Wikipedia:Requests for deletion

Shortcuts

If you think a page should be deleted, read the deletion policy to make sure.
Then follow these instructions on how to request a page for deletion. To find more information on what discussed deletions and quick deletions are:
PLEASE READ THIS

Before nominating: checks and alternatives

Shortcut

WP:BEFORE

Prior to nominating article(s) for deletion, please be sure to:

A. Read and understand these policies and guidelines

The Wikipedia deletion policy, which explains valid grounds for deletion.
The main four guidelines and policies that inform deletion discussions: notability (WP:N), verifiability (WP:V), reliable sources (WP:RS), and what Wikipedia is not (WP:NOT)
Subject-specific notability guidelines, which can be found at Category:Wikipedia notability guidelines

B. Carry out these checks

Confirm that the article does not meet the criteria for quick deletion.
If there are verifiability, notability or other sourcing concerns, take reasonable steps to search for reliable sources. (See step D.)
Review the article's history to check for potential vandalism or poor editing.
Read the article's talk page for previous nominations and/or that your objections haven't already been dealt with.
Check "What links here" in the article's sidebar, to see how the page is used and referenced within Wikipedia.
Check if there are interlanguage links, also in the sidebar, which may lead to more developed and better sourced articles. Likewise, search for native-language sources if the subject has a name in a non-Latin alphabet (such as Japanese or Greek), which is often in the lead.

C. Consider whether the article could be improved rather than deleted

If the article can be fixed through normal editing, then it is not a candidate for RfD.
If the article was recently created, please consider allowing the contributors more time to develop the article.
If an article has issues try first raising your concerns on the article's talk page, with the main contributors, and/or adding a cleanup tag, such as {{notability}}, {{hoax}}, {{original research}}, or {{advert}}; this ensures readers are aware of the problem and may act to fix it.
If the topic is not important enough to merit an article on its own, consider merging or redirecting to an existing article. This should be done particularly if the topic name is a likely search term.

D. Search for additional sources, if the main concern is notability

The minimum search expected is a normal Google search, a Google Books search, a Google News search, and a Google News archive search; Google Scholar is suggested for academic subjects.
If you find a lack of sources, you've completed basic due diligence before nominating. However, if a quick search does find sources, this does not always mean an RfD on a sourcing basis is unwarranted. If you spend more time examining the sources, and determine that they are insufficient, e.g., because they only contain passing mention of the topic, then an RfD nomination may still be appropriate.
If you find that adequate sources do appear to exist, the fact that they are not yet present in the article is not a proper basis for a nomination. Instead, you should consider citing the sources, or at minimum apply an appropriate template to the page that flags the sourcing concern. Common templates include {{unreferenced}}, {{refimprove}}, {{third-party}}, {{primary sources}} and {{one source}}.

Discussed deletion

Put the deletion tag on the article.

Click "Change source" at the top of the page to be deleted.
In the edit box, add this tag: {{rfd|REASON}}. Put it at the top of the page, above the rest of the text. Then, replace the text "REASON" with a short reason why the page should be deleted. Do not be too specific here. You can add more details on the discussion page (see below).
- It is a good idea to write a change summary to let others know what you are doing. You can say "nominating for deletion", "requesting deletion", or something like that.
Click "Save changes" at the bottom to save the page with the deletion tag at the top.
- You can also check the "Watch this page" check box to add the page to your watchlist. This lets you know if the page for deletion has been changed. If the deletion tag is removed any time before the discussion is closed, it should be put back.

Create a discussion page.

If the deletion tag has been added to the page, a box should appear at the top of the article with a link saying "Click here to create a discussion page!" Click that link.
You should be taken to a page starting with "Creating Wikipedia:Requests for deletion/Requests/..." along with the current year and the name of the article to be deleted. In the edit box, the following tag should have already been added: {{RfD/Preload/Template}} . Replace the text PLACE REASON HERE with a more detailed reason why the page should be deleted.
- It is helpful to include links to the various policy pages about Wikipedia (that begin with Wikipedia:). Here are some examples of this: "This article is [[Wikipedia:COMPLEX|not easy to understand]]" or "Not a [[Wikipedia:notable|notable]] topic''. This will make others more aware of why the page is not acceptable under Wikipedia's policies.
Click "Save changes" to save the new discussion page when you are done.
- A change summary you can write for this page is "creating discussion page", "starting deletion discussion", or something like that.
- As with the page for deletion, you can check the "Watch the page" box. This will let you know if someone else has replied to your discussion.

List it here

Copy the title of the discussion page to the clipboard. You can do this by dragging the mouse over the text from "Wikipedia" to the end of the page title to highlight it, then right-clicking and selecting "Copy".
Go to the list of deletion requests, and click "change source" beside the words "Current deletion request discussions".
At the top of the list of discussions, paste the title from the clipboard (right-click and select "Paste"). Add a pair of curly brackets before and after the title to make a template that will copy the content of the discussion page onto the main deletion page, like this:
{{Wikipedia:Requests for deletion/Requests/2024/(name of page to be deleted)}}
Finally, click "Save changes" to add the discussion to the list. If the page saves successfully, you should see your deletion discussion at the top of the list. And that's it!

If this is too complicated for you, there are some gadgets like Twinkle that you can use. This allows you to do it faster.

Quick deletion

If you think a page has nonsense content, add {{non}} to the top of the page.

If you think a page does not say why the subject is important, add {{notable}} to the top of the page.

If you think a page should be deleted per other quick deletion rules, add {{QD|reason}} to the top of the page.

Notifying the user

Generally, you should try to be civil and tell the user that created the page to join the discussion talking about the page. This can be done by adding {{subst:RFDNote|page to be deleted}} ~~~~ to the bottom of their talkpage.

Discussions

The discussion is not a vote. Please make suggestions on what action to take, and support your suggestion with reasons.
Please look at the article before you make a suggestion. Do not make an opinion using only the information given by the nominator. Looking at the history of the article may help to understand the situation.
Please read other comments and suggestions. They may have helpful information.
Start your comments or suggestions on a new line. Start with * and sign after your comment by adding ~~~~ to the end. If you are responding to another editor, put your comment directly below theirs and make sure your comment is indented (using more than one *).
New users can make suggestions, but their ideas may not be considered, especially if the suggestion seems to be made in bad faith. The opinion of users who had an account before the start of the request may be given more weight or importance.
Suggestions by users using "sock puppets" (more than one account belonging to the same person) will not be counted.
Please make only one suggestion. If you change your mind, change your first idea instead of adding a new one. The best way to do this is to put <s> before your old idea and </s> after it. For example, if you wanted to delete an article but now think it should be kept, you could put: "~~Delete~~ keep".
If you would like an article to be kept, you can improve the article and try to fix the problems given in the request for deletion. If the reasons given in the nomination are fixed by changing, the nomination can be withdrawn by the nominator, and the deletion discussion will be closed by an administrator.
Try to avoid confusing suggestions, such as delete and merge.
Requests for deletion is not a war zone. You can click here for more information, although the page is not in Simple English.

Remember: You do not have to make a suggestion for every nomination. You should think about not making a suggestion if:

A nomination involves a topic that you do not know much about.
Everyone has made the same suggestion and you agree with that suggestion.

All times are in UTC.

Current deletion request discussions

Template:IUPAC spelling US

Template:IUPAC spelling US (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

MrMeAndMrMe has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: This template, along with Template:American English, has not ever been used in the 3 months that this template has existed. I am not sure what the point of these templates are. On the topic, I usually see the templates like "use american english", or "use nigerian english" etc., are deleted when others translate an article, but I have never seen anybody say why? MrMeAndMrMe_Talk 00:45, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

Discussion

Neutral - that is what i am leaning toward. i have tried to find En-wiki articles that uses the template. I did not find any. 2001:2020:30B:E528:E931:8EC4:6E67:7D81 (talk) 01:24, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This request is due to close on 00:45, 15 August 2024 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

Template:AthleticsAt1972SummerOlympics

Template:AthleticsAt1972SummerOlympics (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete)

Template:Nations at the 1972 Summer Olympics (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete)

· close request MrMeAndMrMe has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Unused templates, containing now-deleted articles that weren't simplified. While I am working on the Olympic Games currently, and could fill some of these pages, I am working on other years and don't see myself working on 1972 anytime soon. Unless if someone else has any intention on making this pages, it should be deleted MrMeAndMrMe_Talk 17:46, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

Discussion

This request is due to close on 17:46, 14 August 2024 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

Trupa Muzicii Rock (2nd nomination)

Trupa Muzicii Rock (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Ferien has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Nominating for identical reasons to Wikipedia:Requests for deletion/Requests/2024/Trupa Muzicii Rock, that closed in a WP:SOFTDELETE and therefore requires another RfD after recreation. --Ferien (talk) 09:08, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

Discussion

Delete fails WP:GNG--Cactus🌵 ^spiky ^ouch 11:37, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Per first nomination. ✩ Dream Indigo ✩ 21:37, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This request is due to close on 09:08, 14 August 2024 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

Beauty of the beat

Beauty of the beat (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Ternera has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Article was only created for promotional purposes. Ternera (talk) 15:18, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

Discussion

Speedy delete (A4) - Tagged as such as no evidence of any notability, –Davey2010^Talk 15:26, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This request is due to close on 15:18, 13 August 2024 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

Youth smoking

Youth smoking (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Rathfelder has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Unreferenced personal opinion. Rathfelder (talk) 21:57, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

Discussion

This request is due to close on 21:57, 12 August 2024 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

Category:Unmanned aerial vehicles

Category:Unmanned aerial vehicles (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Rathfelder has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: They are usually called drones. Wouldnt that be a simpler name? Rathfelder (talk) 15:51, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

Discussion

Keep because of Unmanned aerial vehicles's title. In alternative, we could Move both of them. ✩ Dream Indigo ✩ 21:45, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This request is due to close on 15:51, 12 August 2024 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

Congo crisis

Congo crisis (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Rathfelder has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: No attempt at simplification Rathfelder (talk) 22:24, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

Discussion

Weak keep - The article is substantially different from the EN version and searching this articles sentences online it only brings up this article ... so it appears the creator has tried to simplify it the best they can, Imho as it's not been copypasted from EN or anywhere else and as the creator has tried to simplify it I don't really see a valid reason for deletion here, –Davey2010^Talk 11:49, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It merits an article, but there are an awful lot of complex words. Rathfelder (talk) 14:51, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I agree but imho it's not complex enough for QD and not complex enough for here, Respectfully en:WP:BEBOLD and en:WP:SOFIXIT applies, –Davey2010^Talk 15:26, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This request is due to close on 22:24, 11 August 2024 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

Assumption of Mary

Assumption of Mary (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Rathfelder has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Garbled Rathfelder (talk) 21:27, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

Discussion

* Delete - Lost braincells trying to read that!, Respectfully better off recreated, –Davey2010^Talk 11:43, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep with special thanks to Eptalon for rewriting, I'll be honest I didn't think this was salvagable otherwise I would've tried myself but nonetheless I'm happy this was salvaged, Happy for this to be kept now, Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 17:55, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Spent 10 min rewriting.-Eptalon (talk)
I think that is OK to keep now thank you.Rathfelder (talk) 17:34, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This request is due to close on 21:27, 11 August 2024 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

Almal Real Estate Development

Almal Real Estate Development (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Davey2010 has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Non notable company, Cannot find any evidence of any notability, Fails NCORP and GNG –Davey2010^Talk 18:14, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

Discussion

This request is due to close on 18:14, 8 August 2024 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

Star vs. the Forces of Evil

Star vs. the Forces of Evil (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Cactusisme has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Might be translated from En wikipedia without attribution Cactus🌵 ^spiky ^ouch 10:39, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

Discussion

Keep - Copyright is a serious matter and editors should always attribute content copied from other Wikipedias.... however imho attribution alone isn't a valid reason to nominate an article especially when the EN equivalent is still live. I've cited and expanded the article as well as added the proper attribution to the talkpage, I can't quite understand why you couldn't have done this yourself ?.... Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 14:47, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I thought it was the author jobs to do that. Cactus🌵 ^spiky ^ouch 07:57, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It is but there's hundreds if not thousands of articles here missing attribution but that doesn't mean we should automatically delete them, Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 11:12, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your help and explanation. Cactus🌵 ^spiky ^ouch 11:13, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, not valid reason for requesting deletion. In the end the article is notable. ToadetteEdit (talk) 10:11, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This request is due to close on 10:39, 8 August 2024 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

Moldovan Cyrillic alphabet

Moldovan Cyrillic alphabet (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Cactusisme has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Might be translated from En wikipedia without attribution Cactus🌵 ^spiky ^ouch 10:00, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

Discussion

You never explained how to add attributions, which I stated I would do, when I had the time. Catalyst GP real (talk) 10:12, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You said not to reply? Cactus🌵 ^spiky ^ouch 10:26, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You still could've explained in a previous msg or ignore it and reply like most people. Catalyst GP real (talk) 10:30, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't want to offend or mislead you. Cactus🌵 ^spiky ^ouch 10:31, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Author blocked by checkuser. Cactus🌵 ^spiky ^ouch 10:43, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral - Don't agree with the noms rationale however not entirely sure if G5 should be applied given they were sock-blocked, Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 15:11, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, not everytime pages should be deleted just for translation without attribution. Unsure whether G5 applies or not. ToadetteEdit (talk) 10:15, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This request is due to close on 10:00, 8 August 2024 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

Flag of Transnistria

Flag of Transnistria (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Cactusisme has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Might be copied from En wikipedia without attribution Cactus🌵 ^spiky ^ouch 09:58, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

Discussion

Translated*--Cactus🌵 ^spiky ^ouch 10:01, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You never explained how to add attributions, which I stated I would do, when I had the time. Catalyst GP real (talk) 10:12, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You said not to reply? Cactus🌵 ^spiky ^ouch 10:26, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Author blocked by checkuser. Cactus🌵 ^spiky ^ouch 10:43, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: I added the link to Wikidata because, most Simple English Wikipedia pages have the wikidata link to it. 2001:569:7C55:9000:79CE:52FA:3612:BF3F (talk) 18:07, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Author is blocked for socpuppet issues though. Cactus🌵 ^spiky ^ouch 07:58, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, keep for now. ToadetteEdit (talk) 10:17, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This request is due to close on 09:58, 8 August 2024 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

Template:Current sport

Template:Current sport (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

MathXplore has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: This template was deleted per [[Wikipedia:Requests for deletion/Requests/2012/Multiple article message boxes ]], but User:Cactusisme thinks it is needed (Special:Diff/9677824). Should we reverse the previous RFD? MathXplore (talk) 09:14, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

Discussion

Delete for 2 reasons; 1) We don't get half of the traffic the English Wikipedia gets and 2) to quote Osiris from the previous RFD[1]
Remove them. A lot of them have been sitting on the articles for several years – the ones at the top of Anhalt-Bitterfeld and Chicago Spire have been there for 4 years, the ones on Edinburgh Trams and List of tallest buildings in Thailand for three years... That's another reason they should go. Most of them are regularly forgotten about and left on the articles indefinitely. Even if {{current sport}} somehow serves a purpose that {{current}} doesn't, I don't see the need for its own category separate from Category:Current events. Osiris (talk) 14:06, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

Taking the 2024 Olympics as an example; EN: 600,000 - 470,000 readers, Simple:880 - 280 readers, so we don't even reach half of the traffic EN does, On one hand yes we're doing readers a disservice by not having the template but on the other hand I feel there's not enough readers/traffic to justify this template and that given the issue with these being left on articles for 4 years that in short this template causes more problems than what it solves or achieves. Delete. –Davey2010^Talk 15:05, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Davey2010 But there are readers, aren't there? I will be updating the templates if they are not needed. Cactus🌵 ^spiky ^ouch 11:36, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I mean yeah readers are still readers at the end of the day but imho the issues outlined in the prev RFD outweigh the positives, Also lets say for instance you add these templates and then get blocked for a month or a year .... then what ? .... These stay until you're unblocked (unless you're indeffed then they'll also be there indefinitely),

If there were a way were this template could be added and removed automatically then sure I'd support !keeping it but we to my knowledge don't, Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 12:38, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Davey2010 But what if I do not, then there is still a use for the template aren't there? Cactus🌵 ^spiky ^ouch 03:11, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Someone else can also do it Cactus🌵 ^spiky ^ouch 03:12, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Well anyone / IP / sock can add these and be blocked ....

Can do what ? remove them ?, If that's what you mean then respectfully no they cannot - If that were the case then the template wouldn't have remained on an article for 3-4 years. –Davey2010^Talk 10:23, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I mean in the past; this was not a very known Wikipedia. But now it is. Cactus🌵 ^spiky ^ouch 07:46, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This request is due to close on 09:14, 8 August 2024 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

Pamela Ramirez

Pamela Ramirez (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Omphalographer has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: This artist does not appear to meet the notability criteria of WP:CREATIVE. Most of the references are self-published or listings of her artwork for sale, and a lot of them describe her using the exact same words. I searched but could not find any news articles about her or reviews of her work. Also, the two images of her File:QueenNoble_Dr._Elle_Ramirez_2023_France_Event.jpg and File:QueenNoble Dr. Pamela Ramirez, Psy.D, France, 2024.png both look like they were made by artificial intelligence, not like real photos. Omphalographer (talk) 19:57, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

Discussion

Delete, clear COI creating non notable article. Barely any sources on Google. ToadetteEdit (talk) 10:42, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This request is due to close on 19:57, 7 August 2024 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

Recently closed deletion discussions

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The outcome of this request for deletion was to Delete. MathXplore (talk) 06:09, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Checkuser blocked

Category:Checkuser blocked (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

136.152.209.67 has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: This wasn't created by an admin or a checkuser and it is added manually. The statement on the category page that it is added by {{checkuserblock-account}} is currently wrong. It might not be possible, or the admins here might choose not to use it for all checkuser blocked accounts, so maybe it should be deleted. A few other similar templates/categories have been deleted recently, such as:

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

Discussion

Delete I honestly thought this had already been deleted. Not needed when we have Category:Wikipedia sockpuppeteers. The userpages that were created solely to add {{checkuserblock-account}} and this category should also be deleted as part of this RfD, in my opinion. These aren't helpful or necessary tags. --Ferien (talk) 11:09, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom and Ferien - Not part of any template, Doesn't exist on the English Wikipedia either, Delete. –Davey2010^Talk 19:06, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, very odd category, per above. ToadetteEdit (talk) 10:45, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This request is due to close on 05:42, 6 August 2024 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The outcome of this request for deletion was to Delete. MathXplore (talk) 05:04, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Terri Clark

Template:Terri Clark (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Auntof6 has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Navbox template with only one blue link. The purpose of a navbox is to allow navigating between related pages. If only one page exists, no navigation can be done. Auntof6 (talk) 04:16, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

Discussion

Delete as a pointless navbox, not much navigation can be done with there only being one blue-link and all –Davey2010^Talk 19:11, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This request is due to close on 04:16, 6 August 2024 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The outcome of this request for deletion was to Delete. MathXplore (talk) 05:03, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:A Quick One

Template:A Quick One (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Auntof6 has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Navbox template with only one blue link. The purpose of a navbox is to allow navigating between related pages. If only one page exists, no navigation can be done. Auntof6 (talk) 04:16, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

Discussion

Delete as a pointless navbox, not much navigation can be done with there only being one blue-link and all –Davey2010^Talk 19:12, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This request is due to close on 04:16, 6 August 2024 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The outcome of this request for deletion was to Delete. QD G2 MathXplore (talk) 03:58, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

4Music

4Music (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Rathfelder has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Incoherent Rathfelder (talk) 21:12, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

Discussion

Speedy delete (G2) - Tagged as such as page is generally a useless mess. –Davey2010^Talk 11:40, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This request is due to close on 21:12, 11 August 2024 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The outcome of this request for deletion was to Delete. MathXplore (talk) 14:32, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pagal Premi

Pagal Premi (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

ToadetteEdit has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Looks to be an article that is not notable. Barely any good sources on the internet. ToadetteEdit (talk) 14:10, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

Discussion

Delete as cannot find any evidence of any notability, en:Pagala Premi appears to be a different article not really sure, anyway fails GNG. –Davey2010^Talk 19:19, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with you Davey2010, this page is useless. 2001:569:7C55:9000:6943:1E23:15C2:10E (talk) 20:17, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It is a Bengali film, released in 2007. That movie was shown on TV a lot.

Movie clip: https://www.facebook.com/share/r/tBMhWzxbwNVoqa53/?mibextid=oFDknk

And wikipedia page provides information collection links. Since they were not very big actors then, not many articles were written about them. I have given what I have. What other evidence do you need? Yourpritamgmailom (talk) 08:22, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Concur. There's probably some socking going on here, the history at w:Pagal Premi ([2]) shows Your Pritam socks trying to hijack that article multiple times. It's highly likely that the IP who created the article here and Yourpritamgmailom are the same - the odds of someone unrelated finding a new article on an obscure film when the named account also created w:Pagol Premi are about zero. SPI on en already filed, but will also be creating one here as Your Pritam has some recent socks blocked here. Ravensfire (talk) 02:35, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This request is due to close on 14:10, 5 August 2024 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The outcome of this request for deletion was to Delete. MathXplore (talk) 13:46, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Gustav De Waele

Gustav De Waele (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Fehufanga has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Starred in a movie that won several awards, and himself was nominated for the "Outstanding Performance in a Supporting Role" category of the Ensor awards. However, there seems to be very little notability of the subject outside of this movie. I couldn't find sources that are independent and are not database entries. — *Fehufangą ♮ ✉ Talk page 10:31, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

Discussion

Delete I could barely find any sources that are reliable. ToadetteEdit (talk) 11:20, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This request is due to close on 10:31, 5 August 2024 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The outcome of this request for deletion was to Delete. QD A4 MathXplore (talk) 12:27, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Barzin Alaie

Barzin Alaie (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Cactusisme has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Notable? Cactus🌵 ^spiky ^ouch 07:55, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

Discussion

Delete not notable. ToadetteEdit (talk) 10:06, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This request is due to close on 07:55, 11 August 2024 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The outcome of this request for deletion was to Delete. MathXplore (talk) 01:32, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Behgal Jats (caste)

Behgal Jats (caste) (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Fr33kman has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Non notable subject. Enwiki does not have the article. No QD reason is valid. fr33k man 01:23, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

Discussion

Delete per GNG, only source does not work. MrMeAndMrMe_Talk 01:31, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete not notable. ToadetteEdit (talk) 11:26, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment:If this Article don’t have sufficient attribution, I can marly try to contribute by proving enough sources until I will redirect this to My directory

This request is due to close on 01:23, 4 August 2024 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The outcome of this request for deletion was to Delete. MathXplore (talk) 07:17, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Geography of the United States by state and county

Category:Geography of the United States by state and county (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

2607:F140:6000:802A:4092:5904:2CDA:D395 has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: This doesn't contain anything useful. Is there a need for it? 2607:F140:6000:802A:4092:5904:2CDA:D395 (talk) 00:09, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

Discussion

Delete This was apparently created specifically for Oklahoma, but I have taken it out of Oklahoma categories because this category name doesn't specify that state. I also changed the remaining category so that it isn't a child of itself. The only content left is "Settlements in Oklahoma by county", and we don't need this category just for that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Auntof6 (talk • contribs) 05:07, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as only having one category. ToadetteEdit (talk) 11:30, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This request is due to close on 00:09, 3 August 2024 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The outcome of this request for deletion was to Delete. MathXplore (talk) 07:20, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Historical Jewish Press 2

Template:Historical Jewish Press 2 (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Auntof6 has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Nominating some templates that appear unneeded because they are linked/transcluded only by each other.

Template:Historical Jewish Press 2 -- not used at all
Template:Davar -- used only by #1
Template:Manage parameters/content -- used only by #1; the parent "Manage parameters" template doesn't seem to have ever existed either here or at enwiki

--Auntof6 (talk) 04:23, 26 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

Discussion

Delete Unused and broken templates.— *Fehufangą ♮ ✉ Talk page 13:35, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This request is due to close on 04:23, 2 August 2024 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

IceTre

IceTre (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Ternera has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Sources are not reliable or do not show how the subject is notable Ternera (talk) 19:08, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

Discussion

Hello there! I was still in the process of putting the subject's Wiki together when you nominated it for deletion! I was only 60% done so there was information still being provided/links being cited. As far as notability, information can be provided for criteria to meet under "Criteria for musicians and ensembles"

5 Has released two or more albums on a major record label or on one of the more important[according to whom?] indie labels (i.e., an independent label with a history of more than a few years, and with a roster of performers, many of whom are independently notable).
7 Has become one of the most prominent representatives of a notable style or the most prominent of the local scene of a city; note that the subject must still meet all ordinary Wikipedia standards, including verifiability.

and under "Criteria for composers and lyricists" the subject meets #1

"Composers, songwriters, librettists or lyricists, may be notable if they meet at least one of the following criteria:

Has credit for writing or co-writing either lyrics or music for a notable composition." Stephenbestk28 (talk) 16:51, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

For #5 I cite this section of the subject's Wiki "Interest in Tademy’s music reached record level highs in 2013. A 85/15 distribution deal was offered to Tademy after he caught the attention of an A&R from EMPIRE Distribution In 2014, Tademy formed his own record label, Blazington Music Group which then became integrated into EMPIRE, which is to handle all releases while Blazington Music Group was to handle promotion. Tademy received major label backing when EMPIRE signed a partnership in 2018 with major label Universal Music Group.

The partnership integrated Blazington Music Group into EMPIRE and Universal Music Group. In the partnership, Tademy was able to secure ties from not only Universal Music Group and EMPIRE but from Universal Music Publishing Group as well. This allowed Tademy and other artists registered and established under Blazington Music Group to receive support on select projects that would benefit from major label backing, unique approaches to distribution, digital sales, promotion and marketing."

The subject has released more than two albums on the more important indie label and Notable artists on their roster is Peezy, BabyTron, Babyface Ray, Money Man, Fireboy DML, and more. Notable artists who have released albums through the label are Snoop Dogg, Kendrick Lamar, Cardi B., Tyga, T-Pain, Young Dolph, and more.

the albums can be cited for the sources. Blazington Music Group operates as a subsidiary for EMPIRE just like how Dr. Dre's Aftermath Entertainment operates as a subsidiary of Universal Music Group. Stephenbestk28 (talk) 17:09, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As for #7 and #1 the case for that I cited this section of the wiki

"During this time, Tademy was regarded as the King of Idaho due to his high rank and stature.

Tademy's journey and legacy became well known throughout Idaho as he was the first to create the Idaho Rap Scene and further became the highest contender. Tademy further expanded his reach with live performances with artists such as Kirko Bangz, T-Pain, and Kid Ink ranging from Boise, Idaho to Salt Lake City, Utah. Other artists include Bone Thugs N' Harmony, IAMSU, and more.

On September 24, 2015, Tademy became the first Idaho musician to collaborate with a major label artist, Grammy Nominated and platinum recording artist Mike Zombie with their single, "No Worries." The collaboration went viral, pushing it to #28 on the Top 100 Chart in Idaho, which gave Tademy's musical career a tremendous boost in popularity.

During the King of Idaho Era, Tademy released two albums, "Pisces Gold 2.0" and "28."

Tademy executively produced both albums and released "Pisces Gold 2.0" on March 11th, 2017 and "28" on October 11th, 2019. The album "28" featured the viral singles, "House Party" and "Trophy.' Both songs feature EMPIRE artist Miscellaneous and the latter features Sony Music musician, Vinny Chase."

By co-writing the song "No Worries", the composition became highly notable due to this being the first collaborative demonstration in history of a platinum recording artist working with a musician in Idaho.

In #7 it states "Has become one of the most prominent representatives of a notable style or the most prominent of the local scene of a city;"

the subject overnight became one of the most prominent representatives of a notable style (hip hop/rap) of the local scene of a city when their composition became the first collaborative demonstration in history of a platinum recording artist working with a musician in Idaho. With that being cited that places the subject as a prominent representative of a notable style (hip hop/rap) in not the city and state.

I am still in the process of placing sources and citing references but if that is to your satisfaction on notability then I vote for a stay of the wiki. Hope you see this all soon!

:) Stephenbestk28 (talk) 17:36, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: @Stephenbestk28: The article was 5 hours old when it was nominated here. If it is taking that long to get it in good shape, it's probably better to work on it in a user sandbox until it's ready. -- Auntof6 (talk) 15:49, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

An important note to take into consideration: When it was first nominated it was still being edited from the Mobile version of Simple.Wikipedia.Org so the sources had not been added because the article was still being edited from Mobile). From Computer, i was able to cite in the notable sources as promised.

There are 51 cited sources in the subject's wiki as of yesterday. That many sources would be rather difficult to do in Mobile therefore the switch to Computer was necessary in fulfilling the task. Time was a necessity to do so properly.

With that being said, reliable sources have been provided for evidentiary proof of notability. You are free to take a look!

Notability (music)

Has released two or more albums on a major record label or on one of the more important indie labels (i.e., an independent label with a history of more than a few years, and with a roster of performers, many of whom are independently notable). Stephenbestk28 (talk) 17:10, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your point is fair though and I do see where you are coming from! I have made the necessary changes though and the wiki is ready. Sorry for the issue! Stephenbestk28 (talk) 17:19, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, not notable; sources used in the article are blogs and user generated. No other good sources on the internet. ToadetteEdit (talk) 18:46, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Under "Generally reliable sources:" it says:

These sources are generally considered reliable for use in music-related articles on Wikipedia. Check the far right column for past discussions on the source and any limitations or warnings on a source's particular use."

Both AllMusic and The Source are both included on the list of sources are considered reliable in music-related articles on Wikipedia. The subject's cited sources will be provided to the wiki and The Source is already mentioned in the wiki.

On AllMusic the subjects music shows Blazington Music Group and Blazington Music Group operates as a subsidary of EMPIRE, (i.e., an independent label with a history of more than a few years, and with a roster of performers, many of whom are independently notable). Stephenbestk28 (talk) 01:02, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

More sources have been provided to assist with Notability.

- the subject has released two or more albums on a major record label / independent record label with notable history.

Evidence has been provided to show that the subject has released two or more albums through a major record label / independent record label with notable history. The subject's material are released through EMPIRE and its subsidiary Blazington Music Group. Stephenbestk28 (talk) 04:25, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above - no evidence of any notability, fails GNG, –Davey2010^Talk 00:37, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Notability: released two or more albums on a major record label or indie label

Proof: Walking On Water description on YouTube - it states:

"Provided to YouTube by EMPIRE Distribution

Midas (Intro) • Icetre • Doom Bap

Walking On Water

• 2024 Blazington Music Group

Released on: 2024-03-29

Auto-generated by YouTube."

the subject's other albums cited in their wiki say the same thing. This is proof of the notability guideline being met. Stephenbestk28 (talk) 04:38, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That's irrelevant, Please read en:WP:NMUSIC and en:WP:GNG, Also there are no independent, reliable sources on the subject (the one news piece there is your average blogsite pretty much so doesn't count), Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 09:57, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What's the point of linking to en's GNG when we have our local WP:GNG?- FusionSub (Talk page) (Contributions) 13:18, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@FusionSub, Why not ? Are there any guidelines that say linking to EN guidelines is forbidden ?, Respectfully it's rather sad you felt the need to come here just to ask that.....

But to answer your question I get fed up of linking to guidelines here and then finding out they don't exist WP:NCOLLEGE, WP:BLPVIO (the latter didn't exist until I recently created it) so it's easier just to link to EN. –Davey2010^Talk 14:21, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Fair enough.- FusionSub (Talk page) (Contributions) 14:23, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have a question, so it's been proven already that the subject has released two or more albums on the record label for notability but is the issue that there is no "reliable sources" that say that the subject's albums were released on the record label?

Otherwise I am confused because you linked both of those to me and the subject still meets the criteria under #5 and the rest.

Are you saying that there has to be reliable sources that actively say "the subject released this, this, and this on this and this" and that AllMusic and meta data connecting the albums to the subject does not count?

I just want to be on the same page. Stephenbestk28 (talk) 22:09, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If a tree falls in a forest and no one is around to hear it, does it make a sound? the answer is yes

If the subject releases two or more albums on the record label but doesn't have coverage over those albums, does it still count as releases on the record label? The answer is yes

If an event takes place, say at the White House, and there was no coverage of said event, did the event still take place? the answer is yes

If your weather app told you it was 98 degrees outside would you say that's not a reliable source because you didn't see it on The New York Times? the answer is no

If there was no coverage of you going to a movie (even if you have your ticket as proof with the time date and other info on it) does that mean you didn't go to the movie? the answer is no

If the subject releases two or more albums on a notable major record label / notable independent record label but doesn't have coverage about those releases, does that void the albums being released on the record label? the answer is NO

The reliable sources support the metadata of the releases being on the label. There's 60 sources.

and for the record if it says for example:

AllMusic: Walking On Water by IceTre released on Blazington Music Group, a subsidiary of Empire Distribution

then that works fine for proof. it does not need to suddenly go the extra mile with:

The Washington Post: IceTre from Empire Distribution and Blazington Music releases Walking On Water"

Announcements do not dictate whether something exists or not so let's not be petty and biased. Evidence has been provided, everything else is moving the goal post and this needs to be a fair game otherwise that shows clear bias and favoritism amongst Wiki editors.

In court, you cannot simply "deny" evidence just because you find it irrelevant to the case. All evidence provided has to be taken into consideration, it can't just be ignored like you are trying to do. Stephenbestk28 (talk) 15:55, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
They fail NMUSIC #5 because Blazington isn't a major record label, They're only backed by UMG[3] which means nothing. The subject still fails NMUSIC and GNG.

I can assure you there's no favouritism here - If the subject is notable and meets BASIC, GNG and or the relevant policies to that article then I'm happy with notable subjects staying. Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 16:18, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Blazington releases music under EMPIRE and EMPIRE is a major record label/independent record label with notable past clients. All of Blazington's releases fall under EMPIRE.

I cite this key piece of information: "Doggystyle is the debut studio album by American rapper Snoop Doggy Dogg. It was released on November 23, 1993, by Death Row and Interscope Records."

At the time Death Row had only released one album and that was by Dr. Dre. Death Row was not considered a major record label at the time but Doggystyle being released under Interscope made it to where the album was released on a major record label.

i cite this also "Earlier in 1992, Interscope negotiated a $10-million deal with Dr. Dre and Marion "Suge" Knight to finance and distribute their label, Death Row Records." And in the same article you cited it says "In 2014, Blazington Music Group became integrated into EMPIRE under a distribution deal. Blazington Music Group is a subsidiary of EMPIRE. By the conditions of the deal, EMPIRE is to handle all releases while Blazington Music Group is to handle all promotional values."

the situation is the spot on, the only difference is $10-million and the language is slightly different. Stephenbestk28 (talk) 15:29, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

For clarification, the terms on, under, and through operate with the same basic intention that a product is considered property and thereby owned by the entity in question (the major record label)

Using the example from above, Snoop Dogg’s album was released through Death Row and Interscope. Death Row simply acts as the pipeline between Snoop and the major record label. Interscope would own the rights and maintain it’s their property since it was released underneath Death Row and Death Row is underneath Interscope. This makes Snoop Dogg’s debut album an official release on/under/through a major record label which in that case would ultimately fall under Interscope.

in the case of the subject, for example, they released the referenced album “Walking On Water” through Blazington Music Group and EMPIRE. Using the same language and terminology, Blazington simply acts as the pipeline between the subject and the major record label. EMPIRE would own the rights and maintain it’s their property since it was released underneath Blazington Music Group and Blazington Music Group is underneath EMPIRE. This makes the subjects album “Walking On Water” an official release on/under/through a major record label which would ultimately fall under EMPIRE due to the release being a product of their services to Blazington Music Group. EMPIRE owns the product and it is considered their property. Stephenbestk28 (talk) 22:55, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
To admin: sufficient evidence has been provided for notability. Requesting the subject's wiki stay in the community and not be deleted.

proven notability: "subject has released two or more albums on a major record label or on one of the more important indie labels (i.e., an independent label with a history of more than a few years, and with a roster of performers, many of whom are independently notable).

the major record label/one of the more important indie labels: EMPIRE

the albums released on the record label: Pisces Gold 2.0, 28, Walking On Water, and Paradise. ' Stephenbestk28 (talk) 04:33, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Davey2010 @ToadetteEdit@FusionSub @Ternera Pingign you guys because you participated. Thanks Cactus🌵 ^spiky ^ouch 04:37, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Notability Argument: Has released two or more albums on a major record label or on one of the more important indie labels (i.e., an independent label with a history of more than a few years, and with a roster of performers, many of whom are independently notable).

Proof (plus concept for reference):

Snoop Dogg released his debut album on Death Row Records and Interscope. Death Row acts as the pipeline between Snoop and the major record label, Interscope. Interscope owns Death Row thus making his debut album an official release by Interscope.

The subject "IceTre" released 5 albums on Blazington Music Group and EMPIRE. Blazington Music Groups acts as the pipeline between the subject "IceTre" and the major record label, EMPIRE. EMPIRE owns Blazington Music Group thus making the 5 albums all official releases by EMPIRE.

I proved that the subject has released two or more albums on a major record label or on one of the most important indie labels. The subject in fact has released 5. I vote that it stays. In court, ignoring evidence is grounds for a mistrial. I presented the evidence when it was requested, do not ignore it.

'Can anyone prove that the subject didn't release their 5 albums on Blazington Music Group and EMPIRE? If not then i double up on my vote for it to stay and if no one can prove that then that should be the nail in the coffin for it to stay.

and don't just skim over my comments, actually read them in full length. Even a couple of times if necessary. In court, a short case is a sloppy case. do not be mad at me for making a solid case...thats what i am supposed to do. Stephenbestk28 (talk) 05:37, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Pisces Gold 2.0

28

STT5

Walking On Water

Paradise

Pisces Gold 2.0 is the oldest release on that list with it being from 2017 and Paradise is the most recent with it being from 2024. From Pisces Gold 2.0 to Paradise every song in those links from 2017 to 2024 begin their description with this:

"Provided to YouTube by EMPIRE Distribution"

1. This further maintains that the subject's releases are property of EMPIRE (EMPIRE DISTRIBUTION), therefore making them official releases on a major record label / or one of the most important indie labels.

2. YouTube compiles musical data from record labels and generates descriptions for the release on YouTube.

3. The data is supportive as the newest album "Paradise" includes the following descriptions with the subjects first and last government name:

"Provided to YouTube by EMPIRE Distribution Paradise · Icetre · Dracula Gang Paradise ℗ 2024 Blazington Music Group Released on: 2024-04-05 Producer: Tre Tademy Composer: Tre Tademy Lyricist: Tre Tademy Auto-generated by YouTube."''''' Stephenbestk28 (talk) 17:15, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Still no response from anyone. I wish I knew what was going on or why they won't respond back. I fear that the evidence will be ignored and it will become deleted, how unfortunate. Stephenbestk28 (talk) 15:26, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I answered every question and proved every bit of evidence and everyone goes quiet. It's clear that the only reason it's not being accepted is because I proved the subject's notability and you all do not like that. The subject is notable. A decision to keep it needs to be made by a moderator but if it gets deleted then at least I know it's due to Wikipedia bias and Moderator imbalance so I'll be able to let the proper channels know about that. Moving goal posts and demanding more and more and more is part of the bias and imbalance so let's not go into that situation. It's all under Guideline #5 and nothing else. You all can't be mad that I gave you what you wanted when you asked for it. Davey2010 @ToadetteEdit@FusionSub @Ternera Stephenbestk28 (talk) 15:38, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There's been no response from anyone because nothing has changed, you've still not provided evidence showing how or why this subject is notable nor have you provided any references proving this fact, The subject as it stands still fails WP:NMUSIC and WP:GNG,

Regarding the closure - Unlike the English Wikipedia where anyone and everyone closes AFDs - Here it's generally left to admins whom all have lives and cannot be here 24/7, It will be closed when an admin has time to close it, This will be my last reply on the matter. Thanks –Davey2010^Talk 15:51, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Stephenbestk28

Comment: I don't think adding on any more is going to help as it may just be repeated. Cactus🌵 ^spiky ^ouch 07:22, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This request is due to close on 19:08, 17 July 2024 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The outcome of this request for deletion was to Delete. --Auntof6 (talk) 00:57, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Susan Safford Bright

Susan Safford Bright (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Ferien has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Appears to fail WP:GNG. --Ferien (talk) 10:53, 26 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

Discussion

Delete as not notable person. ToadetteEdit (talk) 11:32, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This request is due to close on 10:53, 2 August 2024 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The outcome of this request for deletion was to Delete. --Auntof6 (talk) 00:56, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ernest Sainte-Marie

Ernest Sainte-Marie (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Ferien has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Fails WP:GNG/w:en:WP:NARTIST. --Ferien (talk) 10:52, 26 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

Discussion

Delete as non notable. ToadetteEdit (talk) 11:35, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This request is due to close on 10:52, 2 August 2024 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The outcome of this request for deletion was to Delete. --Auntof6 (talk) 00:55, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ilya Manin

Ilya Manin (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Ferien has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: fails WP:GNG --Ferien (talk) 10:47, 26 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

Discussion

Delete not notable. ToadetteEdit (talk) 11:37, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This request is due to close on 10:47, 2 August 2024 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The outcome of this request for deletion was to Delete. --Auntof6 (talk) 00:53, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Muhammad Javed

Muhammad Javed (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Ferien has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Appears to fail WP:GNG/w:WP:NARTIST. I did note the claim that "MIT gave him the First Annual Distinguished Artist Award". There is no such evidence that this "Annual Distinguished Artist" award actually exists, not from MIT and not from any reliable sources other than in the context of this artist. Note this person isn't any of the other w:Muhammad Javeds on enwiki. --Ferien (talk) 21:18, 25 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

Discussion

@User:Ferien I nominated this page for QD for failing Wp:GNG but was rejected, so highly unlikely that this is not notable. --Cactus🌵 ^spiky ^ouch 10:20, 26 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Ferien Source editor really messed up my ping lol. Cactus🌵 ^spiky ^ouch 10:20, 26 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Cactusisme, notability is almost always a matter for RfD to decide. A4 is for articles that have no claim to notability (or our equivalent of enwiki's "credible claim of significance"). A4 is a much lower standard than notability. Quick deletion in general is just for quick checks of things we can easily see on-wiki. If we're having to go off-wiki to do research on whether the person is notable, that's for RfD. There was a claim of significance about Javed receiving an award in this article, and that alone is a reasonable claim to notability to make A4 invalid, even if it fails our notability guidelines and ends up being deleted at RfD. This was talked about in much more detail in Wikipedia:Simple talk/Archive 133#Use of QD A4 a few years ago. By the way, I received both of your pings. --Ferien (talk) 10:27, 26 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Ferien Thanks for the lengthy response Cactus🌵 ^spiky ^ouch 10:30, 26 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep meets WP:GNG. He has received direct and in-depth coverage in major publications of Pakistan, Dawn ([4], [5], [6]), Nawaiwaqt([7], [8]), The Express Tribune([9]), The News International([10], [11]), The Nation ([12], [13]). Also, meet w:ANYBIO due to Pride of Performance award from the president of Pakistan. 185.168.134.57 (talk) 13:48, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Ferien what do you think? Ip's first few edits though. Cactus🌵 ^spiky ^ouch 07:21, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This request is due to close on 21:18, 1 August 2024 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.

Related pages

All archives before July 2008 - implementation of new system made archives redundant
Category:Requests for deletion that did not succeed
Category:Requests for deletion that succeeded
Wikipedia:Deletion policy
Wikipedia:Quick deletion
Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion
Category:Deletion requests
Category:Quick deletion requests