazzard (talk) 06:47, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to List of Gloucestershire County Cricket Club players. References are currently insufficient for GNG. Frank Anchor 18:04, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep. Passes WP:NCRIC as a cricketer who has played at the highest domestic level. I would add [136] and maybe [137] to the references. Tau Corvi (talk) 14:18, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: No clear consensus yet.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 19:26, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - This AfD was initiated after an AFC discussion. I don't see any rationale AfD discussion here. Twinkle1990 (talk) 16:00, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
can you please clarify what you mean here, or adjust the link to point to a discussion? Star Mississippi 16:23, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Link corrected now. Sorry for the confusing link. Twinkle1990 (talk) 01:56, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

Authors

S. Brent Morris

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

Fails WP:NAUTHOR. No clear notability. Longhornsg (talk) 18:51, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Military, Organizations, Mathematics, and United States of America. Longhornsg (talk) 18:51, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:29, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Notable for work on Freemasonry and mathematics. Xxanthippe (talk) 23:16, 20 July 2024 (UTC).[reply]
Weak keep. I found 11 published reviews of 4 books (one mathematics, three Freemasonry). That would ordinarily be enough for a full keep from me, except that three of the books are edited rather than authored and that doesn't count for as much. —David Eppstein (talk) 00:38, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Add later: I also found one more review of an authored work but in a Freemasonry journal (nine of the other reviews are in mainstream publications). Perhaps that counts less? —David Eppstein (talk) 18:50, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Christine Axsmith

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

Textbook WP:BIO1E. Was in the news for one blog post that got her fired in 2006. No notability as defined in WP:BIO, such as WP:SUSTAINED otherwise. Longhornsg (talk) 23:29, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Law, Military, and United States of America. Longhornsg (talk) 23:29, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: per nom. Meets all three criteria of WP:BLP1E. Barely scrapes by GNG either way. C F A 💬 23:36, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 00:56, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Pennsylvania, and Washington, D.C.. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:08, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete based on WP:BIO1E. Axsmith's notability stems from a single incident: her firing following a 2006 blog post. There has yet to be the kind of steady coverage that shows a broader notability. There are also no writings or citations related to her work. Thus, the article does not meet WP:BIO. The lack of sustained coverage or impact in her field supports the case for deletion. It's crucial to remember that this platform's content focuses on subjects that have lasting significance.--AstridMitch (talk) 04:22, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Seems to be a writer for Daily Kos now, but that's not terribly notable. The firing got into the news cycle almost 20 yrs ago, but nothing since. I don't see sustained notability. Oaktree b (talk) 15:00, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Agree that this is a case of WP:BIO1E due to a lack of sustained coverage. Let'srun (talk) 15:50, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Quentin Boëton

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

I don't think the author is notable. I can't find enough independent reliable secondary sources covering his work. --Xexerss (talk) 19:31, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors. Xexerss (talk) 19:31, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of France-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 19:36, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:11, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - fails WP:BIO, all sources I could find are either interviews or passing mentions.

BilletsMauves^€500 13:55, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bent Flyvbjerg

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

GNG - non-notable researcher lacks significant coverage, in both reliable and non-reliable sources. Article seems autobiographical, with 20/25 sources being written by the subject. Couruu (talk) 12:32, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Sources do not establish notability. Also note that this person is the subject of an extensive promotional campaign of citespam and other articles (see Making Social Science Matter on his book). See Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Sonderbro/Archive for more info on the socks, including the creator of the biographical article. - MrOllie (talk) 12:39, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators and Denmark. Shellwood (talk) 12:44, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Although this article needs significant alteration and removal of unreliable sources in places, the subject is the Villum Kann Rasmussen Professor, a named professorship, at IT University of Copenhagen. This seems to me to meet C5 of WP:NPROF, which is sufficient to establish notability. Again, the article needs substantial editing but the subject appears to be notable. Qflib (talk) 13:30, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Philosophy, Economics, Geography, and Technology. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:59, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not to Delete The article should not be removed as the citations are available. Wikicontriiiiibute (talk) 11:40, 19 July 2024 (UTC) — Wikicontriiiiibute (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

Speedy keep WP:SK3 totally faulty nomination fails to even consider the appropriate notability criterion, WP:PROF, which is independent of GNG. Massive citation counts give him an easy pass of WP:PROF#C1 and named professorships at two universities pass #C5. He also appears to pass WP:AUTHOR with multiple published reviews of his books. —David Eppstein (talk) 19:41, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I don't see how he's notable under WP:GNG, nor do I believe there should be an exception for academics. It's also promotional - it's not really an encyclopedia article. SportingFlyer T·C 22:28, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Your failure to abide by established Wikipedia's guidelines and consensus is nobody's problem but your own, and is misplaced here, where to have any weight arguments should be based on those things and not on personal opinion. But, to be explicit: there are many published works that go in depth into his work (in particular the book reviews I alluded to above). Or are WP:BEFORE and WP:DINC, and the existence of sources beyond what is already in the article, another part of the established guidelines and consensus that you reject? —David Eppstein (talk) 00:18, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Because the article is horribly promotional and I agree with the citespam comment. He probably does pass WP:NAUTHOR on a second look, but WP:TNT should apply. SportingFlyer T·C 07:09, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Also, being able to have articles on cricketers who appeared in any first class match were once Wikipedia's established guidelines and consensus. Consensus can change. SportingFlyer T·C 07:09, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: In addition to the clear WP:NPROF pass through both citations (80,000 citations, including twelve over 1,000 and one over 20,000) and holding a named chair, there is also a good argument for an WP:NAUTHOR pass as a brief spot-check returned a number of reviews for his books. Academics generally do not receive coverage in the same way as celebrities and politicians, but (especially for those like this, who are at the absolute top of their field) are mission critical for us to cover. Curbon7 (talk) 00:36, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Edgar Chibaka

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

should be deleted due to the lack of significant independent coverage that meets the General Notability Guideline (GNG), relying instead on primary sources, company related news and not significant mentions. LusikSnusik (talk) 10:22, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Businesspeople, Africa, and England. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:41, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep or redirect: to Nyasa Times, the company that the subject found. Subject has enough WP:GNG. For example here reported by the Telegraph, subject won the Black British Business Person of the Year award in 2021. I also found this where subject is being the founder and the Chief Executive Officer of Malawi's leading online publication, the Nyasa Times that he found in 2006. This could be used to sustain the article per (WP:NEXIST). --Tumbuka Arch (talk) 13:19, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete interviews are a poor way to establish notability and if he owns the Nyasa Times then it isn't independent enough to establish notability. Traumnovelle (talk) 21:42, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Traumnovelle Alternatively, it makes sense to redirect it to their company on Wikipedia that the subject found, thus Nyasa Times. Again, not all sources are interviews. Furthermore, this AfD was made by someone at random who was even reported at ANI here and there is even a discussion on their talk page about their nominations. Tumbuka Arch (talk) 07:30, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't oppose a redirect. I looked at the references now. I presumed the sources you mentioned were the strongest sources. The strongest source appears to be the Yorkshire Evening Post but it isn't enough for notability in my opinion. Traumnovelle (talk) 07:35, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jack Colman (author)

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

No independent reliable sources found. Author thus fails WP:NBIO. GTrang (talk) 01:11, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Authors, and England. GTrang (talk) 01:11, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
del No discussions of the person in RS. - Altenmann >talk 16:43, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Drunvalo Melchizedek

AfDs for this article:

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

It's regrettable that this page has remained on Wikipedia for so long. It relies exclusively on primary sources and blog posts. Drunvalo Melchizedek lacks significant coverage in multiple, independent reliable sources. There are no serious reviews of his self published books. Consensus was deletion after a previous nomination in 2012. Not much has changed. He might be well known in New Age pseudoscience circles but there is nothing of substance for a Wikipedia page. Ynsfial (talk) 19:07, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Spirituality, and North America. Ynsfial (talk) 19:07, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Arizona and California. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:14, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment The AFD is inaccurate as this is not the same page from 2012. It was recreated from scratch with available info in 2019. Also, the AFD does not actually give any specific grounds for deletion except what sounds like personal disdain, which WP needs to be above. In fact, the deletion submission itself admits topical notability. Whether said topical area is bad or good is not relevant to encyclopedic inclusion. - Keith D. Tyler ¶ 12:15, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fiona Krautil

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

I don't see how she meets WP:BIO or WP:AUTHOR. Most of the sources merely confirm facts about her and I found nothing in a google news search. LibStar (talk) 02:37, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Women, and Australia. LibStar (talk) 02:37, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I have already added more references to this article to show notability. She has been written about in the Australian press with some brief bios in those articles. She advised the Federal Government and argued for innovative labour policies for women long before they were legislated by government such as paid maternity leave, flexible working hours, better access to child care. I will add more to her article later.LPascal (talk) 06:10, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Additional comment- Also she has brief bios in Who's Who in Australia 2002 and 2009 and is listed in the Encyclopedia of Australian Science and Innovation https://www.eoas.info/biogs/P004276b.htm LPascal (talk) 06:27, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Additional comment: A short bio and interview is here and shows some of her impact on government policy. https://aclw.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/Leadership-Interviews-alphabetical.pdf by Australian Centre for Leadership for Women https://aclw.org/research-and-publications/leadership-interviews/leadership-interviews/LPascal (talk) 09:43, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure if an interview would be a primary source. ACLW invited her for an interview. LibStar (talk) 03:42, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as sources are either not reliable or not providing sufficient support to meet WP:GNG. Twinkle1990 (talk) 11:43, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Which sources do you think are not reliable?LPascal (talk) 09:02, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete the available sources don't demonstrate GNG here. LusikSnusik (talk) 10:31, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Geoffrey Girard

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

Appears to fail WP:GNG & WP:NAUTHOR. Most sources were either WP:INTERVIEWS or simply do not establish notability. Did not find any independent reliable sources. The article itself is very promotional, and was majorly written by individuals using SPAs with a COI that are closely tied to the subject. If article is kept, it will need a major rewrite. ⁂CountHacker (talk) 08:45, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. ⁂CountHacker (talk) 08:48, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ohio-related deletion discussions. ⁂CountHacker (talk) 08:50, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Girard's works are reviewed a number of times in Publishers Weekly (link to all the reviews, plus an interview with him), Booklist (links 1 and 2, but there are more), Library Journal (link) and Kirkus Reviews (search results). And that's barely scratching the reviews of his fiction out there. In addition, the nonfiction book he wrote with Thomas Lockley, African Samurai: The True Story of Yasuke, has been reviewed in the Washington Post, The Houston Chronicle, Library Journal, Booklist, and a large number of other places. Finally, Girard has an entry in Contemporary Authors. This author so easily meets the WP:Author notability guidelines that I wonder if a search for reviews and coverage was even done.--SouthernNights (talk) 12:39, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm interested in Girard's work with Hitchcock's plans to film Mary Rose. I agree that this article needs work, but I was happy to find something on Girard in Wiki. 2600:8800:730C:A900:28D5:BE9F:93E6:2983 (talk) 09:22, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Per WP:author "played a major tole in co-creatiing a significant or well known work...such work must have been the primary subject of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews". There is a plethora of work from the BBC, CNN, and other websites that use or talk about the African Samurai book alone. Likewise, he has won awards for his other works. He has also received media attention for his work overall Chrhns (talk) 23:46, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

His work may be notable, that does not mean he is. Slatersteven (talk) 13:34, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree. Given that his work with Lockley, controversial as it is in both sides of the Pacific at the moment, is known enough to establish notability as authors of such work, so I suggest we keep this and Thomas Lockley. --Jnglmpera (talk) 13:57, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Per WP:Author, a creative person is notable if any of several criteria are met, including having "won significant critical attention." Girard easily meets this criteria. SouthernNights (talk) 14:18, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Chris Vander Kaay

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

Mildly promotional biography of a writer fails WP:GNG, WP:NBIO, WP:NWRITER. Sources are all primary (principally WP:INTERVIEWS or the subject's own writing that is not independent) or they are WP:USERGENERATED. No evidence of his books being reviewed by independent reliable sources. Dclemens1971 (talk) 16:38, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors and Maryland. Shellwood (talk) 16:41, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: articles written by the subject, nothing about him. There is nothing we can use for GNG. Oaktree b (talk) 23:02, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - per nom. Fails WP:NAUTHOR meeting none of the four criteria. No reliable sources were found. ⁂CountHacker (talk) 08:55, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:24, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Paulette Flint

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

Does not meet WP:AUTHOR and WP:BIO. Many of the citations are primary as her employer is The Observer (Gladstone). Not seeing indepth third party coverage to meet WP:BIO. Also an orphan article. LibStar (talk) 04:08, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, History, and Australia. LibStar (talk) 04:08, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: although being an orphan isn't a reason for deletion, there's not enough WP:RS to meet WP:GNG, and none of the WP:AUTHOR criteria apply. — Alien333 (what I did & why I did it wrong) 09:49, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: In a Newsbank database search (deeper and wider than Google) I found many articles by her but few about her, insufficient to meet WP:ANYBIO,WP:AUTHOR or WP:PROF (in her capacity as a Gladstone regional historian). She seems to be a WP:RTM Gladstone regional journalist. Cabrils (talk) 01:22, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators and Authors. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:43, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep‎. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:17, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Paul Jessup (writer)

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

I have carried out WP:BEFORE on this article about a writer of speculative fiction. I have found and added one reference, but it is either an interview or an article by a friend (named author who introduces the article, but the bulk of it is by Jessup). The article already references the Encyclopedia of Science Fiction, which I think is a reliable source, but as the only reference which demonstrates notability I don't think it's fully evidenced. The article only needs a couple of reviews from reliable sources to meet WP:NAUTHOR, but I haven't been able to find any. Unless anyone else can, I don't think the article meets WP:GNG, WP:ANYBIO, or WP:NAUTHOR. Tacyarg (talk) 20:31, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Science fiction and fantasy, Literature, and United States of America. Tacyarg (talk) 20:31, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
weak keep: Two book reviews [138] and [139], there might be more. Oaktree b (talk) 21:36, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that. I've added the PW review to the article. Haven't added the other as it is just one sentence. Tacyarg (talk) 22:26, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Just one sentence? Try [140] Geschichte (talk) 22:47, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I've added that to the article. Tacyarg (talk) 22:59, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Withdraw (as nom) - two reviews found by Oaktree b, article meets WP:NAUTHOR. Tacyarg (talk) 22:59, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
We still need at least some material to source the biographical stuff. Or, it could just be removed.

I found more reviews, including another one in PW and one in The Future Fire [141] Here is a shorter one in Reactor (magazine). The next one is from Wired, but is primary, starting off with "My friend Paul Jessup": [142] Had you heard about Werewolf News? Me neither. (Blog, not reliable.) Geschichte (talk) 03:40, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment For the record, one of the above-cited reviews is a Kirkus Indie review, which does not count towards notability per WP:KIRKUS. On the other hand, The Encyclopedia of Science Fiction, mentioned in the nomination, is most certainly a reliable source. TompaDompa (talk) 02:16, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep In addition to the earlier mentioned reviews, Publishers Weekly reviewed more of his novels (link 1 and 2) while I also found other reviews out there (link 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5) along with the previously mentioned short interview in Wired and this article in the Washington Post. Overall, there are enough reviews and press coverage to meet our notability guidelines.--SouthernNights (talk) 12:23, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

Imre Vallyon

AfDs for this article:

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

I'm nominating this page for deletion again because the initial discussion lacked sufficient engagement and the sources provided were inadequate in both quality and quantity. There's a notable absence of substantial coverage of Imre Vallyon, his work, or his organisation in multiple reliable secondary sources. Meeting notability criteria typically requires presenting at least three such sources. The article from Stuff, while primarily focused on his legal issues, appears to be the only source that meets these criteria. Without it, the page is mostly information sourced by primary sources and a list of his self published books and ebooks.

In terms of Vallyon's notability as a writer, the two book reviews presented by Oaktree b in the previous discussion are clearly poor sources, as they seem to be paid content from freelance writers on unreliable websites. Additionally, Vallyon does not meet the criteria for notability as a criminal according to Wikipedia guidelines on crime perpetrators, despite the only significant coverage of him focusing on his legal issues. His organisation, FHL, does not seem to meet the notability standards either. Ynsfial (talk) 16:55, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Authors, and New Zealand. Ynsfial (talk) 16:55, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Hungary-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:07, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep has enough to meet WP:GNG. NealeWellington (talk) 10:13, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment for Ynsfial - it seems pointless making multiple attempts to have this article deleted as the previous Afd covered the arguments in sufficient depth. I suggest you look at the deletion review process if you consider there is an issue. NealeWellington (talk) 10:13, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No, deletion review is the wrong avenue here. It was a no consensus close, and closed over 2 months ago. It is perfectly fine to bring it back for another look. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 13:59, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Exactly. Thank you.Ynsfial (talk) 18:40, 19 July 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) 18:31, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

’’’Keep’’’ He’s a convicted pedophile. Where’s the good in deleting this? Meets WP:GNG. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A01:E0A:E9F:8340:51A7:F4CD:CE5C:4B8B (talk) 18:30, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as thin as it is, the media coverage in New Zealand and the Netherlands establishes WP:GNG in my opinion. David Palmer//cloventt ^(talk) 01:33, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Greg Koukl

AfDs for this article:

Articles for deletion/Greg Koukl

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

No evidence of notability, warning has been in place for over 7 years. I cannot find sources to indicate notability has been attained since the last nomination in 2011, which was closed as no consensus. glman (talk) 18:43, 9 July 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 July 9. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 19:12, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete: Rather prolific author and is talked about a ton in the religious media, but a distinct lack of book reviews in "mainstream" media (for lack of a better word). This [143] review in religious media is typical... Some scattered mentions here [144] or [145]. We'd need more of these last two types of sources for this to have a chance to be notable here. Was hoping this would pass AUTHOR. Oaktree b (talk) 00:15, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Radio, Christianity, California, and Illinois. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:08, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I have added another reference which squeezes him over the line on WP:GNG. But the Google scholar citations are actually pretty good, including 98 for Tactics. St Anselm (talk) 23:13, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as has good cites for two of his books as per Google Scholar here and coverage in reliable sources such as The Christian Post, imv Atlantic306 (talk) 18:20, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep:He's made STR. He's notable. Quote Veteran (talk) 18:48, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:52, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Per above. ADifferentMan (talk) 07:14, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kade Ferris

AfDs for this article:

Articles for deletion/Kade Ferris

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

I believe this article should be deleted because it clearly fails WP:NOTE. OldDiddlyBop (talk) 11:35, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators and Archaeology. Shellwood (talk) 11:55, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The cited sources are a bit thin but I wouldn't say it's 'clear' either way. Did you look for sources? The article lists several books authored by the subject, did you look for reviews per WP:NAUTHOR? – Joe (talk) 13:00, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah I can't find anything to meet the Wikipedia notability guidelines. I still stand by deleting this article. OldDiddlyBop (talk) 16:08, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nope this article fails notability guidelines for authors too. It seems this page was made by friends of the article's subject. OldDiddlyBop (talk) 16:12, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What makes you think it was made by friends of the subject? Belbury (talk) 08:49, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. His books appear to be self-published but that would be ok if there were reliably published reviews of them. I couldn't find any. The sources in the article now include a book review, but of someone else's book and mentioning Ferris only in passing. The only in-depth source that we have is a local-news obituary, appearing to be a family-written obituary rather than a work of independent journalism. That's not enough. —David Eppstein (talk) 17:33, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@David Eppstein Kade Ferris is the author. Charles Albert Bender = Chief Bender and is the subject of the biography. There are other reviews of that book too. Anyway I'm leaning keep. Cielquiparle (talk) 22:28, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Chief Bender meets notability guidelines for his sports career while Ferris does not meet any Wikipedia notability guidelines. OldDiddlyBop (talk) 00:15, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Are you telling me that the book Métis and the Medicine Line: Creating a Border and Dividing a People, with the author listed as Michel Hogue on the cover, is really by Kade Ferris? Because that is the book whose review I was referring to. —David Eppstein (talk) 00:20, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@David Eppstein Right. I clocked that the first time I read your comment, but the second time I read it, I read it the other way. I can add the other book reviews (of his book) and also quote from at least one other book I found. Cielquiparle (talk) 05:26, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This article still seems to fail WP:NTEMP and WP:SUSTAINED OldDiddlyBop (talk) 16:12, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Minnesota, and North Dakota. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:50, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. I see that the review in American Indian Children's Literature got removed from the article as a source. I am adding it back. While the site itself could be construed as a blog, the reason this particular blog qualifies as a reliable source per WP:BLOGS, is that it is produced by Debbie Reese, who is an established subject-matter expert, whose work in the relevant field has previously been published by reliable, independent publications. Cielquiparle (talk) 05:47, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - I expanded it to include more about the impact of his tribal history preservation work and the impact that has on reservations, ND and MN educational standards and added information about his mapping skills. oncamera _{(talk page)} 08:59, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I still don't see how this article ceases to fail WP:NOTE WP:NTEMP and WP:SUSTAINED. OldDiddlyBop (talk) 16:11, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
His written work as an author and oral traditions that he embedded within his maps, blogs, and recorded videos for the state of North Dakota established notability. He was a respected tribal historian and elder knowledge keeper and professional work reflects that. oncamera _{(talk page)} 21:07, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The article has now been puffed up with some 30 footnotes, most of which do not seem to be the sort of in-depth independent and reliably-published coverage of the subject that could be used to pass WP:GNG. Of the ones that actually mention Ferris or his works in their title, "Kade Ferris's Gift" is an interview (not usually counted as independent), the Red Lake Nation News obituary reads like a family-written obituary (not independent), the Mendoza book review is in a blog (not reliably published), Teachings of Our Elders is by him not about him, and Archaeologist presents has no depth of coverage of Ferris. Perhaps, per WP:THREE, advocates of keeping the article could save us the effort of similarly evaluating all 30 of the footnotes and point us to three sources that are actually in-depth, independent, and reliably-published? I'm looking for a small number of high-quality sources, at most three, not many low-quality sources. —David Eppstein (talk) 23:16, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that it would be helpful to hear the three best sources. It seems like notability is marginal at best and it's hard to see through all the passing coverage. – Joe (talk) 08:12, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Joe Roe, thanks for asking. I'd say that these sources are strong: 1) Obit from the Indigenous news press, BobaaMaajimowinan (Telling of the News in Different Places) Red Lake Nation News [146]; 2) Obit in the peer-reviewed academic journal, Minnesota History (can be read on JSTOR via WP:LIB) [147]; 3) The Extra, a newspaper covering Red River Valley, eastern North Dakota and northwestern Minnesota areas, on Ferris' book on Charles Bender [148]; 4) The Indigenous radio program, Minnesota Native News on Ferris' contributions to children's literature [149]; 5) Voice of America [150]; 6) Book review in American Indians in Children's Literature (which unfortunately is published thru blogspot, so it may not count since it's a blog) [151]; among others....please have a look at the improved article along with the current sourcing when you find a moment (sorry I don't have the time right now to list more). However there is less coverage but still solidly sourced: 3-minute PBS (Arizona) discussion with Ferris re: Indigenous reconciliation and cultural healing. The book review on Hogue's book on the Métis includes a quote Ferris as an expert on Métis culture. Some of the other sources are primary sources, such as press releases, or Indigenous human rights and environmental justice publications where he is called up on as an expert, for example this [152] from the Minnesota government's website. To my way of thinking he is clearly notable, and especially so in Indigenous Native American communities as an important leader and thinker, which is just as important as "mainstream American" culture. Netherzone (talk) 17:44, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Strong keep. This article was already extremely well cited, but I added an infobox and a little bit more. His notability stems from his tribal historic preservation work which is interdisciplinary (history, anthropology, archaeology, policy making, language advocacy, etc.) Yuchitown (talk) 16:34, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Can you please address the discussion above about lack of high-quality sourcing, rather than merely asserting that "This article was already extremely well cited" when clearly it isn't? It has many sources but that misses the point. We need a small number of high-quality sources, and continuing to add larger numbers of low-quality sources only makes notability harder to discern by hiding the good sources in a big pile of dross. It would be better to remove both the low-quality sources and the material sourced to them so that we can focus on the essentials. The sources you added (his own dissertation and a web page about someone else that mentions him in passing) do not contribute to notability according to Wikipedia's standards for notability, which are not based on the work the subject might have done but rather on the depth of coverage of the subject in sources that are independent of him and meet Wikipedia's standards for reliable publication. —David Eppstein (talk) 18:55, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't appreciate the suggestion that tribal newspapers are "low-quality sources." Like I wrote, his notability is based on being a THPO, so it's interdisciplinary. He was not just a writer. While several pieces (Red Lake Nation News, Minnesota Native News) focus on him specifically, even if these didn't exist, Wikipedia:Notability (people) states: If the depth of coverage in any given source is not substantial, then multiple independent sources may be combined to demonstrate notability. He has contributed "part of the enduring historical record" of the Métis people. Yuchitown (talk) 02:06, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Tribal newspapers are as reliable as any other newspaper. But when a local newspaper (tribal or not) runs an obituary that reads like the sort of obituary written by a family member to announce a death, rather than the kind of obituary that major newspapers write themselves when famous people die, it doesn't count much towards notability. For one thing, if it is indeed written by family, it is not an independent source. —David Eppstein (talk) 06:06, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
.... even if these didn't exist, Wikipedia:Notability (people) states: "If the depth of coverage in any given source is not substantial, then multiple independent sources may be combined to demonstrate notability". He has contributed "part of the enduring historical record" of the Métis people. Yuchitown (talk) 13:55, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
So much a part of the enduring historical record that the only Wikilink to him from any other article is a an unsourced sentence about him in an article about a village in Lebanon, stating that he is also of Lebanese descent, something that appears nowhere in the Kade Ferris article itself? —David Eppstein (talk) 19:10, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If that's an issue to you, you can help expand topics on Turtle Mountain, the Ojibwe or Metis history and credit/wikilink his article from those edits. Wikipedia needs more editors in that area. oncamera _{(talk page)} 10:27, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I definitely think the Métis have an interesting history that deserves to be better-known, but I have no special expertise in that area, and I have even less knowledge of Turtle Mountain or the Ojibwe.

Incidentally, I can find no evidence that Kade Ferris had any connection to Lebanon, outside of a few unreliable web sources. I have removed the link to him from the Lebanese village article. His mother was from Minnesota and his father was originally from the Turtle Mountain Reservation. I suspect his father, Albert Ferris, may have some notability as an artist. —David Eppstein (talk) 19:14, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - I just came across this AfD and don't entirely feel experienced enough with guidelines to vote either way, but I'd like to note that Ferris' work on map decolonization and geographic technologies (as THPO for the Red Lake Nation) was significant enough that he gave a full-fledged presentation at the Council for Minnesota Archaeology's 2023 annual conference, entitled "Creating a Virtual Database for Regional Tribal Resource Management and Consultation". I don't know if, for example, a program (with an abstract of his talk) from the conference (the most important one on Minnesota archaeology, as far as I know) would count towards GNG, but I do have such a document if uploading it somewhere could prove useful. Thanks. SunTunnels (talk) 21:41, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think that giving a lecture or presentation at a conference is a stand-out event. Doing that is an ordinary part of an academic's job. The only exceptions would be instances where being selected to give the lecture is itself a high honor, like when a national academic society invites someone to do the Annual So-and-so Memorial Lecture. That can be an indication that the field regards the person's work as particularly important. XOR'easter (talk) 21:02, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Please address the question of notability per cited sources.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 15:52, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Recheck the article. It's completely fine now. Yuchitown (talk) 03:26, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

False. There are still zero WP:GNG-contributing sources: sources that provide in-depth content about Ferris, are written independently of their subjects, and are reliably published. None of the previous keep comments have even attempted to address those requirements of GNG. —David Eppstein (talk) 19:59, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Kade Ferris was a distinguished archaeologist, anthropologist and historian, one of the first Indigenous archaeologists in the U.S. I've made some improvements, including adding a book review and an obit in an academic journal. He clearly meets criterion #2 of WP:ANYBIO, WP:BASIC and also nows meet GNG. As an aside, I find it really quite odd that the nominator would assume that It seems this page was made by friends of the article's subject especially given the fact that such a new editor, with only 40 total edits (the majority of which were to the article or this AfD) would make such a comment. I guess I'm also a little curious how they learned by their 20th edit how to produce an AfD so quickly. Nominator, do you yourself have a connection to the subject of the article and why would you make such a statement? Netherzone (talk) 17:50, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Adding "Strong" in front of your !vote, or casting aspersions at the nom, will not give your view more weight. Highlighting sources that provide WP:SIGCOV will.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 19:27, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. An obituary in a history journal and status as one of the first indigenous archaeologists are compelling. Good articles like this go a long way toward correcting long-standing biases on Wikipedia. 172.9.46.64 (talk) 02:11, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What biases are you referring to? Are you implying that this is bias instead of this figure not meeting notability guidelines? Do you have any evidence of bias or is this a baseless accusation? This article was not nominated for deletion in bad faith. OldDiddlyBop (talk) 21:52, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There has been discussions on here and elsewhere in response to a scholarly paper written about the bias against topics about Indigenous people and history. Wikipedia Signpost. And Netherzone did bring up questions about how this account with limited edits would know how to nominate for deletion which was not addressed by the OP. oncamera _{(talk page)} 22:29, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Additionally, there is one "delete" vote and three "keep" votes plus one "leaning keep." The article has been vastly improved since nomination. This conversation has dragged on for more than two weeks now. Yuchitown (talk) 01:52, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I never interacted with, knew, or worked for Ferris, but for a brief period I watched some of his work from afar. The history journal obit that IP 172.9.46.64 linked to is in my opinion good evidence of what I anecdotally have observed, which is that Ferris did some groundbreaking work that was recognized by his archaeologist and historian peers. Unfortunately for his Wikipedia article, Ferris also worked in an often-overlooked discipline (tribal historic preservation) that doesn't frequently make it into the kind of secondary sources that Wikipedia values for notability purposes. I think a good chunk of that is due to broader systemic biases, absolutely, but I suppose that's not what we're discussing here. Wikipedia's notability standards are likely different from what we as individuals may think makes a person notable. Even so, I think the journal Minnesota History writing "Kade was one of the first THPOs and native archaeologists in the country [....] His dedication to the work in the fields of history, archaeology, and tribal preservation led to his assistance in the development of many THPOs across the region" demonstrates notability by Wikipedia's standards. I can absolutely see how others may disagree, however. SunTunnels (talk) 16:07, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Keep. The article has clearly been improved since it was nominated and I'm suprised it hasn't been closed yet. I can't really fathom any reason to delete it now that it has a massive number of sources and clearly meets GNG.

PersusjCP (talk) 20:24, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Manuel D'Lima

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

Reviewed during NPP. No evidence of wp:notability under SNG or GNG. None of the sources are about him. Sources (and much of the content) are about taitrs. Material on him is just resume type material. North8000 (talk) 17:33, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Theatre, and India. Shellwood (talk) 17:35, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Poor to unreliable sources with no significant coverage on the subject. The subject fails notability. RangersRus (talk) 18:30, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Goa and Maharashtra. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:48, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment a number of references are from offline books. Has the nominator managed to access them ? Atlantic306 (talk) 18:24, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's hard to answer with respect to what you are seeing because there have been 104 edits to the article since I nominated this. But I did evaluate them at the time. North8000 (talk) 18:52, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Well, a lot was added after you nominated this, including several refs, but much of it was WP:PROMO, fluff, repetition, and stuff about the genre of theatre that, I think, has no direct relevance to D'Lima's career. I tried to reduce the promo, cruft, repetition and tangential stuff, but someone else should review the refs to see if they actually discuss Liima's life or career at all. -- Ssilvers (talk) 23:10, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting to assess new additions to the article since it's nomination.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:29, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Still no review of additions to the article.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:00, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mayank Shekhar

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

Article does not meet WP:GNG and WP:JOURNALIST. Subject did receive an award Ramnath Goenka Award for Excellence in Journalism. Source 1 is a book review, source 2 is a blog, source 3 has a passing comment made by the subject himself, source 4 is a review by subject himself, source 5 is a bio written by subject himself, source 6 is more on bio written by subject himself, source 7 is a link to Ramnath Goenka Award and source 8 is a book written by subject himself. Many unreliable and primary sources here. Draftify would be an option to improve the page with secondary independent sources and remove primary sources like the reviews by the subject himself and the interview with the subject.RangersRus (talk) 15:39, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If the award is judged significant enough, he could meet WP:ANYBIO. If his books have received coverage that is judged sufficiently significant (including the review you mention, or https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/delhi/name-place-animal-thing-of-bollywood-trivia-popular-culture/articleshow/52685080.cms or https://www.spectralhues.com/news/bookreview-name-place-animal-thing-mayank-shekhar/), he might also meet WP:AUTHOR. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 17:56, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

TOI makes it under WP:NEWSORGINDIA. I still do not find his books a significant monument or been a substantial part of a significant exhibition or won wide significant critical attention by well known peers and critics in secondary independent sources. RangersRus (talk) 18:49, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

TOI falling under NEWSORGINDIA is an interpretation that I respect but with which I disagree in this case (not great journalism but not simply unreliable). The fact that the author of the book is one of the film critics of the Hindustan Times also indicates the article in the TOI should be rather independent.-- -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 19:53, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Mushy Yank: The article from TOI doesn't look like a review at all; it seems more like a promotional piece or an announcement. Additionally, the article was published by PTI. I don't think he meets WP:AUTHOR. GrabUp - Talk 16:12, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note about the Times of India: The Sources noticeboard says not to use it for political subject matters for example, which the Indian task force clarifies: "Uncontroversial content such as film reviews are usable". Consensus is that concern about retributed coverage exists, but not to the point of making it unreliable. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 19:50, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reply to Note: TOI has trivia (likely promotion) from the subject's book and is not a review that I glanced over again and spectralhues.com is likely unreliable source as it says "Spectral Hues has been founded by a couple of starry-eyed romantics with their feet firmly planted on the ground (a rather unusual combination, we know!)." This is not a well established news media or website. About The Times of India, Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources says The Times of India is considered to have a reliability between no consensus and generally unreliable. It has a bias in favor of the Indian government and is known to accept payments from persons and entities in exchange for positive coverage. So this puts in question the promotion by using trivia taken from the book written by the subject. RangersRus (talk) 14:16, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Journalism, Film, and India. RangersRus (talk) 15:39, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - clearly notable; a prolific film critic who is also known for his in-depth interviews with major film stars. The Ramnath Goenka Award for Excellence in Journalism is no mean achievement, and he is the first film critic to have received it. I have added a reference for an interview with him for the The Asian Age. At best, the article needs expansion, certainly not deletion. Shahid • ^Talk2me 18:03, 3 July 2024 (UTC)— Note to closing admin: Shshshsh (talk • contribs) is the creator of the page that is the subject of this AfD. [reply]

Indeed, I should have mentioned that I hapeen to have been the creator of this page many years back. I actually didn't even remember I was the one who created it, as I've created numerous pages for notable Indian film critics. As someone who has worked on Indian cinema-related articles, I can attest to the relevance of his reviews on dozens of film articles, including several FAs. Him being an author as well as the winner of a notable award only consolidates my position. Shahid • ^Talk2me 18:34, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
interviews are primary sources that needs to cite the truth of the statements unless attributed. RangersRus (talk) 11:51, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@RangersRus: Didn't undersrtand what you said here, please explain. Shahid • ^Talk2me 13:04, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Interviews are considered primary non-independent source. Independent sources helps to fairly portray the subject, without undue attention to the subject's own views. If you use interviews as source for any statement made by the subject then the subject's statements needs to be cited with secondary independent source as well. Wikipedia:Independent sources. RangersRus (talk) 14:19, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Shshshsh: The award “Ramnath Goenka Excellence in Journalism Awards” is given to over 20 people every year. Do you think this is an exclusive award that can make recipients notable? GrabUp - Talk 16:15, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Grabup: Yes; there are many notable awards which award several groups of individuals. Shahid • ^Talk2me 12:33, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Shshshsh: Hey, Thanks for the reply. Can you please name some! GrabUp - Talk 12:56, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Grabup: Yes, off the top of my head - the Padma Shri. Not comparing them in notability, but just giving a direct answer to your question. Shahid • ^Talk2me 13:15, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Shshshsh: Padma Shri does not establish notability. I wanted the names of some awards that establish notability and are given to more than 20 people every year. GrabUp - Talk 15:28, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No award in the world "establishes" notability in and of itself; notable awards indicate notability, they attest to the recepient's notabiltiy. The notability is established by the professional achievments the award was given for. Shahid • ^Talk2me 09:38, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, see my reply to nomination above.-My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 18:07, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Clearly notable.♦ Dr. Blofeld 06:42, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep very much notable, as pointed out above. Krimuk2.0 (talk) 09:27, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I am not convinced that he meets any notability criteria. He fails WP:ANYBIO, as the award is not exclusive, with more than 20 people receiving it. Receiving the award first or last does not make it exceptional or add to notability. Regarding WP:AUTHOR, The Times of India is not a review, merely a short promotional or announcement piece with no author, published by the Press Trust of India (PTI), therefore, it does not meet WP:AUTHOR criteria. The person does not meet the General Notability Guideline, which is already known. Also, I don't understand how interviews with celebrities establish notability. GrabUp - Talk 09:41, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as the award is a notable national award as per WP:Anybio and having specific award categories does not invalidate that in my view, Atlantic306 (talk) 20:57, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ramnath Goenka Award is not national award. It is award named after journalist Ramnath Goenka that began in 2006 and is awarded to over 20 journalists every year and is presented by Indian Express Group. RangersRus (talk) 22:39, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note to Closer. Keep votes are more focused on the subject's notability because of an award (not national award) but there is no argument on the unreliability of the sources on the page that are blogs, interviews with no secondary sources as attribution and self written reviews by the subject himself and part of WP:NEWSORGINDIA. Two keep votes consider him notable but have no argument as to why and the two other keep vote (including the creator of the page) do not have opinion on the argument about the page and the unreliable sources that fails WP:GNG. I think the page is at best Delete but Draftify is also an option if there is any scope of improvement with secondary independent reliable sources. If this page stays a keep, then likely it opens a Pandora box to use unreliable sources like blogs and interviews and self published reviews on other pages or newly generated pages. RangersRus (talk) 22:51, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note @RangersRus is the nominator of this AfD and appears to have voted twice (assuming good faith), both in the nomination description and in the comment above. Shahid • ^Talk2me 12:42, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Those are not votes but opinion based on the unreliability of the sources on the page. RangersRus (talk) 14:50, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@RangersRus: Then you should not have highlighted them in bold. Shahid • ^Talk2me 09:34, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I do not see it as problem. Two closers already went through the arguments and understood it as opinion. RangersRus (talk) 11:30, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I really don’t understand why they are not providing good arguments for their Keep votes. It looks like @Atlantic306 is just here to go along with the majority. The question raises because how can he call it a ‘national award’? Additionally, they are posting low effort delete votes and not giving any counterarguments, which raises some questions in my mind. GrabUp - Talk 02:08, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Grabup: Please assume good faith on other participants here. The fact that they do not agree with you doesn't mean their arguments are not "good". This is an AfD where no one is obligated to satisfy his voting peers. Shahid • ^Talk2me 12:26, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, they are not obligated to satisfy me, but to build consensus, they should explain further why and how the subject meets some notability criteria. Being a "National award" does not establish notability, such as the Padmashri Award, which is a national award, but the majority of the recipients are not notable and don’t have articles. Giving low effort votes does not really help to build consensus in every AfDs. GrabUp - Talk 13:01, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- In the UK and US a national award means it relates to the scope of a whole country not that it is given by the government. For example the Oscars and Grammy Awards are national awards that are given by private organisations, imv Atlantic306 (talk) 13:21, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  For UK and US, there is national award for films National Film Awards UK and National Film & TV Award USA. In India, for journalism, Press Council of India honours the journalists selected by the Jury/Council for having excelled in various fields on the occasion of National Press Day. This is national award. RangersRus (talk) 15:42, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  
  The award is not exclusive enough to establish notability. Every year, more than 20 people receive the award. Are they also notable for this award? I don’t think so. GrabUp - Talk 16:06, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  Yes, they might be notable. The UK Awards are given by a private organization. National, especially in the Indian context, means the recepients may be chosen from across all states and not just locally. The Ramnath Goenka Award is given by a notable organization which has existed for almost a century. The award might not necessarily establish notability in and of itself (although I think it should), but everything else about the subject certainly does. Shekhar is also a member of the CBFC, he writes for notable publications, he hosts programs where big stars are being interviewed (see Hitlist on YT), he has authored two books which received media coverage. I can't see the harm in having a Wikipedia article on this person even with half of these achievements. I do admit I'm an inclusionist. :) I strongly believe WP can and should cover as much as possible. The spirit of WP, as I think of it, lies in its ongoing goal to become a robust center of knowledge, where minimal restrictions are put on inclusion of information. Shahid • ^Talk2me 13:12, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  @Shshshsh: Being a member of the CBFC does not meet any notability criteria. Writing for a notable publication does not meet any notability criteria. Hosting big stars in a program or interviewing them does not meet any notability criteria. Lastly, his book has not received enough media coverage to be considered notable, nor have his books been reviewed by any notable media organization that would allow it to meet WP:AUTHOR.
  
  I want to ask where it is written in Wikipedia’s notability guidelines that being a member of the CBFC, writing for a notable publication, hosting big stars in a show, or taking interviews makes a person notable. I don’t have a problem with your intent to include everything on Wikipedia, but there are rules that should be followed. Why keep a subject that has not met any notability criteria set by Wikipedia guidelines? GrabUp - Talk 15:36, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  He does meet notability guidelines, because all these positions do not work individually but as a group. Going by your opening sentence, no critic/journalist is notable. Anyway, we should agree to disagree. Shahid • ^Talk2me 09:33, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  @Shshshsh: My comment was: Journalists or critics are not inherently notable; they have to pass some sort of guidelines, such as GNG, JOURNALIST, AUTHOR, or similar, for an article in Wikipedia. You said, "because all these positions do not work individually but as a group. Going by your opening sentence," where is it written that these types of works or positions make a person notable, whether in a group or individually? GrabUp - Talk 11:58, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  WP:N, WP:GNG is my answer. We wouldn't have known all of this had this not been published in reliable sources. And above all, common sense is an option. I will reiterate for you: he has won a notable award, he is a member of the CBFC, he writes for several notable publications, he hosts programs where big stars are being interviewed (see Hitlist on YT), he has authored two books which received media coverage, he is a film critic whose reviews are being quoted, and his work has made him the interviewee, as we can see. If you're not convinced, which I think is going to be case anyway, let's agree to disagree. Shahid • ^Talk2me 09:20, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  GNG requires significant coverage from reliable, independent sources, and I am unable to see any. GrabUp - Talk 16:51, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  Three awards are now reported by reliable sources (another one added just now). I can't think of many non-notable writers/authors whose books get a full review on India's most popular entertainment portal. Shahid • ^Talk2me 22:52, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  I can’t see the full review. These are promotional. The Asian Age article contains only statements from the subject and is not an independent article. The newly added source The Print is a press release and is not at all independent nor reliable per WP:PRSOURCE. Please share your “reliable sources” here. GrabUp - Talk 01:57, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  Whether you can see it or not, it's there. The Asian Age is a legitimate interview. I really don't get the analysis here of independent or not given it's a film critic we're talking about. A notable one, of course. With all due respect, I don't accept your subjective analysis of the sources. Shahid • ^Talk2me 09:24, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  How do interviews start to pass GNG? To pass GNG, independent in-depth coverage of the subject is required. How is this a subjective analysis? The article is just full of quotes from the subject or what you call interviews. Interviews do not help to establish notability at all. Read WP:INTERVIEWS, which states, "They may be used for sourcing some facts amid a mixture of sourcing types, but a person does not pass GNG if interviews are the only kind of sourcing they have." The subject actually does not have independent sources. GrabUp - Talk 10:30, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  Exactly - it's not the only kind of sourcing. Shahid • ^Talk2me 10:57, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  Where is independent source then? GrabUp - Talk 11:03, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  Sorry, I've said enough on this. I'm really busy. You and the other user haven't managed to convince anyone except each other. Shahid • ^Talk2me 11:16, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  
  Interestingly, The Print’s ANI press release was provided by SRV Media, a PR company known for sponsored promotional publishing. Therefore, this article falls under WP:NEWSORGINDIA and cannot help meet GNG. None of the sources cited in the article are reliable, independent secondary sources. GrabUp - Talk 02:11, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  You must be kidding - The Print is an online newspaper and the article cited is just used for the overage of the awards. All you said here is mere speculation. Shahid • ^Talk2me 09:17, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  That shows you have not seen any articles and are just arguing blindly. If you read the end of the article, it is clearly mentioned, “This story is provided by SRV Media. ANI will not be responsible in any way for the content of this article. (ANI/SRV Media)” And since you are acting like you don’t know anything, here is what SRV Media’s website says: “A well-written press release informs and positions your brand as an authority in your industry, enhancing credibility and trust among your audience.” GrabUp - Talk 10:39, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  Please use WP:RSN to gain consensus pertaining to the label you're using. For the rest, let's agree to disagree. Shahid • ^Talk2me 10:55, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
When I went to RSN about the source he wanted and mentioned that he wants to establish notability with that article, he immediately came to my talk page telling me to remove the word. Closer can see this. He says he has no time when I ask him to provide an independent, reliable source but has time to argue and tell people to remove things. After all this, he agreed at RSN that the article is a press release. GrabUp - Talk 11:56, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This article is notable regardless of whether this specific article is a press release. I think we should let this AfD run its course and see what other people think. Shahid • ^Talk2me 12:30, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Primary sources can’t really establish notability (unless any additional criteria is met). You are unable to provide any secondary independent sources but are claiming this article is notable. You are replying to everything but saying you have no time when asked to provide independent sources, and acting like you have, but actually have not. Anyways, I will leave it to the closer to decide. GrabUp - Talk 17:30, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I actually agree with your points when seen specifically, but disagree about the outcome where all the criteria are taken together. I think I have made my point clear and so have you. Shahid • ^Talk2me 22:11, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 07:46, 11 July 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) 09:42, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep seem to be notable and meeting GNG. LusikSnusik (talk) 10:25, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@LusikSnusik: Can you explain how he meets GNG? You should learn about notability before voting on AfD. GrabUp - Talk 10:58, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The article cites in-depth coverage of the subject's books and his criticism. He is mainly known for his work, which is common enough. The same could be said of the poet Homer or the playwright Shakespeare. Mayank Shekhar is clearly notable as a film critic. Aymatth2 (talk) 13:16, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The article does not cite multiple reliable secondary independent sources with indepth coverage on subject's book. It is very clear to me that you did not review the page. Subject's comparison with Homer and Shakespeare is bizarre. RangersRus (talk) 16:28, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note to Closer. Please do not consider consensus based on a tally of votes, but on reasonable, logical, policy-based arguments. Keep votes have not made any logical and policy based arguments. The last keep vote by Aymatth2 before this note makes me suspicious of off-wiki canvassing who hasn't voted on an AFD for as far back as I can check and to just appear and make vote on this only AFD today just adds to suspicion. The creator of the page who voted for keep admitted that he is inclusionist and that is why his stance is amoral and disingenuous. Please assess the discussion and review the page and sources on the page for final consensus before closing this AFD. RangersRus (talk) 16:47, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"Amoral and disingenuous"? As I've noted to the other user, please assume good faith on other participants here. The fact that they do not agree with you doesn't mean their arguments are not "logical". This is an AfD where no one is obligated to satisfy his voting peers. Please note it is your second note to the closer; I'm sure the closer will consider the entire discussion without us repeating ourselves. Also remember that if the article does not have enough good sources, although I think it does, it doesn't mean deletion is the right course of action; improvement is. With respect to inclusionism, beliving in it is totally allowed on WP as long as you follow policy - I have used above policy-based arguments and said that in my view this article meets notability guidelines. Shahid • ^Talk2me 22:19, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Enough good sourcing? Not a single independent, reliable secondary source is cited. Please share if you find any. Just promotional, Sponsored, NEWSORGINDIA, full of sayings of the subject. GrabUp - Talk 02:16, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Except for the Bollywood Hungama source, there is just a single piece, which cannot make the book notable as it requires multiple independent reviews. GrabUp - Talk 02:19, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Please stop replying to me in several places, especially when I call out another user for inappropriate conduct. You say the same above. Shahid • ^Talk2me 09:06, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete although I wouldn't be opposed to draftifying if there is an editor who wants to work on the article.
Source 1: A full review of the subjects book. reliable, independent, and significant coverage.
Source 2: An WP:ABOUTSELF blog, reliable but not independent.
Source 3: A passing mention which is a quote from the subject, reliable - not independent - not significant coverage.
Source 4: This is by the subject themselves, reliable but not independent.
Source 5: A piece about the subjects book, reliable - not independent as it mostly an interview. This is the Asia Age sources mention above.
Source 6: By the subject, not independent.
Source 7: By the subject, not independent.
Source 8: One line noting they won the Ramnath Goenka award for 'Films and Television (Print)', this seems notable per WP:ANYBIO point 1 but that doesn't guarantee inclusion it only mean they are likely notable.
Source 9: A press release, reliable but not independent.
Source 10: A book by the subject, reliable but not independent.
There are two more sources mentioned in this discussion. Two book reviews one by SpectralHues and another by Times Of India. SpectralHues is not a book review site, per it's 'Our services' page[153] it offers services including Content Management, SEO, SEM, Website Designing & Development, Social Media Marketing and Book Promotion. It's not a reliable or independent source. The Times India review is quite short and I fear could be promotional.
So there is one reliable, independent source with significant coverage that has been mentioned so far, and that is a review of one of their works and I can't find any other online sources that would contribute. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested «@» °∆t° 02:14, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That’s what I was saying from starting, thank you so much for the detailed analysis. GrabUp - Talk 02:48, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hafiz Baxish

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

Zero references to establish notability. After searching, found other people of same name, but no comprehensive, in-depth coverage of this specific person. PROD removed 27 June 2024; PROD reverted 27 October 2022; PROD on 27 October 2022; Created on 27 August 2014. JoeNMLC (talk) 14:59, 1 July 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 July 1. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 15:15, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Poetry and Azerbaijan. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 15:19, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 15:30, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I mistakenly put a PROD on it last week without checking that it hadn't already had one. I agree with delete per nom. SomeoneDreaming (talk) 18:45, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Not eligible for Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 15:53, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment The Azerbajani article gives 1 reference: "Tamxil Ziyəddinoğlu, "Hafiz Baxış-80". Bütöv Azərbaycan qəzeti, №36(168), 17-23 oktyabr 2012-ci il." This appears to be an article in a reasonable news source. I can't find it but I think he may have significant coverage. Mrfoogles (talk) 16:36, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Week keep. Found a few Azeri sources ([154], [155], [156]) that I think are just over the line of WP:SIGCOV. Reviewing with machine translation though, so could be wrong -- happy to be convinced either way. Dclemens1971 (talk) 05:21, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 16:56, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Authors proposed deletions

Nazareth Hassan (via WP:PROD on 9 October 2023)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Businesspeople Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Lists of people Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Politicians
Template:Broken ref
Template:Broken ref