Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/People

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|People|~~~~}} 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.

Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at:

Purge page cache

watch

People

Kamalakanta Nayak

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

Fails WP:JOURNALIST. Subject works for Argus News, so the reference article mentioned is not independent of the subject. Online search results show coverage of another person, Kamalakanta, who is a para-athlete. Junbeesh (talk) 08:16, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, India, and Odisha. Junbeesh (talk) 08:16, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Uday Narkar

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

Fails the notability test for politicians, and of course WP:ANYBIO or WP:GNG. A cursory search doesn't bring up anything useful. Also, peoplesdemocracy.in would be very much unreliable in this context, because it is not independent of the subject and would hardly be unbiased. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 08:14, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Politicians, and India. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 08:14, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Dollya Black

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

Drag performer fails WP:NBIO. GTrang (talk) 04:07, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: If the subject is not notable, then the page should be redirected to The Boulet Brothers' Dragula season 3, not deleted altogether. Thanks, ---Another Believer _(Talk) 05:32, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Television, Entertainment, Sexuality and gender, and Florida. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:29, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Dylan Bachelet

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

Even appearing in a highly visible television show neither makes this person a high-profile person nor prevents him from being subject to WP:BLP1E or WP:BIO1E. Sure, he became a chef de partie at a Michelin-starred restaurant. Nonetheless, with all achievements he has made so far, I'm doubtful that he would meet either WP:GNG or WP:NBASIC, no matter how many sources have been used to verify info about him. Much of relevant info should be merged into List of The Great British Bake Off finalists (series 8–present)#Dylan Bachelet. George Ho (talk) 21:23, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Food and drink, Television, and United Kingdom. George Ho (talk) 21:23, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: People are presumed notable if they have received significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject. This article fits the brief. (Heroeswithmetaphors) talk 23:21, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
How so? Checking the sources used in the article, this person is referred as one of Bake Off contestants. Digital Spy extensively covers his appearance there and mentions his post-Bake Off career briefly—well, just one ongoing job. Also, you've created the article, didn't you? George Ho (talk) 02:10, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fashion and England. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:22, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Kaavya Sha

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

From a WP:BEFORE, I am unable to find any independent sources with significant coverage. The only sources I could find with SIGCOV are interviews /wedding announcements, which are ineligible towards GNG. NACTOR is also not met here, as none of these roles are significant enough to warrant a separate article. No plausible ATDR either. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 19:41, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, India, and Maharashtra. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 19:41, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep as per references from The New Indian Express, The News Minute, The Times of India [1], [2] and her work in many notable movies as mentioned in the article. Behappyyar (talk) 20:25, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I've added more references to it. And Despite this, it is incomprehensible to tag for AfD after a senior editor has already reviewed it. Behappyyar (talk) 06:40, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: There certainly seems to be more than just passing coverage in the Times of India sources.--Ipigott (talk) 08:15, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep According to WP:GNG, significant coverage from reliable for establishing the notability of a topic. 𝒮-𝒜𝓊𝓇𝒶 08:30, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Ipigott and S-Aura, would you mind mentioning the WP:THREE best sources or the sources you think help the subject pass GNG or NACTOR? It would be great to see a source analysis, as all I could find is routine coverage and nothing independent of the subject. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 09:46, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Stefan Pleszczynski

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

Just a brief overview of credits no sigcov. Page is also out of date as it describes a 2014 television episode as recent. Fails GNG Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 19:24, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Television. Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 19:24, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 19:48, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:50, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Mom Soth

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

Improperly sourced (by one external link to IMDB) article for non-notable actor. WP:BEFORE does not yield any reliable sources that verify notability. Waddles 🗩 🖉 19:01, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, and Cambodia. Waddles 🗩 🖉 19:01, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Bill Wilson (pastor)

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

3/6 sources are his organization. Another is dead link. There is only this [3] and apparently a mention in a book. If it should not be deleted it can probably be merged with Metro World Child. 🄻 🄰 16:41, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Christianity, Massachusetts, and New York. 🄻 🄰 16:41, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep No WP:PAYWALL-compliant argument against notability articulated. Jclemens (talk) 02:29, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Vanessa Xtravaganza

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

Disputed draftification. WP:DRAFTOBJECT prevents unilateral redraftification., Fails WP:BIO 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 09:25, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, Dance, Music, Theatre, Visual arts, Sexuality and gender, and New York. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 09:25, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy delete WP:MILL club performer. -- Ssilvers (talk) 15:41, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Mekomo (talk) 16:18, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. No reliable sources providing significant coverage. Fails WP:GNG. Madeleine (talk) 17:55, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Fails WP:GNG. An alternative could be to redirect to House of Xtravaganza where she is mentioned once. Asparagusstar (talk) 00:57, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Makenna Kelly

AfDs for this article:

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

Fails WP:ANYBIO, almost all the cited sources are either primary sources or unreliable sources. Has been identified as such since June 2022, without improvement. Dan arndt (talk) 08:39, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Women, Internet, and Colorado. Dan arndt (talk) 08:39, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The 2022 AfD discussion was keep, with the condition that the flag on notability was added. I have added some sources, where the best coverage is the 2019 article in the Fort Collins paper (though I note she is from Colorado). She has minor mentions in the Boston Globe and the Washington Post (now in article). I have not replaced all the citations to YouTube, though I agree with the 'unreliable source' flags for them. DaffodilOcean (talk) 18:31, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I now have access to the Wired magazine article, and that is also significant coverage. My inclination would be to delete the other items that are sourced to YouTube or primary sources, but I think they can remain for now in case someone else finds better sourcing. DaffodilOcean (talk) 07:07, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yaron Gottlieb

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

Fails to meet WP:N. I have been unable to find any significant coverage in reliable sources. The article's sources are mostly the subject's own works along with an article that quotes the subject a single time. Should be deleted per WP:GNG. --Helleniac (talk) 22:46, 13 January 2025 (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/2025 January 13. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 22:54, 13 January 2025 (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/2025 January 14. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 00:34, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: I have fixed some malformed formatting in this nomination that hid a good chunk of it when transcluded. No opinion. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:47, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Law, Israel, and France. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:48, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Just noting that the nominator has been blocked as a sockpuppet, and some of their other contributions make me a little concerned that this nomination might not have been done in good faith. No opinion at this point on the merits of the AfD. MCE89 (talk) 10:35, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Shivkrupanand Swami

AfDs for this article:

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

Recreated following deletion in 2020; sources continue not to support WP:GNG/WP:NBIO. Sources are:

Sponsored content (Forbes "BrandConnect")
Unbylined WP:NEWSORGINDIA promo ([4], [5])
WP:TRIVIALMENTIONS or non-mentions ([6], [7], [8])

More of the same is all that comes up in WP:BEFORE search: [9], [10], [11]. Dclemens1971 (talk) 21:29, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Spirituality, and India. Dclemens1971 (talk) 21:29, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - I agree with the above source analysis Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 21:38, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Very much PROMO, this is typical [12], rest of the sources are as explained aobve. I don't see enough for notability. Oaktree b (talk) 00:01, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Current article primarily relies on Indian media sources(WP:NEWSORGINDIA), many of which have questionable reliability. The Forbes India article explicitly mentions that it is a "Brand Post," meaning it is a paid article. Therefore, the article completely fails to meet WP:GNG. Baqi:) (talk) 11:22, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: The article meets Wikipedia's notability guidelines because the subject has been covered by multiple independent, reliable, While some may argue that the coverage is predominantly local, this claim does not fully reflect the range and scope of the sources cited. The Times of India and Forbes India. This article completely meets WP:ANYBIO and WP:GNG with significant coverage If there is a promo content it can be removed. SATavr (talk) 06:20, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ben Yennie

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

This man does not seem to be notable, the only content about him that are not from his own companies are podcasts interviews. 🄻 🄰 16:57, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, and Film. 🄻 🄰 16:57, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors and Businesspeople. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:13, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:02, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - WP:PROMOTION. Also delete User:Jwdoke/sandbox, as the draft for this article; possibly the same person as Ben Yennie. No other content was created by this user. — Maile (talk) 20:08, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Clintianoo

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

A WP:PROMO biography for a TikToker. The sources do not support WP:GNG or WP:NBIO. Quick analysis:

Unbylined promo/churnalism recapping things he says in his own videos and thus WP:PRIMARYSOURCES: [13], [14], [15], [16]. Per WP:NEWSORGNIGERIA, this appears to be promo or paid placement w/r/t a biography.
WP:TRIVIALMENTIONs in other sources, one of them also unbylined: [17], [18].
Finally, one source (InfoMediaNG) my network won't let me open because the site's security is compromised -- not likely to be a reliable and robust source.

Didn't find anything else in my WP:BEFORE search. Dclemens1971 (talk) 16:33, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, News media, and Nigeria. Dclemens1971 (talk) 16:33, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:03, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. TheOilSpillExpert (talk) 22:40, 13 January 2025 (UTC) Sock strike. Reading Beans, Duke of Rivia 13:42, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@TheOilSpillExpert can you explain why you chose delete? I believe your vote should be constructive. Opyquad (talk) 23:40, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Dclemens1971 Thank you for your constructive feedback. However, I addressed the issues you raised when the page was initially moved (by you) to draft status, and I ensured that all guidelines were strictly followed before moving it back to the Mainspace. Two, I have previously worked on pages that required more references, and I believe this is one of those pages that can be improved over time. BYLINE: The issue of whether an article is bylined or not should not be attributed to the writer since contributors on Wikipedia are volunteers, who are trying to make 'free knowledge' something of value to everyone who consumes information on this platform. Regarding the source InfomediaNG, I did not encounter any security issues while using it here. Moreover, I have seen other reliable platforms referencing the site, particularly for biographies and fact-checking-related content. Could it be that certain pages are restricted in your country? Opyquad (talk) 23:56, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Opyquad: All guidelines were not strictly followed, clearly. Regarding unbylined content, please review discussions at WP:RSN. News organizations in Nigeria are considered by many editors to publish promotional content that does not meet the bar of WP:RS, and content without bylines is particularly likely to be this kind of promotional material. Beyond that, the content is just churnalism based on recycling Clintianoo's social media statements into articles, which means the material is not independent since it's basically the subject's own words. I can't view InfoMediaNG since my network indicates the site hosts malicious malware and I have no desire to invite that onto my computer. Dclemens1971 (talk) 02:07, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Dclemens1971 I have done my best to ensure that the article adds value to Wikipedia’s goals. No emotions involved! First, I do not agree with the proposition being advanced at WP:RSN that Nigerian newspapers should be “formally” deprecated. That is too harsh of a recommendation. In fact, some newspapers in Nigeria are dedicated to combating fake news and fact-checking claims made by other media outlets. The fact that some media organizations have published unverified claims should not be enough to categorize all Nigerian newspapers as unreliable.

I have cited some of these newspapers in other articles I have published (here, here, and here), and there were no issues raised regarding the authenticity of the sources. My approach has always been to conduct thorough research on my subjects and write about them, especially when they are of public interest and have made significant impacts in their respective fields.

I would encourage you to approach this matter with an open mind while applying the guidelines without any preconceived bias that Nigerian newspapers are inherently unreliable. As for the other source—InfomediaNG—it may be related to your system’s configuration, such as a firewall mistakenly flagging the site as a false positive. I have no such issue here.

While it's understandable that some sources might be flagged due to instances of misinformation or promotional tone, it would be unfair to apply a blanket deprecation without assessing individual publications on a case-by-case basis. A balanced approach that recognizes both the strengths and weaknesses of various media outlets would better serve Wikipedia’s objective of providing accurate and well-rounded information. Encouraging editors to critically evaluate sources rather than outright dismissing them seems like a more constructive path forward.

Thank you for your time. Opyquad (talk) 12:00, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Opyquad I don't agree with the proposal to deprecate all Nigerian sources either, but I do believe that given the problems identified, they must be carefully evaluated and that promotional or tabloid-type articles like the ones used in this article are inappropriate to establish notability. And are you using ChatGPT or another AI platform to write your responses? GPTZero gives your fourth paragraph a 100% probability of being AI-generated. Please use your own words to participate in discussions here. Dclemens1971 (talk) 13:55, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Dclemens1971 AI cannot be relevant to my response here. To the main issue, similar sources have been cited in a similar page for Tiktok influencer in Nigeria. Opyquad (talk) 14:24, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It's relevant in that AfD discussions are based on strength of argument, not on !votes. Because AIs have literally never proven themselves able to apply Wikipedia policies and guidelines to sources, AI-generated responses will usually be discounted by closers seeking to weigh the strength of argument. (I share this not for purpose of this argument but only for your own benefit as a Wikipedia editor and this will be my last word on the subject.) Dclemens1971 (talk) 14:27, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Dclemens1971 And I don't think an editor that generates their responses using AI is qualified to be a Wikipedia editor. Opyquad (talk) 14:37, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - All of the main sources cited are WP:NEWSORGNIGERIA or barely mention him. 🄻 🄰 14:07, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@लॉस एंजिल्स लेखक I think you should read the article we're discussing for deletion before drawing your conclusions. A promotional piece is unlikely to address the controversies surrounding the subject. Let’s review the page with an open mind while adhering to Wikipedia’s guidelines. It is unfair to delete a page simply because the sources are from Nigeria. Where else are editors in Nigeria expected to obtain sources if biases against Nigerian media persist? Opyquad (talk) 14:34, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Paddy Scott

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

Cannot see or find anything to suggest notability. TheLongTone (talk) 14:33, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your message TheLongTone. My thoughts on notability had been that it adds context to the Willis Resilience Expedition article as well as the family information of Bladen Hawke and Sir Nicholas Scott JaneBotha94 (talk) 14:43, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have also added the appropriate incoming links so it is no longer an orphan article JaneBotha94 (talk) 14:49, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, nothing gets this photographer close to notability for an entry into Wikipedia per the sources cited in the article and WP:BEFORE search conducted. Mekomo (talk) 15:31, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Photography, and United Kingdom. Shellwood (talk) 15:56, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tentative Keep. See Category:Fellows of the Royal Geographical Society, while his FRGS status alone does not constitute notability, if a fair amount of well-sourced information can be found, the article should remain. The article has just been created today, see WP:BEFORE C.2 - the article likely requires time to develop. TheOilSpillExpert (talk) 23:01, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Aishwarya Rutuparna Pradhan

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

I could not find significant coverage about this person. Fails WP:GNG. Rajeev Gaur123 (talk) 15:23, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Women, and India. Rajeev Gaur123 (talk) 15:23, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Odisha-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:21, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Does not meet notability guidelines. TheOilSpillExpert (talk) 22:46, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ali Raza (actor)

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

Disputed draftification. I do not believe redraftifying would allow this to be accepted because no amount of editing can conjure notability from nowhere. Fails WP:NACTOR. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 09:55, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, Film, Television, and Pakistan. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 09:55, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Meets WP:NACTOR with at least two main/lead roles in notable productions + other significant roles. Can be expanded through sources like https://www.thenews.com.pk/magazine/you/1063549-ali-raza (containing an interview; bylined presentation). Declining creation because iit needs improvement could have been OK but not because it does not meet WP:NACTOR. Because it does. -Mushy Yank. 12:25, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think that interview means means much for to WP:Notability, see WP:INTERVIEW. And declining wasn't an option for the nominator, as they said in the nom, this is a disputed draftification; this is an procedurally correct nomination. Follow up @Mushy Yank, I'm just going through the filmography on the article, which two are you considering main/lead roles in notable productions? I'm not sure I'm totally convinced but I could be persuaded to agree. Bobby Cohn (talk) 18:38, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Bobby CohnOh, no the interview is not to prove notability directly, just an exemple of what can be used to improve the page and verify the importance of the roles. Regarding procedure; I did not say this could not be AfDed (everything can), just commenting on the fact that the nomination's rationale is based on NACTOR, just like the reason to decline the creation at AfC was. Lead/main cast roles in Muhabbat Gumshuda Meri, & Noor Jahan (2024 TV series) ; significant roles (not minor) in Duniyapur (TV series) & Gunah (TV series). I'm leaving it at that. Best, -Mushy Yank. 20:24, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: per nom. --- Bhairava7 • (@píng mє-tαlk mє) 14:22, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Having lead roles does not make someone inherently notable. They need the significant coverage to support. The references are interviews, puff pieces, or otherwise unreliable. On a side note, this was more than just draftification. It was draftified, then declined, then still moved to the mainspace. --CNMall41 (talk) 19:26, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Echoing the nom, fails NACTOR and GNG. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 02:47, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tim Brunero

AfDs for this article:

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

Fails GNG TheLoyalOrder (talk) 07:55, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Australia. TheLoyalOrder (talk) 07:55, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Journalism, Radio, and Television. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:47, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Big Brother Australia 2005. LibStar (talk) 23:20, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Payal Dhare

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

The subject does not pass WP:GNG and WP:ANYBIO. Taabii (talk) 06:22, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Women, India, and Madhya Pradesh. Taabii (talk) 06:22, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games and Internet. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:27, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

My opinion may not count, but yes APenguinThatIsSilly("talk") 21:21, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: Might have been best WP:PROD'd, but the notice may have been removed for no reason. APenguinThatIsSilly("talk") 21:25, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Joseph N. Macaluso Sr.

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

seems to fail WP:N, no secondary sources in the article, google search turns up nothing Reflord (talk) 01:52, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Academics and educators. Reflord (talk) 01:52, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Military and Louisiana. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:32, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Setting aside the large amount of unsourced content (not really a deletion reason by itself per WP:DINC), we have none of the in-depth and independent published reliable sources needed for WP:GNG and no claim of notability through any other criterion that could bypass GNG. —David Eppstein (talk) 07:31, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Almost certainly written by someone close to the subject, such as a family member, given that they had access to Macaluso's childhood photos. Many of the refs are not notability lending, such as proof of his counseling license (cited twice) and a program for an event by a local group (also listed as 2 separate refs). He wrote a book but I doubt WP:AUTHOR applies as the publisher, RoseDog Books, redirects to another publishing company that appears to handle self-published books and who's article is sourced entirely by non-RS references like BBB reviews and probably isn't notable either. Best, GPL93 (talk) 13:09, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Daniel Elliot Stuntz

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

I could find no secondary source about this person. One book by Margaret McKenny and Stuntz, The New Savory Wild Mushroom, does have some reviews, but I'm not convinced that's enough to make him notable. Badbluebus (talk) 22:01, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Academics and educators, Biology, United States of America, and Ohio. Badbluebus (talk) 22:01, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. There's an 8 page biography already cited in the article: Ammirati, Joe F.; Libonati-Barnes, Susan (1986). "Daniel Elliot Stuntz, 1909-1983". Mycologia. 78 (4): 515–521. ISSN 0027-5514.. Another one is Ammirati, J. F. (1983). "Daniel Elliot Stuntz". Taxon. 32 (3): 533–533. ISSN 0040-0262.. He is the coauthor of The Savory Wild Mushroom, which was widely reviewed (e.g. [19], [20]). Jfire (talk) 01:36, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It looks like the 1983 source you showed is an obituary, which to me carries less weight when establishing notability. I'm more inclined to believe that although the book he co-authored could be notable, Stuntz himself is not. Badbluebus (talk) 01:45, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep. To me this idea that obituaries carry less weight is making things up that are not actually in our guidelines. If we have a rule that what we need for an article is in-depth coverage in reliable independent secondary sources, then what we have is exactly that. If you think GNG should be changed to mean something different, then an individual AfD is not the place for that. The bigger issue, though, is that these two obituaries are not independent of each other, because they share an author. That means we do not have multiple independent sources counting towards GNG notability. One coauthored book with two published reviews [21] [22] counts towards WP:AUTHOR but by itself that would again fall short of the mark. I am on the weak keep side of the fence rather than weak delete, though, because I think the book reviews are also in-depth coverage (of Stuntz's works rather than his life story, but still coverage that counts), so putting them together with the obituaries gives us enough. —David Eppstein (talk) 07:14, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Gordon Vayo

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

Fails WP:NSPORT. - UtherSRG (talk) 20:35, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Sportspeople, United States of America, and California. UtherSRG (talk) 20:35, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, yet another non-notable poker player with no WP:SIGCOV. Is it time to deal with these creations more centrally? Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 17:45, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I would support such a move. - UtherSRG (talk) 23:41, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as not notable. This is not the place for it but I would support something like a topic ban for the creator. Saying their creations (and general edits) are sub-standard is being generous. This is wasting a lot of time and effort.--Atlan (talk) 10:34, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Francis Glennie

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

This article does not meet the notability criteria (or almost any other criteria) which would make it appropriate to include in Wikipedia. Lukewarmbeer (talk) 18:15, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and England. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:52, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I had draftified it to Draft:Francis Glennie, hoping the page creator would take time and care to expand it and make it encyclopedic, but they clearly moved it back too soon. I tried. Est. 2021 (talk · contribs) 07:25, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:GNG - I don't see any serious allegations of notability nor evidence. Bearian (talk) 03:08, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Jacqueline Leo

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

Fails WP:NOTPROMO. Article is written like a promotional resume and for that reason alone should be blown up per WP:TNT. The sourcing does not pass WP:GNG. It's possible she might pass WP:NAUTHOR if some book reviews can be located but I wouldn't support keeping this unless it were stubified or rewritten to remove promotional language. 4meter4 (talk) 15:42, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Women. Bobby Cohn (talk) 17:07, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:38, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - I have done a bit of editing on this one. The best article in terms of WP:SIGCOV is this one in the New York Times [23]. I have also found reviews of two of her books (see the article), and multiple (more minor) mentions of her work over the years. DaffodilOcean (talk) 07:01, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

William Parente

AfDs for this article:

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

Fails WP:BIO1E and WP:EVENTCRIT and WP:NOTNEWS. Article is sourced entirely to news sources in April 2009. No evidence of lasting significance in WP:SUSTAINED coverage or WP:DIVERSE sourcing. The last AFD was in 2009. Distance should give us better perspective that the event wasn't significant. 4meter4 (talk) 15:24, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Is profiled for a large portion of the Prometheus Books book "Killer Dads" by journalist Mary Papenfus, which has a lot of detail and analysis to pass WP:NEVENT and by extension WP:NCRIMINAL. On the strength of that source alone, I would vote keep. I can retitle it and shuffle stuff around to "eventify" it as "Parente family murders" or something, though with familicides we don't always do that because of how they're covered, and also in this one there's the thing about the Ponzi scheme.... There's also later news coverage and commentary due to the bizarre involvement of the Ponzi scheme in this whole affair. PARAKANYAA (talk) 15:59, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Bobby Cohn (talk) 17:06, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Agree with PARAKANYAA that the book coverage demonstrates sustained coverage and in combination with news coverage at the time is enough to meet WP:GNG. The book is available on IA by the way. Not opposed to eventifying the article but the topic should be kept. Jfire (talk) 17:17, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. @ PARAKANYAA is there one more source from outside of the 2009 window of coverage? Papenfus' book is certainly a great find, but I would think we would need at least one more source of this quality to satisfy WP:EVENTCRIT. If you are able to find one more of this calibre I will gladly withdraw the nomination. I do think we should retitle the article as an event.4meter4 (talk) 17:23, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Crime, Law, Maryland, and New York. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:43, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

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

Ky Dickens

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

I checked the first 26 sources for any sign of passing WP:NBASIC. Nothing. The sources are all either interviews, promotional press releases/churnalism, passing mentions (credits), or primary. Not convinced that this passes WP:NDIRECTOR either. Most of the Awards and recognition section are non-notable awards. Two of her films have articles, but notability isn't inherited. qcne (talk) 12:06, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Actors and filmmakers. qcne (talk) 12:06, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women and Illinois. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 12:14, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Agree, it also before I did significant editing it was clear that it had been written by the subject herself 2A01:4B00:88BE:DF00:C79:3693:EC66:C21B (talk) 14:33, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

~~Keep~~: Passes NDIRECTOR through Sole Survivor, Fish Out of Water and Zero Weeks (reviews here, here, here and here). Somebodyidkfkdt (talk) 15:44, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Struck keep vote as WP:TNT applies. The subject is notable through NDIRECTOR but the article violates PROMO. Somebodyidkfkdt (talk) 02:35, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Completely unnoteworthy and largely written by the subject of the article without disclosure.

http://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Special:Contributions/Kydickens Internetronic (talk) 16:54, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

All edits by that account were immediately reverted (not that other edits to the article couldn't have been COI). Nardog (talk) 11:33, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Reddit post detailing why it should be deleted.Kayn bred 02:23, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: I’m also skeptical as to whether the two films mentioned that do have articles even deserve them too 2A01:4B00:88BE:DF00:D083:FA22:6B14:99A1 (talk) 09:46, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. The primary reason this article is of note to me is that since late 2024, Dickens' primary claim to fame (notoriety?) has been The Telepathy Tapes, a podcast that I do not think I, as an autistic person, can talk about objectively.
I agree that WP:TNT would be the least circuitous route to a quality Biography, if some iteration of the article was permitted(?) to remain in the database.
Also, I want to make sure I understand Wikipedia:Introduction to deletion process § How does the deletion process work? correctly. The page was proposed for deletion on January 12, so if the vote to delete the page is unanimous (which of course it might not be), it could be deleted on the 19th. Is that correct? Thank you for your help!! Finalgirlfall (talk) 17:24, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi User:Finalgirlfall, that's correct. On the 19th or 20th (usually), an uninvolved administrator will look at the discussion and determine if there is a consensus to close the discussion. If there's not, they'll relist the discussion for 1-3 additional weeks, checking in each week to see how the discussion has evolved. Otherwise, they'll close the discussion and take whatever the consensus action is (such as deleting the article). Cheers, Suriname0 (talk) 01:10, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to The Telepathy Tapes - I do think Dickens meets WP:NDIRECTOR as it is usually applied, but without good secondary coverage to meet WP:GNG I'm skeptical of maintaining this as its own article. (I'm not particularly concerned about WP:PROMO here; the article is short, and can be trivially reduced to a series of simple verifiable claims by removing the awards and recognitions section entirely and trimming Career.) I suspect that higher-quality profiles of Dickens are imminent, given the recent prominence of The Telepathy Tapes. This review in The Times, for example, contains a few substantive sentences on Dickens. A few more sources like that would lead me to vote Keep. For now, we're better off selectively merging info (a few sentences at most) about the host to The Telepathy Tapes. Suriname0 (talk) 01:36, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Demzy BaYe

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

Fails WP:MUSICBIO and all the sources cannot count toward WP: GNG. There are also elements of source farming here, in June 2024, this source was published in up to nine ([24] , [25], [26], [27], [28], [29], [30], [31] different newspapers with different titles but same contents word for word. Probably, the subject's notability is tied to being the originator of Baye Dance step, however, the dance step is also not notable. I would have redirect it to Dance with a Purpose Academy (DWP Academy) but it has no page on Wikipedia. Ibjaja055 (talk) 10:20, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Bands and musicians, Dance, and Ghana. Ibjaja055 (talk) 10:20, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: In accepting the draft of this article, I considered it under WP:NMUSICOTHER, and yes, took the invention of dance steps to be notable, supported by national shows and performances, as documented. I don't think we're seeing source farming - rather, as happens with AP and similar, a base article was probably produced in one source location and circulated (it's not a press release) - the piece was found in respectable sources such as the Accra Times - so the only limitation is that that counts only once. Given performance, choreography, etc., I believe GNG is met, if not by much - I've seen a lot of less-well-attested articles (and yes, WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS is valid, but I weight what there is vs. the source base in Ghana). SeoR (talk) 17:31, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@SeoR Thanks for the explanation but I took my time to go through all the sources and couldn't find GNG sources. The widely circulated source is highly promotional with flowery languages.hijacking the internet...He boasts a remarkable footprint... the multidimensional dance powerhouse whose talent has garnered widespread admiration and inspired an entire generation. .... Other sources are social media gossips like [32] [33] [34] and so on. Ibjaja055 (talk) 21:53, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for coming back, and I see your point. I do think the over-circulated article could be genuine "entertainment journalism" which often tends to the flowery, but I agree it's not ideal. And the "gossipy" materials are only good for background, not as primary references. I will try to search some of the main Ghana media sites for more. In the end, this was a "Random AfC" and I have no attachment, but I am aware that our coverage of areas such as arts in most non-EU, non-Anglosphere countries could use a boost, so I'd be loathe to lose an article with real potential. SeoR (talk) 00:30, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Susovan Roy

AfDs for this article:

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

Non-notable actor, doesn't passes WP:NACTOR. I got a mail from User:Xegma, they written, Hi Taabi, this is my article https://en.m.wiki.x.io/wiki/Susovan_Roy why you tag deletion for it. Please remove it. I'm that actor pls withdraw it. They also closed the discussion and drafted the page. It's a clear WP:COI. The closing admin can ask me for the proof of their mail, I'll be happy to share. Taabii (talk) 07:56, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, India, and West Bengal. Taabii (talk) 07:56, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Noting here as I did at ANI, Xegma is p-blocked from this discussion to avoid further disruption. They're welcome to contribute elsewhere. Star Mississippi 15:23, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:46, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Gerard A. Barbara

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

Fails WP:NOTMEMORIAL/WP:VICTIM. The sources are mainly in context to his death as a firefighter on 9/11. Like many first responders he gave his life that day. An admirable man but the sourcing isn't there to meet WP:GNG external to his death.4meter4 (talk) 03:14, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to New_York_City_Fire_Department#September_11_attacks or a similar 9/11 memorials page. Barbara is not otherwise notable. Star Mississippi 04:09, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: 4meter4 is correct about subject's notability. As long as it is done consistently in this situation, i.e. not WP:GNG biography but subject was a good brave soul and first responder (I don't know how common these sort of memorial pages that shouldn't have been created to begin with), making it into a redirect as suggested by Star Mississippi seems reasonable to me.--FeralOink (talk) 11:23, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Military, Terrorism, and New York. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:45, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Robert J. Blackwell

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

Fails WP:SIGCOV. I tried finding sources, and I was able to find lots of WP:PRIMARY materials in presidential libraries, government websites, and in government publications. The best secondary source I found was this one in The New York Times but so much of it is quoting what people said, including Blackwell, and not independent reporting/analysis it's difficult to know whether this too shouldn't be considered a primary document as well. I was unable to locate any source that wasn't PRIMARY that gave a big picture overview of Blackwell. Altogether, couldn't find enough to demonstrate WP:GNG is met.4meter4 (talk) 04:27, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Military, Florida, Massachusetts, and New York. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:37, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Mordechai Dov Brody

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

Fails WP:EVENTCRIT/WP:BIO1E (same way we apply WP:VICTIM in subjects only known for their death.) The article is sourced to a bunch of news coverage in November 2008 over a two week period. No indication of lasting significance in WP:SUSTAINED or WP:DIVERSE sources. If this is kept it should not be titled as a biography page as the person was not notable outside this event.4meter4 (talk) 4meter4 (talk) 05:09, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Law, Judaism, Medicine, and New York. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:34, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Mustafa Nader

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

He does not meet Wikipedia's notability policy. All sources focus on a single event—his cancer diagnosis. There is no significant or varied coverage, and the article appears promotional. فيصل (talk) 00:24, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Journalism, and Iraq. فيصل (talk) 00:24, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Artists, Photography, and Internet. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:42, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Neither significant coverage nor any notable achievements are evident.Gedaali (talk) 09:52, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I created the article according to a friend recommendation. I know notability issue is debated. When I worked to create this article, I asked some other editor for their opinion. محمود (talk) 19:30, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Harsh Beniwal

AfDs for this article:

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

Here we are again, a year after the fourth deletion discussion was closed as Delete. Speedy was declined so we are here to decide yet once again if this meets notability guidelines. Nothing since the last AfD shows notability. Note that most of the press is from reliable sources, but it is all similar to this which is unreliable churnalism and falls under WP:NEWSORGINDIA. CNMall41 (talk) 20:40, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, and India. CNMall41 (talk) 20:42, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Pinging everyone from the last deletion discussion to see if they see anything I don't as far as notability that has taken place since this was closed in 2023. @Worldiswide:, @Mooonswimmer:, @Edwardx:, @Pharaoh of the Wizards:
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Entertainment, Internet, and Delhi. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 21:03, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Sources 2 and 7 are RS, but trivial coverage, barely anything beyond a paragraph. This [35] is about what you find, celebrity shares photos. This [36] is barely longer than a paragraph. We don't have enough sourcing for notability. Oaktree b (talk) 21:26, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: meets WP:NACTOR or WP:ENTERTAINER as Harsh has had played significant roles in multiple notable films, television shows. He has played an important role in the film Student of the Year 2, played the lead role in the film Checkmate.. He has also played the lead role in the series Who's Your Daddy?, Who Killed Jessica?, and Heartbeats, also played an important role in the TV series Campus Diaries. This is an in-depth coverage which is talking about his journey. 1, 2 are reliable sources. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jitujadab90 (talk • contribs) 23:08, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The first one is unreliable per WP:NEWSORGINDIA. The other two were already decided in the four previous AfD's to not be enough. Looking closer, they are churnalism based off the announcement of his roles. What press can you provide since the last AfD that would be considered in-depth?--CNMall41 (talk) 23:40, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Checked WP:NEWSORGINDIA; not a single word is saying News18 is unreliable. So we can say News18 is a reliable source. The other two are not churnalism, as the two articles are written by journalists; the 1st is reported by Archit Mehta on May 7, 2019, and the 2nd one is reported by Sana Farzeen on April 13, 2019. Jitujadab90 (talk) 07:50, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Not quite. Just because NEWSORGINDIA doesn't explicitly mention News18 among the examples it gives of media outlets engaging in churnalism, doesn't mean that News18 doesn't do that; a variation on the theme of "absence of evidence is not evidence of absence". In any case, NEWSORGINDIA is making the general point that "even legitimate" outlets commonly do this. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:54, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, respected or legitimate news outlets sometimes engage in churnalism. But does this mean News18 is an unreliable source? If so, then on what basis will you judge that News18 is an unreliable source? Can you point to any policy that backs up the statement that News18 is unreliable? Jitujadab90 (talk) 09:11, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No, it means that News18 shouldn't likely be used if you have better sources. Churnalism is the issue, not any news source in particular. Oaktree b (talk) 16:48, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

What do you think of these sources? 1 2 Jitujadab90 (talk) 18:42, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No one said the publication is not reliable. The source itself is unreliable per NEWSORGINDIA. There is no byline, it is marked as being created by "buzz staff" or "trending desk" which is a clear sign of churnalism. So, it is not that News18 isn't reliable...it is that particular reference in News18 that is unreliable. As far as the two you just posted above, they are not in-depth and the second one (the publication itself) is unreliable. --CNMall41 (talk) 20:33, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I will stick to my vote to keep, as Harsh has more than 16 million subscribers on YouTube (according to WP:NYOUTUBE, Subscriber count helps meet the second criteria of WP:ENT). Also, he has had significant roles in multiple notable television shows such as Campus Diaries, Who's Your Daddy?, Who Killed Jessica?, and Heartbeats, thus satisfying WP:ENT. Jitujadab90 (talk) 21:40, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That essay is a great guide, but there is no subject-specific criteria for notability on YouTubers. I do respect your contention and the right to vote !Keep however. --CNMall41 (talk) 21:46, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Call-Me Kevin

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

Fails WP:NBIO and WP:NBASIC; didn't find any reliable sources that contain significant coverage of him. Most references in the article currently don't establish notability of O'Reilly and are either not reliable or not in-depth coverage of him. ~ Tails Wx 16:28, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Ireland. Shellwood (talk) 17:13, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Entertainment and Internet. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:42, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. I don't normally weigh-in on YouTuber AfD discussions (as they often seem to rely on relative perceptions of "fame"). However, the sources in this article are woeful. Effectively all are primary sources. Where the subject(s) own YouTube statements are relied upon as fact. While this might just about be "OK" in the context of WP:ABOUTSELF, it is not "OK" (certainly not in establishing notability) that effectively all of the sources are self-published/self-statements. The handful of secondary sources in the article are barely brief passing mentions. And are placed alongside text that they unequivocally do not support. Like those screenrant.com and thegamer.com webpages - which do not support the text of the "collaborations" section they are placed within. At all. Not even close. It's hard to offer an objective AfD recommendation in the face of this type of WP:REFBOMBing. Guliolopez (talk) 20:56, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. I note that a draft, Draft:Call Me Kevin, has been created/declined/deleted/recreated several times. And that Call Me Kevin (without the oddly placed "-" character in the title under discussion) was also previously deleted. Guliolopez (talk) 20:59, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: No coverage in RS in the article, hardly anything at length that I can find. This [37] is fine, but it's only a paragraph in a list of other Irish people. Oaktree b (talk) 21:32, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I tried to find sources about Kevin awhile ago and still now coverage. Warm Regards, Miminity (Talk?) (me contribs) 03:18, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete - this Business Week article is reliable but is a passing mention of Kevin. Bearian (talk) 16:57, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Kit Butler

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

Non-notable model. Declined at AfC but moved into the main space regardless. Sources don't come even close to establishing notability, and BEFORE search finds only social media, agency listings, etc. Fails WP:GNG / WP:BIO by some margin. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 15:10, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Fashion, United Kingdom, and England. DoubleGrazing (talk) 15:10, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Draftify: It looks like there might be some coverage, but this article is in no state to be in mainspace yet. ~Darth Stabro^{Talk • Contribs} 15:45, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Draftify: it's enitrely possible that this subject is notable, or is on the way to becoming notable and isn't there yet. I think that the models.com Model Of The Year award probably does carry some weight, however the article is missing the right sourcing to demonstrate a pass of GNG, ANYBIO or NMODEL. -- D'n'B-📞 -- 09:05, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Mike Abrams (criminal)

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

Tagged for sourcing issues since 2017. Not clear the subject meet WP:GNG or is compliant with WP:CRIMINAL.4meter4 (talk) 09:10, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Crime, and New York. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 11:25, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Notability not established. No inline citations whatsoever. Spideog (talk) 11:38, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep (?) I never know how to write these mobster articles, but he is described as a significant mobster in several books on the topic, including topical crime encyclopedias. [38] [39] [40]. I will add sources later PARAKANYAA (talk) 01:08, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Everything in the article was in those two books. Could probably be expanded further he's covered a decent amount but it at least verifies now. PARAKANYAA (talk) 01:16, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nana Akosua Frimpomaa

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

The subject of the article fails WP:NPOL. Simply being a flag bearer of a political party in an election does not inherently establish notability. I proposed a deletion few days ago, but the tag was removed by the author of the article. Idoghor Melody (talk) 09:39, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Politicians, and Ghana. Idoghor Melody (talk) 09:39, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @Idoghor Melody I was the one who created the article and I did not remove the tag for deletion. Check your facts right before making an accusation. daSupremo

18:55, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@DaSupremo, I'm really sorry about that mix up. Idoghor Melody (talk) 21:26, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That's fine daSupremo

22:20, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Describing her merely as a "flagbearer" (a vague, unrevealing term) obscures her significance as described in the article. She was the National Chairperson of the Convention People's Party. She won a Presidential Primary. She was also named Female Politician of the Year in Ghana. Her notability appears much clearer than this misleading nomination reveals. Spideog (talk) 11:16, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 11:23, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks @Spideog for your input daSupremo

19:02, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Hello Idoghor Melody, I removed the tag because the subject clearly meets notability guidelines, and I second what Spideog has stated in support of keeping this article. Describing the subject merely as a "flagbearer" significantly downplays her notability, as Spideog rightly pointed out.

I find it surprising that the nomination suggests the subject fails WP:NPOL. The guideline clearly states that "Major local political figures who have received significant press coverage" are notable. While it’s true that "just being an elected local official or an unelected candidate for political office does not guarantee notability", this individual exceeds those basic criteria, given her prominent leadership roles and national recognition, including her election as National Chairperson of a political party and being named Female Politician of the Year.

I would kindly advise the nominator to review the relevant notability guidelines again. This article demonstrably satisfies both the specific (WP:NPOL) and general (WP:GNG) notability standards. Repeated nominations for deletion without fully considering these criteria risk discouraging valuable contributions to Wikipedia. Robertjamal12 ~🔔 01:47, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: All what I am seeing here is WP:BLP1E. 98 percent of the Sources provided in the article are about her campaign as the flag bearer of a party to participate in an election that she did not win. 99 percent of the sources lack WP:SIGCOV and cannot be used as WP:GNG sources. Only this vaguely discusses other aspects of her life which is also tied to being a flag bearer. Also, if she had won the highest National Award of Ghana, I know this article wouldn't be in AfD. She won a non notable award, given to her by her political party. I tried to check for process of the award and could not find anything on the internet. From the above, it is very clear that this subject fails WP:NPOL and the sources cannot establish WP:SIGCOV Ibjaja055 (talk) 08:46, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Ibjaja055

I’m surprised by how you reviewed this article according to WP:NPOL and WP:SIGCOV. If 98% of the sources truly lack significant coverage, I wonder whether you conducted an independent review beyond the sources already provided in the article to assess the subject’s overall notability.

Additionally, I find the repeated misinterpretation of WP:GNG and WP:SIGCOV concerning articles that clearly meet the criteria quite concerning. The subject may not have won an election, but WP:NPOL explicitly states that "Major local political figures who have received significant press coverage" can be notable. It also clarifies that "just being an elected local official or an unelected candidate for political office does not guarantee notability", but individuals in such roles can still be notable if they meet the general notability guideline. This subject, with significant coverage and recognition in Ghana, meets these standards.

I’m genuinely curious as to how your reviews are being conducted because the criteria seem to be applied inconsistently, leading to confusion and frustration.

To conclude, I believe the notability criteria in this case have been misinterpreted, and these types of reviews are discouraging and potentially misleading.—- Robertjamal12 ~🔔 11:07, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Robertjamal12 can you list three references that significantly covered the subject? Almost all her coverage both listed here or online are either about her ambition to become the president or receiving non notable awards. However, I came across a source that would have shown something better though seems like her CV with this statement According to her curriculum vitae... Yet only this cannot convince me to vote a keep. Ibjaja055 (talk) 13:19, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Ibjaja055, I’m not trying to convince you, and I won’t attempt to convince you to vote "keep." As I stated earlier, I’m genuinely curious about how your reviews are being conducted. I would kindly advise you, as a reviewer, to carefully revisit the relevant notability guidelines, specifically WP:NPOL, WP:SIGCOV and WP:GNG. Thank you. — Robertjamal12 ~🔔 13:36, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Robertjamal12 I think you are the one mixing things up here. You don't have to shift the post, provide the three references that meet WP:GNG and WP:SIGCOV if you truly understand the guidelines. Ibjaja055 (talk) 14:07, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Ibjaja055, I am neither mandated nor obligated to provide the three references you’ve requested to prove my understanding of the guidelines. I’ve already shared my submission and reasoning for why the article should be kept.

As I mentioned earlier, I’m genuinely curious about how you review articles based on these criteria, and I’ve offered my advice accordingly. — Robertjamal12 ~🔔 14:32, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Robertjamal12, you are not mandated nor obligated to provide the three references that @Ibjaja055 requested, but you can express concerns about their !vote on this discussion. Nice one! Idoghor Melody (talk) 17:19, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Firstly, it would be very unnecessary to reply to my !vote, especially if you're going to be saying what you already said above. The more often you express the same ideas in a discussion, the less persuasive you become. Please don't BLUDGEON this process. Discussions are for building consensus, not for confronting everyone who disagrees with you.

NPOL#1 says that only when a politician or judge has been elected to hold an international, national, or (for countries with federal or similar systems of government) state/province–wide office or when the politician is a member of the legislative bodies of these levels, whether they have assumed the office or not, would they be presumed notable. Not when the person was only a candidate of the election, the person has to win the election. This does not include winning a political party's primary elections. Even though leaders of registered political parties at the national level are sometimes considered notable despite their party's lack of electoral success, they are subject to the same content policies as any other article and this subject fails the general notability guideline (see a detailed source analysis below).

NPOL#2 says that Major local political figures who have received significant press coverage (emphasis mine) can be presumed notable, and that means that the politician must have been written about, in-depth, independently in multiple news feature articles, by journalists, now, I don't see any of that in the coverages Nana Akosua has received so far, most of these sources are either routine coverages or cookie cutters. Below is a detailed source analysis of why Nana Akosua obviously fails the general notability guideline too.

EDIT: Also, the "Female Politician of the Year" award is a non-notable award.

Source assessment table
Source	Independent?	Reliable?	Significant coverage?	Count source toward GNG?
https://www.gbcghanaonline.com/news/politics/farmer-frimpomaa/2024/	~ This is Ghana's Broadcasting Corporation, a national news corporation. Would it be independent of a presidential election? Of course not. And besides, this piece is a WP:DOGBITESMAN.		This is a WP:DOGBITESMAN. Provides no useful information on the subject.	✘ No
https://www.modernghana.com/news/1344146/cpp-flagbearer-promises-government-for-your-doors.html	I will initiate a..., ... she stated, For us in the CPP..., ... she added. It is also evident that this is a WP:DOGBITESMAN.	I don't see a reason to think a site that anyone can register on to post news (UGC) is a reliable source of information for English Wikipedia.	Again, this is a WP:DOGBITESMAN. Provides no useful information on the subject.	✘ No
https://www.ghanaweb.com/GhanaHomePage/NewsArchive/Why-Nana-Akosua-Frimpomaa-of-the-CPP-wants-to-become-Ghana-rsquo-s-first-female-president-1782539	Speaking with Etsey Atisu on GhanaWeb TV's Election Desk, Nana Akosua, who is also the National Chairperson of the CPP, stressed that...	This piece lacks a byline and that is very unprofessional of a news org.	Another WP:DOGBITESMAN.	✘ No
https://3news.com/elections/	Unaccessed, this is only a database.	No clear editorial oversight].	This is only a database.	✘ No
https://www.bbc.com/pidgin/articles/c1jdgrx6550o			This is another WP:DOGBITESMAN.	✘ No
https://mx24online.com/presidential-candidates/nana-akosua-frimpomaa-convention-peoples-party-cpp/		No clear editorial oversight.		✘ No
https://www.graphic.com.gh/news/politics/ghana-news-cpp-flag-bearer-election-nana-frimpomaa-onsy-nkrumah-submit-forms-promise-economic-revolution-restoration.html		~ There was no consensus on whether the paper is reliable in itself, the last time it was discussed. And even though there is a Board of Directors of the company that owns this paper, there is not clear editorial oversight of the website itself.	Obviously, not of substantial coverage about the subject here.	✘ No
https://www.graphic.com.gh/news/politics/ghana-news-rally-behind-cpp-to-break-duopoly-nana-frimpomaa-urges-electorate.html	Another WP:DOGBITESMAN.	~ Ditto	The single-sentence about her is insufficient substantial coverage.	✘ No
https://www.myjoyonline.com/refund-monies-collected-from-job-applicants-at-state-agencies-cpp-to-government/	Addressing the media at the party’s headquarters in Accra, the Chairperson of the Party, Nana Akosua Frimpomaa said... This piece is entirely dependent on the subject.	But of course, a WP:DOGBITESMAN.		✘ No
https://3news.com/news/politics/cpp-is-the-only-party-that-did-not-fail-ghanaians-chair/	Ditto	Ditto	Nothing like a substantial coverage on the subject here.	✘ No
https://www.asaaseradio.com/election-2024-nana-frimpomaa-sarpong-kumankuma-declared-cpp-flagbearer/			A political party's primary election result, another WP:DOGBITESMAN.	✘ No
https://www.myjoyonline.com/election-2024-its-no-1-for-npp-no-8-for-ndc-on-ballot-paper/			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) 17:31, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I would like to respectfully raise a potential concern regarding WP:CANVASS. While appropriate notification aimed at improving participation is encouraged, WP:CANVASS warns against selectively notifying users in a way that might influence the outcome of a discussion. In this case, I’ve noticed that several editors have joined the discussion with similar reasoning and viewpoints in quick succession. This has raised questions in my mind about whether notifications were issued in a manner fully compliant with WP:APPNOTE, which requires neutrality and transparency when notifying users. I’m not making an accusation, and I recognize that notifying editors of discussions can be helpful when done correctly. However, to ensure a fair process, I would appreciate it if participants could clarify whether any notifications were issued and, if so, ensure they complied with WP:CANVASS guidelines.

Thank you. Robertjamal12 ~🔔 18:31, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep:This subject passes the basic WP:NPOL criteria and the general English Notability criteria. Owula kpakpo (talk) 18:52, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Frimpomaa was an unsuccessful candidate, and the only coverage I can find of her is of her as a candidate. We do not keep these articles, but we are allowed to cover her candidacy on the election page, and a redirect there would make sense. SportingFlyer T·C 23:10, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Chef Tony

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

Cited entirely to primary and self published sources connected to the subject. Promotional as well. Fails WP:GNG and WP:NOTPROMO.4meter4 (talk) 05:26, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Food and drink, Television, Advertising, and New York. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:45, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete nothing to indicate that they are notable aside from publishing a lot of promotion. 🄻 🄰 17:16, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Robert Ciranko

AfDs for this article:

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

In looking at the independent book sources cited in the article in google books, all of these sources only mention the subject briefly and in passing (only covering his appointment in one or two sentences; that is all). The few that do have more detail are published by the organization the subject runs and lack independence. See source table below. A WP:BEFORE showed no independent coverage that was in-depth. Fails WP:SIGCOV with zero qualifying sources. I note that this article was rightly deleted once before in 2017. Suggest WP:SALTING it. 4meter4 (talk) 05:37, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Source	Significant?	Independent?	Reliable?	Secondary?	Pass/Fail	Notes
George D. Chryssides. Jehovah's Witnesses: Continuity and Change. p. 143.	N	Y	Y	Y	N	A single-sentence mention of his assumption of office in 2014.
McCoy, Daniel J. (2021). The Popular Handbook of World Religions. Harvest House Publishers. p. 287.	N	Y	Y	Y	N	A single-sentence mention of his assumption of office in 2014.
Besier, Gerhard; Stoklosa, Katarzyna (2016). Jehovah's Witnesses in Europe—Past and Present. Vol. 1. Cambridge Scholars Publishing. p. 209.	N	Y	Y	Y	N	Passing mention of assumption of office in 2014.
"A History-Making Meeting". The Watchtower. Watch Tower Society. August 15, 2011. p. 19.	Y	N	Y	?	N	The Watchtower is published by the organization Ciranko runs. It is not independent.
Minnesota Center for Health Statistics, Office of the State Registrar, St. Paul. Robert L Ciranko and Ketra B Bates 20 Aug 1978	N	Y	Y	N	N	WP:PRIMARY government source verifying subject's marriage. Not significant.
"Keep Holding Men of That Sort Dear"". The Watchtower. Watch Tower Society. October 15, 2015. p. 3. The Governing Body members make the final decisions, but the helpers implement the committee's direction and carry out whatever assignments they are given.	Y	N	Y	?	N	The Watchtower is published by the organization Ciranko runs. It is not independent.
Total qualifying sources					0	There must be multiple qualifying sources to meet the notability requirements

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Christianity, and New York. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:44, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: The article is of little value. It tells us nothing very informative about him: just his rank in an organisation and his immediate ancestry/ethnicity. Spideog (talk) 13:21, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment See, this is the problem with sourcing tables: they very neatly present one opinion. Since the subject leads a local constituency within the Watchtower society, he is not in a leadership or direct affiliation with the ownership of the magazine, and thus non-independence is not established. Having said that, we typically only let a source count once, even if there are multiple articles published in it, so I still don't think we're necessarily to multiple RS yet. Jclemens (talk) 16:50, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Jclemens Not sure how you drew that conclusion. The Watchtower is published by the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania. Ciranko is the president of the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania. They are clearly not independent of one another.4meter4 (talk) 16:59, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You're correct; I made an assumption that the national and local organizations were separate, which is not the case. Jclemens (talk) 17:00, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It's an easy mistake to make. The religion's governing organization structure is somewhat counterintuitive.4meter4 (talk) 17:06, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

With no comment on notability (yet), should he be found to be non-notable should be redirected to Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania, where he is covered. PARAKANYAA (talk) 21:50, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect. After searching it doesn't say much about him. Just, he runs the organization. Lots of mentions so a redirect is appropriate. PARAKANYAA (talk) 22:03, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Also, I think in the table you meant the organization Ciranko runs. Chryssides is the academic. PARAKANYAA (talk) 22:05, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks I modified it per your comment. A redirect is fine by me as an WP:ATD. 4meter4 (talk) 22:09, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. I don't know enough about the JWs to know if this applies, but according to WP:CLERGYOUTCOMES, Heads of large, Protestant denominations are generally found to be notable by dint of achieving this office, as seen in this deletion debate Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/David W. Graves about a General Superintendent (Church of the Nazarene). Ciranko is head of what is described on the page as the JW's main corporation, but again the structure seems extraordinarily byzantine so I have no idea whether Ciranko would properly be described as the head of the JWs as a religious group. Dclemens1971 (talk) 17:09, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Benjamin Clark (chef)

AfDs for this article:

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

Deleted once before for failing WP:NOTMEMORIAL/ WP:VICTIM. Not seeing any significant difference between this and the last time it was taken to AFD by Oaktree b. Granted it was a soft delete outcome first time round. A possible WP:ATD would be redirect to List of victims of the September 11 attacks (A–G). I would suggest article protection if we do that to prevent recreation. 4meter4 (talk) 06:15, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Food and drink, Terrorism, and New York. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:40, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:40, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete in accordance with WP:NOTMEMORIAL and WP:VICTIM policies, as nominated. Spideog (talk) 13:01, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Refrained from participating in the first deletion discussion as I was waiting for input from at least one person other than myself or the nominator, which ultimately didn't happen. At the time, my belief was that Clerk met WP:VICTIM due to having "a large role" (potentially saving the lives of hundreds of Fiduciary Trust employees, as reported by both his wife and Fiduciary's senior vice president) "within a well-documented historic event" (9/11) with "persistent coverage of the event in reliable secondary sources that devote significant attention to the individual's role" (both the CNN and The Daily Beast explicitly cover Clark and his role in the attacks without reading outright like obituaries, and he's mentioned alongside a few other 9/11 victims in the New York Times article). It may be worth noting that Clark was also profiled as a "9/11 Hero" by CNN on the first anniversary of the attacks [[41]]. In the event this article is deleted a second time, I have no intention of recreating it. ★ The Green Star Collector ★ (talk) 14:54, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The daily beast source is pretty good IMO, so I see what the thought was in making this article. However, the rest, not so much, and the one source is not enough. @The Green Star Collector Can you find any more like that? PARAKANYAA (talk) 20:27, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There is an Irish Examiner article ([[42]], but it's unfortunately a copy and paste of the Daily Beast article (published three days later and credits the same author). I could've sworn I came across a New York Post article mentioning Clark (as well as a few other victims), though I opted not to include it at the time due to the publication's skew toward unreliability. As the creator of this article, I'll be throwing in my own vote for deletion as well unless this can somehow be resolved. ★ The Green Star Collector ★ (talk) 22:41, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah delete for me as well I'm afraid. I understand your thought in making this but that one article is not enough. PARAKANYAA (talk) 23:58, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Still nothing notable about the chef. Died in the attack. You could literally replace "chef" with any other job in the story, and you'd be in the same place. Guy in the towers, helped people out but passed away. Was a non-notable chef (he isn't Gordon Ramsay) and hundreds of people helped hundreds of others escape. This is a simple memorial page, perhaps better served at a 9/11 wiki somewhere... I've said before, we don't need a detailed life history of every single person that died on 9/11, unless they did something to stand out from the other people. Chef/janitor/office worker, they all passed away. Nothing lasting about this person's influence almost 25 years later at this point. Oaktree b (talk) 21:42, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. PARAKANYAA (talk) 21:58, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Lisa Drouillard

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

Article is cited to unreliable blogs and self published sources. Fails WP:GNG.4meter4 (talk) 04:30, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Beauty pageants, and Haiti. – numbermaniac 04:37, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
delete single-event fame. --Altenmann >talk 04:44, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women and New York. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:46, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

George de Meo

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

Tagged for notability and sourcing since 2017. Fails WP:GNG.4meter4 (talk) 04:13, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. 4meter4 (talk) 04:13, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
del no evidence of notability. --Altenmann >talk 04:45, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Crime, and New York. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:48, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

~~Keep~~ quite a bit of coverage here [43] [44] [45] [46], for his weapons dealing was "the single most important source of weapons" of The Troubles, quite the claim to notability as evidenced by sigcov. That is without looking into newsy/other book sources (if you are unsatisfied by the sources I have provided or want me to incorporate them into the article, please ping me I will attempt to find more). PARAKANYAA (talk) 00:38, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Also several pages of coverage in A Secret History of the IRA (though that might be moreso on Harrison). PARAKANYAA (talk) 00:41, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

PARAKANYAA Thank you for finding these. Anything you are willing to do to improve the article is much appreciated.4meter4 (talk) 00:45, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect. Changing vote since, while notable, everything he is notable for is summed up at Provisional Irish Republican Army arms importation. ATM I do not see the content for a split, and since his notability is tied up in so many other people I think this is best for now. PARAKANYAA (talk) 00:56, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sven Pichal

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

This person is convicted of ~~accused of and on trial for~~ (revolting) charges but does not appear to be independently notable (I can't find any WP:GNG-qualifying coverage prior to his arrest) from what he's been charged with. Per WP:CRIMINAL and WP:BLP1E, we shouldn't have a biography of this individual~~, at least not until the trial has concluded with a verdict~~. Dclemens1971 (talk) 20:21, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Journalism, Crime, and Belgium. Dclemens1971 (talk) 20:21, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep. I agree with the nominator that he does not pass NCRIMINAL, but looking at the sourcing on the nl.wiki page nl:Sven Pichal, I do think he passes NBASIC as a TV personality, with articles about him in major publications. Haven't searched too much though, but he is not BLP1E. Also, from what I can tell he was convicted in December 2024. PARAKANYAA (talk) 20:27, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, missed that in the sources. Can you share the coverage you saw that you think clears the WP:SIGCOV bar separate from the crime? Dclemens1971 (talk) 20:48, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: PARAKANYAA, thanks for referring to the NL page. The subject clearly passes GNG and WP:CRIMINAL. Cameremote (talk) I came from a remote place 20:56, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Can you explain how he meets the CRIMINAL requirements? (The victim of the crime is a renowned national or international figure, including, but not limited to, politicians or celebrities; or [t]he motivation for the crime or the execution of the crime is unusual—or has otherwise been considered noteworthy—such that it is a well-documented historic event. I don't think either applies. The question is whether there are enough sources outside the crime to warrant a GNG pass. Dclemens1971 (talk) 21:39, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Radio and Television. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 21:28, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Benjamin Szerlip

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

A WP:PROMO bio for a non-notable osteopath. I don't see a pass on WP:GNG since I can't find any WP:SIGCOV in independent, reliable sources. I don't see a pass on WP:NACADEMIC as his papers are not heavily cited. I don't see a pass on WP:NAUTHOR since I can't find any reviews for his book. Dclemens1971 (talk) 20:01, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Medicine, and Texas. Dclemens1971 (talk) 20:01, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 21:29, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Well, when your first hit is pr.com [47], we have issues. Rest of the sourcing is pretty much PR items. I find no book reviews, this is PROMO, virtually a linkedin bio. Neither of which is appropriate for wikipedia. Oaktree b (talk) 23:36, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Saffiyah Khan

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

No lasting coverage, the most recent I can find is the slow slow drip of The Specials-related stuff (e.g. https://www.nme.com/features/music-features/terry-hall-the-specials-obituary-3370063 from 2022) Jay Cubby 16:36, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Women, and United Kingdom. Jay Cubby 16:36, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I'm not quite sure what the deletion rationale is...BLP1E? But she's clearly notable for more than just the viral photo. As the nominator noted, a few years after the photo she collaborated with the Specials. She toured with them, and they wrote a song about her. Notability is not temporary. pburka (talk) 16:46, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Politics, and England. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:34, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep appears to have received RS coverage over a sustained period, and meets WP:BASIC. ResonantDis_tortion 11:22, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Also, the subject has a technical claim meeting WP:MUSICBIO; providing vocals on an album that topped the UK albums chart [48]. ResonantDis_tortion 11:49, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Jacob Rott

AfDs for this article:

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

Does not meet WP:NMODEL nor WP:NBASIC. I went through and cut everything that wasn't verified in the citations, but I cannot speak to the {{coi}} tag. None of the coverage, nor any other coverage that I could find satisfies notability as reliable, independent, AND significant. Bobby Cohn (talk) 14:01, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Artists. Bobby Cohn (talk) 14:02, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Music, Fashion, Internet, and Germany. Bobby Cohn (talk) 14:16, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I can't find any independent sourcing – at best it is too soon for an article about him. --bonadea contributions talk 15:02, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fails WP:GNG and it’s Too Soon Pizza on Pineapple🍕 (talk) 21:57, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Perhaps sadly, Wikipedia isn't a call sheet for every wannabe model. MisterWizzy (talk) 08:30, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete doesn't have enough reliable sources. Darkm777 (talk) 20:21, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Draftify or delete Delete if not enough sources, otherwise we can move it to draft. @Mirkomil Qodirov your participation is welcome. DACartman (talk) 23:49, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: I was confused for a minute because the two awards listed would actually allow for meeting WP:ANYBIO, but actually looking it - they were not awarded to him, they were awarded to the Elevator Boys [de] of which he is apparently a member. Whether or not that group is notable, it would not lead to this individual being independently notable - see WP:BANDMEMBER. -- D'n'B-📞 -- 09:55, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

John Guest (researcher and author)

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

Probable WP:AUTOBIO based on primary sources (letters), self-published books, ... The "Guest family history" has not received significant attention ([49]), and I see no other evidence of meeting our notability guidelines. Fram (talk) 09:38, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, History, and United Kingdom. Fram (talk) 09:38, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Cool family history project, but doesn't seem like it has attracted any attention that could confer notability. Nothing to be found in any of the Australian sources that I would expect might cover something like this. MCE89 (talk) 09:57, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete can't find any mention in Google books or news, main source is self-published. Orange sticker (talk) 10:18, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:48, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:48, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: per nom ~Darth Stabro^{Talk • Contribs} 21:04, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:TNT and WP:MILL. What a horrific page. It's as if someone inserted random words into a AI generated tweet thread. It's probably an autobiography, which everyone knows in 2025 is frowned upon here. And literally millions of people, including yours truly, are related distantly to the early modern kings of England and Scotland. Bearian (talk) 05:58, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete meets no notability criteria, just a promotional WP:AUTOBIO. Best, GPL93 (talk) 18:50, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

1oneam

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

Promo piece on a non-notable musician. Rejected at AfC but moved into the mainspace regardless, speedy requested but the tag was removed, so here we are at AfD. No evidence of notability, the sources don't come even close to meeting WP:GNG, BEFORE finds only social media and streaming sites, and there is nothing in this draft to suggest WP:MUSICBIO notability either. DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:59, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Bands and musicians, Music, and United States of America. DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:59, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Wisconsin-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:49, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nomination. All I'm seeing in reliable sources is a passing mention [50] and two pretty run-of-the-mill articles, both under 300 words [51] [52]. Fails GNG and NMUSICBIO. UpTheOctave! • 8^va? 19:42, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

James V. LaSala

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

Fails WP:GNG.4meter4 (talk) 05:05, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Crime, California, and New York. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:55, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: By the article's own evidence, very obscure mobster. Could not find anything useful. The one source used doesn't even mention him as far as I can see. Very well could be a hoax. PARAKANYAA (talk) 20:07, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, not a hoax (newspapers.com hits), still not notable. PARAKANYAA (talk) 20:11, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

He is actually included in a brief entry in the "World encyclopedia of organized crime" but it's not long and basically just what is here already. PARAKANYAA (talk) 20:14, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

David Lee (still photographer)

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

Clear case of WP:NOTINHERITED. Everything is related to his brother Spike Lee in a search. Article is sourced to a self published website. Fails WP:GNG.4meter4 (talk) 05:10, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Film, Television, Photography, and New York. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:54, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – there are some articles about him (Chicago Sun-Times, AMPAS 1, AMPAS 2), but always in reference to his brother's work. Also wouldn't be opposed to merging to a new "Family" section or similar at Spike Lee, with info from Joie Lee and Cinqué Lee as well. RunningTiger123 (talk) 23:42, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@RunningTiger123 That's not a bad idea on a family section in the Spike Lee article. I would support a selective merge to Spike Lee as an WP:ATD if an editor steps forward who wants to take that on.4meter4 (talk) 23:44, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Brian Lydell

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

Unreferenced BLP other than IMDB as an external link. Not clear the subject meets WP:GNG.4meter4 (talk) 06:03, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Music, Television, and New York. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:48, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete no reason to believe this person is notable and my search did not find anything. 🄻 🄰 12:57, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Fails WP:GNG, even though this dude *supposedly* worked for the American ABC as a music supervisor, I can't find any reliable sources for him. As per the contents itself, it could *possibly* be salvaged? A bit of a stretch, though. Madeline1805 (talk) 23:20, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. doesn't have any sources. None could be found in my search.Darkm777 (talk) 20:22, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:V - no record in any reliable source. Bearian (talk) 06:06, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Luke Vincent Lockwood

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

The one viewable source has only one sentence of coverage. The other offline source can't support the entire text because it was published in 1926. The death information in 1951 is therefore unreferenced. We can therefore only assume that the Hubbard text is only supporting his participation in the Free Masons. There's not enough here to meet WP:SIGCOV/ WP:GNG.4meter4 (talk) 05:41, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. 4meter4 (talk) 05:41, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Law, and New York. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:52, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Connecticut-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:52, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Passes NAUTHOR through Colonial Furniture in America (reviews here, here, here, here, here). Also may pass GNG through obits here and here. Somebodyidkfkdt (talk) 08:09, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Somebodyidkfkdt I'm afraid I can't access most of these because they are behind paywalls, but I will take your word for it. Thanks for taking the time to find sources. Would you mind adding them to the article since you have access?4meter4 (talk) 08:17, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Withdrawing. Based on the sources provided above and Somebodyidkfkdt's assessment of those sources, I think notability is sufficiently supported by evidence.4meter4 (talk) 09:14, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Roberto Vera Monroig

AfDs for this article:

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

Easily fails WP:GNG as it did last year when previously deleted, and there has been no new or near substantial coverage. Snowycats (talk) 05:40, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Politicians, Politics, and Puerto Rico. Snowycats (talk) 05:40, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Mayors are not "inherently" notable just because they exist, and have to pass WP:NPOL #2 on the depth of substance that can be written about their mayoralty (specific things they did, specific projects they spearheaded, specific effects their leadership had on the development of the community, etc.) and the volume of reliable sourcing that can be provided to support it — but this is basically "mayor who exists, the end" with no sourcing at all, and Adjuntas is nowhere near large enough to extend him a presumption of notability if its sourcing and substance are lacking. (A mayor of New York City or Chicago whose article was this inadequate would obviously get the benefit of the doubt, on the grounds that it was easily repairable — but a mayor of a small town with a population of just 18K gets no such indulgences if the article isn't already up to snuff.) Certainly no prejudice against recreation in the future if somebody can actually write and source an article that actually satisfies the requirements, but this isn't it. Bearcat (talk) 17:49, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - the long-standing consensus here is that mayors are not automatically notable - they have to have significant coverage beyond routine reporting. Bearian (talk) 06:50, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Edward J. Megarr

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

Relies entirely on military journals and newsletters like the Marine Corps Gazette. Not sure if we should consider these independent enough to meet WP:SIGCOV (in the same way that we usually don't count trade journals and magazines in other fields). Fails WP:GNG.4meter4 (talk) 04:12, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Military, California, and New York. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:21, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep - a quick gsearchs seems to show a few other hits, and a three-star general is almost absolutely notable. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 04:47, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Major general is two stars, not three. I'd agree he should be notable based on holding a division command alone, but I'm really surprised there isn't more out there. Especially since he seemed to have served during Vietnam. Intothat darkness 14:06, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Duh, right, it is two. My brain was going "Major is a higher rank than Lieutenant" and forgot that for Generals it's the other way around... - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 02:42, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
No worries. Generals are always special... I might look through my sources and see if I can find anything relating to him during Vietnam. Don't have much on Korea, though. Intothat darkness 03:24, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete you'd presume a Major general would be notable, but there aren't enough WP:RS to support that presumption, so fails WP:GNG. Mztourist (talk) 05:38, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Although a major general is *definitely* notable, the lack of WP:RS *does* make it fail WP:GNG. Any hits I can find on Google are either just presumably general listings of war vets, or user-generated content.

Madeline1805 (talk) 23:33, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It should be noted GNG is a general (no pun intended) guideline, not the hard-and-fast ironclad standard a lot of people make it out ot be. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 02:42, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@The Bushranger That's an essay that isn't widely recognized as valid. It's also true and not true. It is true GNG is only one pathway to prove notability. We have WP:SNGs as another recognized pathway which is what that non-policy essay is vaguely pointing to. But there isn't an SNG in this content area so all we are left with is GNG in this case or WP:ANYBIO/WP:BASIC. The subject doesn't meet any of these based on the current evidence. Perhaps there should be a SNG for military people but currently no such policy/guideline exists. We do need to follow a recognized policy/guideline at AFD. Otherwise WP:IAR would have us keep all articles mindlessly. You are making an IAR vote, which is fine, but most of us aren't going to take that argument seriously.4meter4 (talk) 02:51, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm very aware it's only an essay. It's one I happen to agree with. The thing is there used to be a SNG in this content area - WP:SOLDIER (which established "flag officers are always notable"). It was depreciated some time back, as a lot of SNGs have, which is highly unfortunate. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 03:05, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It seems that you are in a minority opinion that has been widely discredited after discussion. The fact that it was deprecated by community WP:CONSENSUS strengthens the argument that WP:GNG is what the community by consensus wants to see and expects to be applied in this context. Citing WP:ONLYESSAY/WP:NOGNG after a formal 2021 WP:RFC (see http://en.wiki.x.io/w/index.php?oldid=1008759107#rfc ) already told us to apply GNG in this context seems ill considered at best, and at worst a WP:DISRUPTSIGNS per criteria 5. You might want to rethink making arguments that have already been formally deprecated by an RFC outcome you are already aware of.4meter4 (talk) 03:38, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

So what? People argue keep based on obituaries all the time even though as far as I know there's no policy stating an obituary is an actual indication of notability. @The Bushranger's opinion is just as valid as yours in this instance. And as always the closer is free to ignore one or both opinions when evaluating this AfD. Intothat darkness 16:11, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think you misread what I stated, and missed the point of this conversation. I have no problem with people making evidence based votes or using obituaries. The issue being addressed had nothing to do with the evaluation of obituaries but the admonition by The Bushranger to Madeline1805 that GNG somehow should be ignored or doesn't apply to this article. That directly contradicts the 2021 RFC decision in this content area which directs us to use GNG at all AFDs on military people. So no, his point is not equally valid. It's flat out against policy from an RFC ruling. Best.4meter4 (talk) 16:27, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'll note that the closure of that RFC was Consensus was reached amongst the participants to deprecate WP:SOLDIER in its current form. Which, IMHO, was unfortunate. I wasn't "admonishing" anyone, just noting that GNG is not the be-all and end-all. I do respect the community's decision, however I have always had, and continue to hold, the personal opinion that flag officers are notable if they pass WP:V. I understand that makes me a minority, but if so, so be it. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 18:18, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't misread what you stated. But I do disagree with your statement that the opinion was "widely discredited after discussion." Most of these discussions involve a handful of people, and aren't any more widely representative than that majority of polls. And I disagree with your contention that his viewpoint isn't valid. And yes, the obituary example is perfectly valid as an example of how something that isn't actually policy is often used in AfD. However, there isn't much in the way of RS dedicated to MG Magarr, which lead me to opt for weak delete. Intothat darkness 21:52, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Delete I checked my books, and I can only find reference to him as an assistant division commander in the early 1970s (after the 2nd Marine Division was out of Vietnam). I don't have as much on Korea, so it's possible he's mentioned in Marine Corps-centric works on that conflict. Still, he seems to have managed to avoid mention with some consistency (which is odd for a major general who commanded a division). Intothat darkness 16:14, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Steven O'Mahoney-Schwartz

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

Relies entirely on primary and non-independent sources. Fails WP:SIGCOV.4meter4 (talk) 03:01, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. 4meter4 (talk) 03:01, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and New York. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:17, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tim Peters (software engineer)

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

While relatively well known in the Python community I'm not finding general reliable sources to establish notability. NE Ent 21:17, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

DELETE No notability for wikipedia, would be enough for pythonpedia thou. Warmonger123 (talk) 22:37, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. Morbidthoughts (talk) 02:48, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Morbidthoughts (talk) 02:51, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Some coverage here: https://www.theregister.com/2024/08/09/core_python_developer_suspended_coc/ ~Darth Stabro^{Talk • Contribs} 03:20, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: The CoC action has also been covered twice in LWN, although you could argue that that's more coverage of the Python community than Peters himself. If consensus is that he doesn't meet GNG, I'd suggest redirect to Timsort. Adam Sampson (talk) 18:43, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note that Peters also appears in stories in at least ten issues of Linux Weekly News in the time from 2014 to 2022, before his Code of Conduct misadventure: 2014, 2015, 2017, July 2018,December 2018, February 2019, August 2019, 2020, February 2022, September 2022. After his suspension he also reappears on 9 December 2024, in a normal, technical Python-news story with only tangential links to his suspension. (There may or may not be other stories which my Google search missed: LWN's own search doesn't seem to work.)

In the old LWN archives reaching up to 23 May 2002 Peters appears five times: 1999, June 2000, August 2000, November 2000, 2001. Around the late '90s and early 2000s, though, LWN mostly leant on the "Dr. Dobb's Python-URL!" email newsletter (Google search inside LWN, partial and partly-broken IA archive), which it would reproduce every week, for its Python coverage so Peters mostly appears there. But one could try to reject the Python-URL as a source as lacking independence, since although it was published by Dr. Dobb's it seems it was (usually?, always?) actually written by a comp.lang.python participant. I wouldn't recommend it in this case though, as it would mean suggesting that maybe Frederik Lundh and others were making up what Tim Peters said.

(LWN also contains lots of primary material, especially since it regularly reproduces a whole mailing-list email as a webpage and links to that. But none of the pages linked here are like that.) RW Dutton (talk) 14:20, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

KEEP If someone has created two things that are notable (Timsort and Zen of Python) it makes sense that that person has notability. Also, without this article, how would anyone know the creators of those two things is the same person? LarsHolmberg (talk) 09:36, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Peters is probably also mainly responsible for SpamBayes (though Gary Robinson shares significant credit).

(Among Python things, he also created the doctest module, which has its own WP page.) RW Dutton (talk) 14:51, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

KEEP. (I confess my interest as the first editor of Tim Peters (software engineer).) I can write more on Peters' notability, but I should respond to others first.

What is meant by "While relatively well known in the Python community I'm not finding general reliable sources to establish notability."? Is the concern that sources like the PSF and the PyPy Team lack independence when it comes to Peters? Or is the suggestion that being one of the most influential Python core developers is not in itself high-impact enough to make one notable? Or that Peters is maybe not really that influential inside Python? In any case, Peters' impact outside of Python is provably high enough to make him notable on its own. RW Dutton (talk) 12:37, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Pustilnik

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

Relies entirely on primary sources. Fails WP:GNG.4meter4 (talk) 02:45, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. 4meter4 (talk) 02:45, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and New York. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:18, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Akin Ogunbiyi

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

Fails the notability guideline for politicians and does not pass WP:GNG or WP:BASIC. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 02:37, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Businesspeople, Politicians, and Nigeria. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 02:37, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete A lack of reliable online sources to establish him as a notable businessman and simply a candidate for a position.Southati (talk) 07:54, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete all sources either barely mention him or fail WP:NEWSORGNIGERIA. 🄻 🄰 13:15, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. As always, people do not get Wikipedia articles just for standing as candidates in elections they didn't win — the notability test at WP:NPOL is holding a notable office, not just running for one — but this article neither establishes that he had preexisting notability for other reasons independent of a candidacy, nor demonstrates a credible reason to treat his candidacy as more special than other candidacies. Bearcat (talk) 17:58, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Fails WP:NPOL Ibjaja055 (talk) 19:37, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: No valid secondary sources to prove notability for WP:POLITICIAN. Mamani1990 (talk) 22:02, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: The subject fails WP:NPOL. Idoghor Melody (talk) 10:10, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Joseph Rodriguez (photographer)

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

Fails WP:SIGCOV. The New York magazine piece is a great feature of his photographs but there isn't much prose about the subject accompanying the photos. The other source is the subject's website. There's not enough indepth coverage here to justify an article.4meter4 (talk) 01:29, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Journalism, Photography, and New York. Shellwood (talk) 02:20, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Edd Gould

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

I've been pondering on nominating this for AfD, and I've finally come to the conclusion that this article is not eligible for standalone notability and should either be deleted or merged into Eddsworld (if that article is even notable at this point with such sketchy sourcing). A WP:BEFORE search brings up obituary-style sources and passing mentions in articles. 💽 LunaEclipse 💽 🌹 ⚧ ^{(CALL ME IF YOU GET LOST)} 01:13, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Artists, Europe, and United Kingdom. 💽 LunaEclipse 💽 🌹 ⚧ ^{(CALL ME IF YOU GET LOST)} 01:14, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Internet. 💽 LunaEclipse 💽 🌹 ⚧ ^{(CALL ME IF YOU GET LOST)} 01:31, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletion discussions. 💽 LunaEclipse 💽 🌹 ⚧ ^{(CALL ME IF YOU GET LOST)} 01:42, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: while i agree Eddsworld isn't sourced properly (and that it probably is impossible to source well given the mainstream media snobness about early-2000s internet culture), this article in particular seems pretty well sourced to me. That his notability mostly comes from the continuation of his work by Ridgewell (ie he became notable mostly posthumously) is irrelevant because he is notable. I think EddsWorld should be merged into etiher TomSka or this article, but that's not the subject.

Themoonisacheese (talk) 09:29, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There aren't very many in-depth sources (including in the article) but I think there are just enough to support a short article on Gould or Eddsworld. However, most of the coverage is overlapping between Gould and Eddsworld and I don't think there is enough to justify articles on both of them so I would support a merge to Eddsworld (or vice versa). Shapeyness (talk) 15:45, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Eddsworld and Edd Gould have alot of disconnected stuff from eachother, and do have their own histories, alot of content involving the show and it's creator reference these articles, so they are definitely in use.

They should'nt be deleted or merged Charliephere (talk) 19:32, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

David Dimitri

AfDs for this article:

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

Dubious notablity. The previous Afd claimed "good sources" which were subsequently refbombed to the article. I reviewed them (and some others) and see nothing but short blurbs in run-off-the-mill reviews of some circus performances and no significant coverage of the person in depth. --Altenmann >talk 23:17, 9 January 2025 (UTC) [reply]

Full quotes from sources cited, for your convenience

One-Ring Circus That Breathes Fellini

Of varying length, they involve the men and women of Les Colporteurs, notably David Dimitri with some nimble, acrobatic tightrope work, in feats of balance, swinging and twirling on ropes, being manipulated like a marionette, flying on a trapeze, clowning and juggling.

The Two-Ring Circus

During celebratory cocktails, they turned their gaze to the Zurich-based tightrope walker David Dimitri (son of the Swiss national treasure Dimitri the Clown) as he traversed a nearly invisible wire a perilous 20 feet above the backyard pond.

Daffiness and Daring In Every Last Ring

Among the daredevils are David Dimitri, the Big Apple's Juilliard-trained Lord of the Wire, who dances to Celtic strains and skips rope on the high wire;

THE FEEL OF A ONE-RING CIRCUS NYT Nov. 22, 1985

Stylistic sympathy notwithstanding, Dimitri had another reason for performing with the Big Apple this year: his 22-year-old son, David, is a member of the troupe. David Dimitri has been performing with circuses since he was 7 years old, when his partner was a llama. Now in his fourth season with the Big Apple Circus, he is thrilled to be on the same bill with his father - but as a name in his own right. I grew up with this image of my dad being very well known in Europe, David Dimitri says. It makes me very happy to be a known, solo performer here, but in the same show with him. It's my own achievement.

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Entertainment, and Switzerland. Shellwood (talk) 00:01, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep. I don't know a lot about this kind of thing, but there are a lot of hits on Swiss newspaper archives [53] [54] [55] [56] [57] [58] [59] [60] [61] [62] [63] [64] some more significant than others. A few look pretty OK, but some are reviews of his performances. If not notable, ATD merge to his father, Dimitri (clown), who is notable. There are more but searching Scriptorium is a nightmare. PARAKANYAA (talk) 23:41, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Yes, there are plenty of hits, because he did plenty of performances. But we need in-depth coverage and the article was not at all improved since its first nomination, hence it exhausted its "presumption of notability" and must go. --Altenmann >talk 23:49, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  Well if the sourcing isn't good enough that's one thing but as far as I'm aware there isn't a set number of AfDs that make WP:NEXIST not apply. There are a lot of listings but there are some sources that seem to be sigcov on the man. So I am unsure. PARAKANYAA (talk) 00:09, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sal Villanueva

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

Subject is only mentioned in passing in the one source. Could find no sources with WP:SIGCOV. Fails WP:ANYBIO/ WP:GNG.4meter4 (talk) 20:39, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. 4meter4 (talk) 20:39, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 21:40, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:29, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: there is evidence that he produced a certified gold album, Tell All Your Friends. Bearian (talk) 23:44, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Daniel Whyte III

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

Sources only mention the subject in passing. Fails WP:SIGCOV. 4meter4 (talk) 19:45, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. 4meter4 (talk) 19:45, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Christianity, New York, and North Carolina. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:06, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. No reliable sources come up in Google News or Google Books; fails WP:NBIO. Notability aside, the whole article is promotional to the point of not being worth keeping. --Richard Yin (talk) 20:08, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - I went through page after page of Google, and found nothing reliable. Bearian (talk) 00:13, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Xenia Sackville, Lady Buckhurst

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

I tagged this biography of a jewellery designer with notability concerns earlier this month; now having carried out WP:BEFORE, I'm not seeing significant coverage of her in reliable sources. Most coverage is tabloid, such as this in the Daily Mail, or passing mentions in the context of her father or husband - see WP:NOTINHERITED. Note that she is mentioned variously as Xenia Sackville, Buckhurst or Tolstoy, or as Lady Buckhurst. I don't think she meets WP:GNG or WP:ANYBIO, and I can't see that there are specific categories of biographical notability she would fit into, except perhaps WP:NARTIST for her jewellery design. Tacyarg (talk) 13:52, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, United Kingdom, and England. Tacyarg (talk) 13:52, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Tacyarg (talk) 14:02, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Royalty and nobility-related deletion discussions. Willthacheerleader18 (talk) 14:57, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Artists-related deletion discussions. Tacyarg (talk) 18:03, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

List of people from Cumbria

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

Only links to two pages which only cover one town and one city in the whole county. This is unnecessary and the same information is widely available in categories. Thirdman (talk) 02:19, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and England. Heart ^(talk) 05:20, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists of people-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:27, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Its outdated as there are now only 2 districts. If kept I will update. Crouch, Swale (talk) 23:37, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ann Pennington (model)

AfDs for this article:

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

Doesn't pass GNG - apart from one puff article seems only to have inherited notability for marriage to Shaun Cassidy Golikom (talk) 05:17, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, and Women. Heart ^(talk) 05:19, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, Sexuality and gender, and Washington. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:25, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tengku Baharuddin

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

I do not see that this younger son of a Malay sultan passes WP:GNG or WP:NBIO. He does not hold any office that would be presumptively notable, and I don't see any WP:SIGCOV in independent, reliable sources (in the article or in my WP:BEFORE search) that would pass the general notability guideline. Dclemens1971 (talk) 03:31, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Royalty and nobility, and Malaysia. Dclemens1971 (talk) 03:31, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Imakuni?

AfDs for this article:

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

Very few sources exist actually covering this guy. The article's in a weird spot where he's technically a mascot/fictional character yet also a real person. Coverage on him is sparse regardless. In English there's very little on him in Books, News, and Scholar in the way of SIGCOV, and even in Japanese it's primarily just announcements of collaborations or promotional articles and the like. The current article is primarily subsisting on trivial mentions and primary sources, with little in the way of actual notability. A potential AtD could potentially be a merge to List of Pokémon characters, but I'm admittedly unsure given his unique status. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 01:31, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Fictional elements, and Video games. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 01:31, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Anime and manga, Advertising, and Japan. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:35, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect and/or merge to said list. He seems to be extremely niche and GNG-failing, based on the sources present. Heavy case of WP:FANCRUFT. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 03:01, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect per Piotrus. Fails the WP:GNG. Shooterwalker (talk) 19:01, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Husam Zaman

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

This person does not meet WP:ACADEMIC, for being a university president! Sabirkir (talk) 19:38, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Academics and educators, and Saudi Arabia. Sabirkir (talk) 19:38, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Less than 200 cites in GS fails WP:Prof#C1. Xxanthippe (talk) 21:45, 8 January 2025 (UTC).[reply]
Weak keep. There has been some recent talk about college presidents being notable if they pass WP:SIGCOV, even if they're not notable as scholars. Can we get some consensus? Bearian (talk) 03:51, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Of course they can be notable if they pass some other criterion, but it has to be shown that they do. I do not see it here. Xxanthippe (talk) 04:05, 11 January 2025 (UTC).[reply]

Keep It would be better for creator to introduce the subject as the ″university president″, not just an ″academic″. The subject seems to satisfy WP:NPROF#C6 based on serving as a president or chairman of universities. I believe the stated reason for nomination is inaccurate: This person does not meet WP:ACADEMIC, for being a university president!. WP:NPROF#C6 specifically addresses this matter. Additionally, his role as president of a governmental organization (ETEC) in field of education could be considered him as a politician. Also, the article mentions local/national awards received by the subject, and other Arabic sources may be consulted to pass other criterion for notability. Gedaali (talk) 14:06, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. According to https://seu.edu.sa/gs/en/admission/, the Saudi Electronic University offers bachelors and masters degrees only, and therefore cannot be construed as satisfying C6 of WP:NPROF. Taif University might qualify at first glance but the cited sources list him as a "Director" and the Wikipedia page says that the highest level official is "President." Being an appointed member of an evaluation board does not connect to any of the WP:NPROF criteria. I cannot tell from the citations for the awards whether they are notable enough for WP:NPROF; if I became convinced of that I could change my recommendation to "Keep" but right now all I see is a page about a career administrator. Qflib (talk) 23:05, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Patrick Smith (Vicar of Great Paxton)

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

No evidence this individual passes WP:NBIO, WP:GNG. No pass on WP:NAUTHOR either; there's a published response to Smith's polemic on Quakerism but nothing else verifiable. (The Bockett letter does not appear to have been published and thus would not count as a review.) Dclemens1971 (talk) 18:16, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Authors, Christianity, and England. Dclemens1971 (talk) 18:16, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Again not finding anything about him except for a short blurb of the same book you mentioned on the Quaker archives of Canada. ❤History Theorist❤ 00:48, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There some book reviews, but they are all polemics for one side or the other. FWIW, I am an Episcopalian. Can we get input from folks who know more about Quaker history? Bearian (talk) 04:02, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Kevin Carson

AfDs for this article:

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

There have already been two deletion discussions about this article in the past, so I was initially hesitant to open this. However, since the last discussion in 2015, the article collapsed from a long-winded ramble about various concepts the subject discussed (cited largely to the subject himself or other self-published sources)[65] into what is now a stub.

I tried looking around for more sources to expand it, but I found little-to-no actual information about Carson as a person. What I did find were largely reviews and analyses of his main major work "Studies in Mutualist Economics", with only passing references to his other works without any real detail.

From what I've seen, there is very little to write about for a biographical article about the subject himself, so I think this might not pass the notability guidelines for people. I do think his work "Studies in Mutualist Economics" has received enough attention for its own article (per the notability guidelines on books), but this might be another case where an author is not independently notable of their single notable work. Grnrchst (talk) 15:01, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Politics, Economics, and United States of America. Grnrchst (talk) 15:01, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I simply do not see secondary coverage about him in a before search, and the keep rationales made in previous discussions don't actually convince me he's otherwise notable. SportingFlyer T·C 16:26, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors and Libertarianism. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:29, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Per nom. Yue🌙 09:18, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Where has "Studies in Mutualist Economics" received significant reviews/discussion? If there was enough reliable sourcing for a dedicated article then it would make a good redirect target, but I don't see the reviews. czar 12:27, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Mutualism (economic theory)#Contemporary developments where Carson's work is mentioned and his name is a relevant search term. If that article didn't mention Wilbur's paragraph on Carson I was going to recommend adding it. Carson is associated with the contemporary mutualist tradition so even if there isn't enough coverage for a dedicated biography, the section on contemporary mutualism should suffice. czar 12:43, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Courtesy ping @Grnrchst, SportingFlyer, and Yue czar 02:57, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Mutualism (economic theory)#Contemporary developments. The above comments by Czar have convinced me that this would be a sensible and plausible move. A. Randomdude0000 (talk) 21:11, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Per nomination and comments. Easy call. Go4thProsper (talk) 00:00, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Aria (Indian singer)

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

Failed WP:GNG, WP:SINGER, WP:BANDMEMBER with no WP:SIGCOV for individual notability other than passing mentions from X:IN-related reportings including but not limited to her "about"-type reporting as part of X:IN's debut-related promotional reportings from WP:BEFORE. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 14:00, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Bands and musicians, Music, South Korea, and India. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 14:00, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Kerala, and Maharashtra. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:31, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I think she doesn't meet WP:NACTOR or WP:NSINGER. Unable to meet roles in three featured films. Unable to see her work in any National Music chart. Bakhtar40 (talk) 09:25, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - there are several articles that establish notability as they are indepth: 1, 2, 3 and others.Darkm777 (talk) 20:27, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The only potential would be the first reference. The second clearly states that it was authored by a third party (no editorial oversight) and the third has no byline and is routine churnalism that falls under WP:NEWSORGINDIA.--CNMall41 (talk) 22:32, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I get your argument with the 3rd party content. I had not seen that. However, is there an specific guideline you refer to that says having no bylines means that they are not reliable? If so, please post the link here. Darkm777 (talk) 02:42, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Also there are several more articles

There are more in Google. Just search her under "aria from kerala." She is notable. Darkm777 (talk) 02:55, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

X:IN debuted on 11 April 2023 and the 8 sources are published in the same week of X:IN's debut that Aria is part of hence I'm not sure how exactly it's different from my rationale that "[she] lacks individual notability other than passing mentions from X:IN-related reportings including but not limited to her "about"-type reporting as part of X:IN's debut-related promotional reportings". — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 14:31, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

So are you saying that if someone is in the news 8 times in one week, then it must be some kind of PR or paid placement? I do not agree with this assessment. To me it appears that she joined a k-pop band that was popular so it became a big news story and many publications wrote about it. Darkm777 (talk) 03:13, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to X:IN.--CNMall41 (talk) 22:34, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tom Varner

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

Fails WP:MUSICBIO. - UtherSRG (talk) 12:51, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Bands and musicians. UtherSRG (talk) 12:51, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New Jersey-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 13:25, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Has a few sources [66], [67], what appears as an album review [68]. Article needs work, it only has two interviews now. Oaktree b (talk) 14:22, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep in addition to the arguments for retention made by Oaktree b, I've added sources such as this source from The Star-Ledger in New Jersey and this one from The Seattle Times on the West Coast. Both of these are examples of the in-depth coverage in reliable and verifiable sources that are available in the press that are unequivocally about him and his accomplishments. The three-word assertion for deletion made by the nominator that the article "Fails WP:MUSICBIO" seems to have been made without having done the most basic effort to search for sourcing as specified by WP:BEFORE. The general notability guideline is clearly met based on his biography as a musician, his work and the ample reliable and verifiable sources that support that claim of notability. Alansohn (talk) 17:57, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as well as the above mentioned reliable sources coverage he has a number of staff written album reviews at AllMusic such as here, here, here, here and here as well as a short bio here, passes WP:GNG imv Atlantic306 (talk) 22:41, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Before nominating for deletion a musical artist or band, always check the charts and AllMusic, which are not always indexed by search engines. Bearian (talk) 04:31, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Meets appropriate criteria. Go4thProsper (talk) 00:01, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Meets WP:GNG. Gedaali (talk) 21:30, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Weidner Communications

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

This article is confusing. Is it about a marketing company, a machine translation software, or the brothers (who have last names spelled differently)? 🄻 🄰 11:13, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Businesspeople, Language, Companies, Technology, and Software. 🄻 🄰 11:13, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:47, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@लॉस एंजिल्स लेखक: I can't identify a deletion rationale in your nomination statement. Could you please provide one, else this nomination should be closed under WP:CSK#1. This appears to be a reasonably sourced article on a company, the machine translation software it produced, and its founders, which appear to be a reasonable set of topics to cover together. ~ A412 ^talk! 16:55, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy keep per WP:CSK#1 (nom has been editing, but has not provided any deletion rationale). ~ A412 ^talk! 18:13, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I wanted to open a discussion on this article because I don't think the company is notable, everything I can find about "Weidner Communications" seems to point back to this article. Note also the varying spelling of Weidner and Wydner.

In the entire article, this is the portion about the company called "Weidner Communications":

"During the mid-1980s Weidner Communications, Inc., (WCC), was the largest translation company by sales volume in the United States. (Margaret M. Perscheid, 1985) Later the Japanese sold Wydner's technology to Intergraph Corporation of Alabama who later sold it to Transparent Language, Inc. of New Hampshire. Bruce Wydner, the principal agent for the Inns of the Temple Inc., that retained the research and development rights to the Weidner Multi-lingual Word Processor, separated himself from his brother in early 1979 and no longer supplied any updated software developments. Weidner had offended his brother over a matter of having Eyring Research Institute send their bi-lingual employee to remove Wydners intellectual property from his home, of which Wydner claims was stolen from him."

Everything else is about the software which mentions "Translation Associates" "Bravis International" "Eyring Research Institute" "Transparent Language, Inc." "Intergraph Corporation of Alabama" as all owning it.

My rationale is that the article as it is currently written does not seem to be primarily about "Weidner Communications" and Weidner Communications itself seems to be a non-notable company that was one of 6+ to have something to do with the software. 🄻 🄰 13:58, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Eric R. Gilbertson

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

This is essentially a resume. The person doesn't appear to pass general notability guidelines. A re-direct to the school is possible, but I question if having a redirect to a small school for every one of their past president is necessary. Graywalls (talk) 14:32, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I am also nominating the following for the same reason:

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Academics and educators, Businesspeople, and Michigan. Graywalls (talk) 14:32, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I can only find articles about his retirement and public speaking events after that, nothing really showing notability. Primary sourcing is used in the article now, so that's not helping. Oaktree b (talk) 15:07, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep (of ERG article): It seems to me that the central question is whether C6 of WP:NPROF is met by ERG due to their having served as the president of Saginaw Valley State University and of Johnson State College (now part of Vermont State University). Since the former school offers a significant number of master's degrees and three doctorates (DNP; see https://www.svsu.edu/graduateprograms/), it seems to me that that the answer is yes. I qualify this as a weak keep because this is not an R1 university and does not appear to be historically significant. I do agree that WP:GNG is not met, and if the page is to remain it needs significant editing so as to not present as a resume. I see no way for this particular subject to satisfy the other criteria of WP:NPROF. The other page (about JMR) should be considered on its own merits; I am unsure whether we are supposed to be discussing both of them here. Qflib (talk) 19:36, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Qflib What academic accomplishments and citations does he have? that would qualify under NPROF? My position is that he doesn't qualify under "a significant accredited college or university, director of a highly regarded, notable academic independent research institute or center (which is not a part of a university), president of a notable national or international scholarly society, etc." I believe "significance" or "highly regarded" of this school is subjective and in mine, it's not. Graywalls (talk) 21:02, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Only one of the 6 criteria of NPROF need to be met in order to establish notability; please read it carefully. I specifically pointed out that I was referring only to C6 of NPROF, so academic citations are immaterial. I also specifically pointed out that "I see no way for this particular subject to satisfy the other criteria of WP:NPROF." I stand by my weak keep recommendation; if other senior editors come on here and convince me otherwise, I am open to input. Qflib (talk) 22:19, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep. I buy the WP:NPROF C6 rationale, as president of a mid-sized college/university. I additionally note that I found several local newspaper sources: [69][70][71]. He was involved in a minor scandal regarding a football hazing incident [72][73]. It's weak for a GNG case, but it helps support the NPROF case. Russ Woodroofe (talk) 21:21, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep of both. Even if not technically passing the PROF test, the presidents of medium size state colleges probably will get significant coverage in their state's media. Bearian (talk) 16:06, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Given the repeated use of the word weak, consensus looks like keep but also looks weak so far.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 19:59, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Still a !delete for me, not passing PROF, the rest doesn't help. Oaktree b (talk) 20:24, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Josh Brar

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

Unable to satisfy WP:GNG. Lack of significant coverage. B-Factor (talk) 14:52, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Entertainment, and India. B-Factor (talk) 14:52, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 15:21, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Non-notable singer, going viral isn't the level of notability we need. [74] is an interview. Source 3 in the article is a list of many people, not mostly about this person. I don't see enough for notability at this time. Oaktree b (talk) 23:14, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
going viral is a context, hitting the charts across multiple countries is notability as defined by the notability guidenlines for Wikipedia Music pages. Wikpedia Music Guidelines notability also defines the release by a major record label as the current case is. There are more sources added by other users as well. G4gurpreet (talk) 09:27, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It doesn't guarantee notability, it's a sign the person could be notable. The Spotify charts aren't ones we use for notability and there is no other sourcing for any sort of charting... We can't use any of these. Oaktree b (talk) 21:29, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I found a source from The Times of India, but I'm not sure if it helps. Aona1212 (talk) 13:35, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 16:38, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Traveen Mathew

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

Non-notable cricketer, who fails WP:GNG. Has only played in T10 cricket, not any FC, List A or T20 competition which can often help increase significant coverage. This article was moved to draftspace and then moved back despite minimal insufficient improvements, which is why this AFD is necessary. Joseph2302 (talk) 16:45, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Sportspeople, Cricket, and Sri Lanka. Joseph2302 (talk) 16:45, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep He has played two First Class matches, 12 List A matches and four T20 matches. He also represented Sri Lanka at the Under-19s Asian Cup. I have added more information and sources including two from The Papare which focus heavily on him. Lookslikely (Talk 18:43, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
i have added further information and another reference which features him as the main focus and in the article title. From my reading of the GNG rules this addition, along with the ones I previously made and are mentioned above, mean this article definitely passes the required SIG COV specification. Lookslikely (talk) 02:35, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the improvements, but I'm still not convinced he is notable, so I wish to continue this AFD to get consensus. Of the sources, [75], [76] are passing mentions in tournament squad lists, [77] is one paragraph of basic stats, [78] is from SLC so not independent coverage (and so does not contribute to WP:GNG, [79] is a match report with a bit of basic information about him. Joseph2302 (talk) 09:20, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Ok. I tried. Lookslikely (talk) 18:45, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 17:52, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: This is an encyclopedia and not a profile page where anybody can get to feature himself without any major achievements. The subject clearly fails GNG, yet the original editor is still trying to defend. Lookslikely, if you're paid to edit, kindly disclose conflict of interest. To the closing admin, this articles fails all criteria. Cameremote (talk) I came from a remote place 01:27, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Cameremote, your comment makes me wonder if you even examined this article. If you looked at the page history, you'd quickly see that that the article creator is Janeesh 22, not Lookslikely. Secondly, do not cast aspersions, like accusing an editor of working for pay while undeclosed, you better have evidence to support those accusations or you could be facing a block yourself. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:49, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Reply to above: I am not the original editor of this page. I just saw it on this list, Googled the guy and added some stuff to his page. I am not paid to edit on Wikipedia and couldn't give two hoots if it's deleted or not. Oh and before accusing people of things, at least have the courage to sign your username (Cameremote) chum. Lookslikely (talk) 01:12, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Out of boredom, I’m willing to save this page out of boredom if it has enough sources. Reader of Information (talk) 01:33, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I will start working on it tomorrow if this is okay with y’all because honestly, it’s getting late lol. Reader of Information (talk) 01:38, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Once again, clearly fails the notability criteria. And thanks for bringing to my attention the signing issue, I'm using mobile, and I assume it auto signs. Thanks for that. I say again, please disclose COI if you're directly or indirectly associated to the subject, because the way you're defending an article that fails GNG is alarming. Cameremote (talk) I came from a remote place

As I said, Cameremote, either provide proof of your allegations or stop making them. There is nothing inherently COI about defending an article from being deleted. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:52, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm just trying to point out to the editor that the way he's defending the article is somehow. He should purely suggest that the article be moved back to draft, for further improvement rather than over-defending an article. Note: I'm not alleging anyone, and if there's any offense taken, my absolute apolgies. Cameremote (talk) I came from a remote place 01:59, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: The person in the article is clearly notable. Whether it passes WP:GNG or not is not really determinable as there is one source that is independent but I’m unsure if that suffices as it passing GNG. Although, it seems the sources are of Sri Lanka or newspapers mainly focused on cricket, the exception is Daily News.

Furthermore, I think it can he concluded that this crickteer is of presumed notability as he has been documented in multiple sources that range from 4 years ago to the most recent being a month ago.

In conclusion, I could see this article being of notability even if it’s a stub.

If the consensus is overwhelmingly delete, then I’d recommend it go back to the draft so it can be improved rather than delete because the information there is clearly of use and not useless.

Cheers,
Reader of Information (talk) 17:52, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tabish Khan (art critic)

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

Biography of an art critic that fails WP:GNG, WP:NBIO. Sources in article are limited to WP:PRIMARYSOURCE WP:INTERVIEWS, WP:TRIVIALMENTIONS in media coverage of other topics, primary source bios and other non-independent sources. WP:BEFORE search turns up lots of his own writing but no independent WP:SIGCOV to establish notability. Dclemens1971 (talk) 03:15, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Authors, Visual arts, and England. Dclemens1971 (talk) 03:15, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - the writer is known within the contemporary art scene in the UK and is currently active suggesting there may be more additions to the page in future. While I agree that searching for the author turns up lots of his own writing, a look at other art critics, writers and journalists with Wikipedia entries returns similar results. In terms of independent coverage, this article does include links to notable outlets that have sought his views on art stories and artworks. Suggestions for improvement rather than deletion may be a better course of action. Londoneditor284 (talk) 21:36, 3 January 2025 (UTC) — Londoneditor284 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
Keep these are good points. It would be a diservice to Wikipedia if well-known critics were expunged Likeabutterfly (talk) 21:45, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - although this person is mostly only known within the contemporary British art scene, they have contributed numerous articles, interviews, and features in multiple outlets and have been quoted in many sources (as can be seen from the citations). They are clearly significant enough within their own field to warrant keeping this article. Any suggestions to improve the article would be welcome. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.45.218.212 (talk) 12:53, 3 January 2025 (UTC) — 80.45.218.212 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
WP:SOCKSTRIKE. Izno (talk) 22:07, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Quotations in sources are not enough to demonstrate notability (except in a limited case for certain academics), and authoring articles isn't either. What SIGCOV in independent, reliable sources can you offer? Dclemens1971 (talk) 13:40, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Let me do some digging and get back to you. The nature of the subject (someone who writes about other people's artwork for a living) makes it difficult by definition to have many SIGCOV sources. I feel this should be taken into account? 80.45.218.212 (talk) 16:41, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If you feel this way, that's a great discussion topic for WP:VILLAGEPUMP, not for a discussion where we can't change policy. Dclemens1971 (talk) 17:19, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
~~Keep~~ Could Dclemens1971 help in finding any better sources for this person/article? I've looked at pages for other critics too but can't seem to see how they fit the criteria if we are super-strict with SIGCOV Likeabutterfly (talk) 21:46, 3 January 2025 (UTC) (striking duplicate vote. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:30, 10 January 2025 (UTC))[reply]
Please strike your second !vote; editors are only allowed one !vote in an AfD. Dclemens1971 (talk) 21:47, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, the entire point of the WP:BEFORE search (which I did) was to find qualifying sources, and I didn't find them. Dclemens1971 (talk) 21:49, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
"[A] search turns up lots of his own writing but no independent [sources]" - isn't this exactly what we should expect though? Likeabutterfly (talk) 21:55, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It's what we should expect from a person who's not notable, I suppose. And as already mentioned, please strike through your duplicative !vote. Dclemens1971 (talk) 02:16, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: As per the nomination. Taabii (talk) 10:30, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting this AFD discussion. Since there are several strong Keep arguments, I'm giving this discussion a little more time for supporters to locate RS that provide SIGCOV. If nothing appears, then I assume this article will be headed towards deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:32, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like more references have been added linking to interviews on BBC Radio London, a 'talking head' spot on a BBC documentary, and a reference from the Royal Academy of Arts. I think this person is notable enough for Wikipedia. I will find more references too. Likeabutterfly (talk) 22:25, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please remember: interviews are primary sources and mentions are not WP:SIGCOV to meet the applicable guidelines. Dclemens1971 (talk) 22:38, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I've been adding some more references and a good point was raised about WP:SIGCOV so I've looked at other notable UK based art critics - Jonathan Jones, Adrian Searle, Alastair Sooke, Mark Hudson and Waldemar Janusczak are the ones I could find who have Wikipedia entries. In all of the above I found they are all heavily reliant on WP:PRIMARYSOURCE. It's unclear to me how a practising art critic, or more broadly a journalist, can be eligible for a Wikipedia entry without heavily relying on WP:PRIMARYSOURCE? I did try to find whether this has been discussed on forums elsewhere within Wikipedia but I wasn't able to. I appreciate I'm relatively new here so happy to be directed to a relevant discussion if it's already been had. Londoneditor284 (talk) 17:01, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

One relevant discussion is WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS; we don't base arguments at AfD on the existence of other potentially policy-violating pages that haven't been nominated yet. Dclemens1971 (talk) 17:11, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for sharing that helpful discussion and I agree we shouldn't base arguments at AfD on the existence of other potentially policy-violating pages that haven't been nominated yet. However, the critics in my last comment are among the most notable art critics in the UK and if the bar for WP:SIGCOV is set so high that no UK-based art critic would be eligible for a Wikipedia entry then that would appear excessive given the UK has a significant art scene and critics play an important part in it. Londoneditor284 (talk) 09:07, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Anne Sofie Madsen

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

Borderline notability, subject requests deletion,Ticket:2024091410007147. CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 00:44, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Fashion. CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 00:44, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Do you have any details on the VRT request, CaptainEek? Any reason for why they would be against the article? Since nothing in it seems negative. And I would not call her borderline notable, since she's one of the biggest names in fashion. It's just that the coverage of her is almost entirely not in English. But outside of most every fashion magazine in the world covering her, she also receives mainstream coverage from newspapers of record. For example:

So I'd really like some more information on this one before making a decision. Because I'm currently leaning toward too notable and well known for WP:BLPREQUESTDELETE to matter. Silver seren^C 01:03, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Silver seren The issue seems to be one of inaccuracy and the sources being out of date; most of them are over a decade old. I made a few corrections to the article, but her overall concern is that the article is now so out of date with her resume that potential employers google her and think her CV is fake because her more recent achievements are not on her Wikipedia. I think this is a problem we often encounter with BLP's: their article is frozen in time at a point when they had coverage, and doesn't reflect who they are now, but there isn't enough new coverage to update with. A problem that grows as Wikipedia reaches the 25 year mark. CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 01:09, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That seems like an argument for expansion, not for deletion. Unless we're going to be deleting a ton of articles for being out of date. There's sources available. There's this from Vogue on her Tokyo 2017 collection. There's this from Women's Wear Daily on her Paris 2018 collection. There's this from Woman.dk and this from Fashion Forum about her 2021 collection collaboration with Lulu Kaalund. I got all that from just a quick Google search without even knowing anything about how to search for Danish, French, or Japanese sources. Silver seren^C 01:33, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm the VRT agent for that ticket, and CaptainEek's characterization is correct. She has provided only vague objections about things being incorrect, nothing specific. I have asked her to use WP:Edit Request Wizard to identify specific things to fix on the talk page, but she seems to want a VRT agent to do the research and fix things for her. The creator of the article even invites people to contact her directly and includes her email on her user page, but the article subject has not engaged with her. Yes, the subject of the article wants it deleted because she isn't famous, but the sources already cited suggest she's clearly notable, which isn't the same thing as fame. ~Anachronist (talk) 02:08, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

So the argument on her end is more of the "not a celebrity level fame", rather than the "rather well known designer in a field level fame" that she actually is, it seems. I still think this is fully fixable in the article, though it would definitely be helpful if she was willing to work with us on that. Since I'm sure she's more personally aware of the fashion news sources covering her more recent work than any of us are. Silver seren^C 02:36, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Women, and Denmark. Shellwood (talk) 01:03, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Artists-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:07, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I have received an email from the subject and have asked for further details. At this stage, I am not sure if she would prefer deletion or correction.--Ipigott (talk) 09:10, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Deletion would be an option if she was borderline notable or the article was a hit job, but neither case applies here. The notability seems pretty clear, and the article isn't negative either. If an article about a notable subject is deleted, someone else will eventually come along and write another article. Improvement is really the best past forward. ~Anachronist (talk) 01:59, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: She is a notable fashion designer and has coverage in reliable sources such as Vogue. Moopaz (talk) 23:01, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Fashion deigner covered by Vogue and other sources listed above. I added the "Update" template to the top of the article, saying "Please help update this article to reflect recent events ..." So, if "potential employers google her" and find this article, they will be greeted with a note making clear the article does not reflect recent events. I hope that helps. Asparagusstar (talk) 03:27, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: before I would go along with a keep, I would like to see the sources found incorporated into this article. This is my personal opinion, and I've raised it before in other AfDs. Bearian (talk) 04:09, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I'd like to hear from more editors and if you have found sources, please mention them here.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:23, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: I had a very quick look on The Guardian newspaper website and found two places where she's named alongside far more famous designers. I've added them to the article. She's mentioned in a textbook, admittedly only a photo of an example of her work, but the author must have considered her worth including – Udale, J. (2023). Textiles and fashion : from fabric construction to surface treatments (Third ed.). Bloomsbury Visual Arts. --Northernhenge (talk) 14:47, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It seams to be another person. 87.49.43.175 (talk) 21:56, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It's 2 photos and an interview, over 2 pages. It seems to be the Anne Sofie Madsen that this article is about, with the same education, work experience and brand name. RebeccaGreen (talk) 13:30, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Strong delete: I have been in touch with the subject by email. She has made a very strong plea for the article to be deleted as although the details are based on reliable sources, some of them are incorrect. She does not have the time or experience to look for sources which paint a more correct picture of her life. As the article is having a negative effect on her current aspirations, she deserves to have it deleted.--Ipigott (talk) 08:38, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep As Anachronist said, she is notable and the article is neither negative nor gushing. If this article is deleted, someone will create another one. I don't understand how a few details in this article could be "having a negative effect on her current aspirations" - surely she has a portfolio to show potential employers? Yes, the article doesn't cover anything in the last 7 years, and not much for the last 10 years, but Wikipedia articles are not meant to be CVs. Hopefully the "Update" template added by Asparagusstar will help potential employers understand that just because the article doesn't cover the last 7-10 years doesn't mean she achieved nothing in that time. RebeccaGreen (talk) 13:48, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Almost everything in the article is incorrect. The Universities do not exist. She graduated with an MA from The Royal Danish Academy of fine arts. Look at the schools website. But 3 other schools are mentioned. It looks like they do not exist. The Sources are wrongly quoted and most of the quotes dosen't even match with the article mentioned. 87.49.43.175 (talk) 21:55, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The magazine sources used in the article do seem to match the summarized information. Did you read them? Are you arguing that the magazines printed incorrect information? Silver seren^C 22:07, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There is so many mistakes. In 2007 she is living in Paris - says one line. But in the following she is living in London in 2007.

And yes I checked the articles. Some of the quotes is no where to be found in the article referred to.

The schools mentioned does not match with any schools. But in the article #5 it is mentioned she graduated from the Royal Danish Academy of Fine Arts with an MA. This is actually the only school that really exists. 87.49.43.175 (talk) 22:23, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

So, this source used in the article states:

Over the years, Anne Sofie Madsen has created illustrations for both magazines and children's and young adult books, and as recently as 2005 she was a visiting student on the animation program at the Film School.

Along with:

She started at the School of Design in 2002 and was able to earn her bachelor's degree in clothing three years later.

“When I applied to the School of Design, I couldn't even use a sewing machine. I thought they looked a bit dangerous. and was surprised by how much sewing technique my classmates knew compared to me,” she says.

Therefore, the sources do cover the schools mentioned in the articles in addition to the MA at the Royal Danish Academy. Silver seren^C 22:27, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, the timeline thing does appear to be a source error though, just by virtue of one mis-placed word. The source reads:

The designer really gained a deeper understanding of the craft when she moved to Paris in 2006 to do an internship. Anne Sofie Madsen spent the first few months at the trend research agency Peclers, which publishes trend books every year with colors and materials that will shape fashion in the years to come.

The aspiring fashion designer acquired strong research skills at Peclers before switching to an internship at John Galliano – one of Anne Sofie Madsen’s great fashion heroes – in the winter of 2007. She stayed there until May of that year, when she returned to Denmark to complete her master’s degree at the Danish School of Design.

I presume it meant May of 2008, the following year. Since that makes much more sense. Silver seren^C 22:30, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have edited the text, and added another source. I have avoided specific dates and said "Before finishing her master's degree, Madsen was offered a job as a junior designer with the London-based designer Alexander McQueen. She spent a year in London, then returned to Denmark. She graduated from the Royal Danish Academy of Fine Arts with a master's degree in 2009." Perhaps that will avoid inaccuracies but still reflect the info in the sources. RebeccaGreen (talk) 01:28, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello 87.49.43.175, the first university named in the article is the Danish Design School. It is blue, which means there is a link to another Wikipedia article. If you click on it, it takes you to the article Danmarks Designskole, that starts: "The Royal Danish Academy of Fine Arts, School of Design, more commonly known as the Danish Design School (Danish: Danmarks Designskole. often abbreviated as DKDS)". So there are different names for one university, and different names used for it in this article. That could be confusing, but it is not wrong. RebeccaGreen (talk) 00:42, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I can see there are sources for years not yet covered in the article. In an interview, Madsen says that she has had 8 books published since 2011 - they are not mentioned in the article yet either. These are not reasons to delete the article, though, they are reasons to improve and expand it. RebeccaGreen (talk) 01:34, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I’ve found some on WorldCat. They date from 2011-2014 which certainly isn’t a problem in itself, but doesn’t help identify more recent sources.
- Frederiksen, Sara Ejersbo (2012). Zombiekatten. Madsen, Anne Sofie (Illustrator). Forum, Kbh. ISBN 9788763822312.
- Grønlund, Peter (2013). Hr. Wisborgs hemmelighed. Madsen, Anne Sofie (Illustrator). Forum, Kbh. ISBN 9788763826532.
- Skaarup, Sara (2011). Helvedes hund og andre gys. Madsen, Anne Sofie (Illustrator). Forum, Kbh. ISBN 9788763816458.
- Grønlund, Peter (2014). I skolens kælder. Madsen, Anne Sofie (Illustrator). Forum, Kbh. ISBN 9788763831635.
- Grønbæk. Pors, Justine (2014). Støjende styring : genopfindelsen af folkeskolen mellem ledelse, organisering og læring. Madsen, Anne Sofie (Illustrator). Frederiksberg: Nyt fra Samfundsvidenskaberne. ISBN 9788776830472.
I’ll leave them here but maybe copy to the article or talkpage at some point? - -Northernhenge (talk) 21:04, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Per Ipigott. Gedaali (talk) 10:04, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Isaac Anderson (model)

AfDs for this article:

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

Refunded after soft deletion. All the sourcing on this fashion model is over-the-top promotional material, nearly all un-bylined, in sources of questionable independence and reliability (examples: Isaac Anderson 3000 is the modern Renaissance man, blending intellect, sustainability, and fashion into a tapestry that feels revolutionary yet timeless and Isaac Anderson is celebrated not only as a fashion icon but also as a trailblazer who has redefined the fashion landscape.) In my WP:BEFORE search, I couldn't find any WP:SIGCOV in independent, secondary, reliable sources and so I don't see a pass of WP:GNG (much less WP:NMODEL). Dclemens1971 (talk) 20:16, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Fashion, and Ghana. Dclemens1971 (talk) 20:16, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep — @Dclemens1971.This sounds like a target to me though I might be wrong . I was doing some checks and I realized you’re the same editor that did that first nomination. The reason for both nominations are the same. For the first nomination I completely agree as the reasons as at that time was valid but I have a problem with this one. “All sources are over-the top promotional” this is not true if you check all the sources. One source was even talking about a scam call, how’s a scam call promotional for a model? Secondly you said nearly all unbylined. This is also not true. I can see only one source unbyline(the first source). For the promotional words you wrote , yes true it sounds promotional but even that that’s the conclusion of the article and the promotional is not throughout every article as you stated. You also said the sources’ independence is questionable. In a discussion by experienced editors about countries which are affected by system bias , some these sources were discussed. This is the link , https://en.m.wiki.x.io/wiki/Wikipedia:New_pages_patrol/Source_guide_discussions/Ghana & https://en.m.wiki.x.io/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Nigeria/Nigerian_sources . The subject has been featured in a notable show(CBS morning show). I think it should be included in the English Encyclopedia. Maconzy3 (talk) 17:57, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I was referring to the content in my BEFORE search, most of which was unbylined. But multiple sources in the article are indeed unbylined. Here's my source analysis:
Vanguard. No byline. Highly promotional.

Modern Ghana. Bylined but also highly promotional. This reads like marketing, not an independent, reliable news outlet. The author appears to have written only this article for Modern Ghana, so is likely not to be a reporter or a legitimate journalist.

PeaceFM. No byline. Promotional. Appears to be based entirely on quotes from Anderson.

Pulse. Bylined, but very promotional, by an "journalist" whose entire oeuvre appears to consist of spam.

CBS News. This is an article about Anderson's brother with a three-sentence WP:TRIVIALMENTION of Isaac Anderson.

GhanaCelebrities.com. An unreliable celebrity gossip blog.

Graphic.com.gh. Another puff piece.
Perhaps this is the discussion you meant to link? Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard#Nigerian_newspapers. It makes clear that the Nigerian sources list of the WikiProject is questionable. Either way, all we have on Anderson are puff pieces, unbylined or by writers with sketchy credentials, or articles that mention him trivially. No independent and reliable SIGCOV. Dclemens1971 (talk) 18:19, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
About bylined and unbylined. You can only say multiple if it’s two or more. Only one which is vanguard Nigeria is Unbylined. For PeaceFM it’s at the buttom. It shows it’s from Isaac Anderson/Peacefm. So definitely an interview reporting but it is not promotional. The vanguard news has a promotional tone for that I agree. You said modernghana.com has a questionable independence, I’d advice you do research on things you’re not familiar with. Modernghana is one of the biggest news sites in Ghana although their reliability in this discussion (https://en.m.wiki.x.io/wiki/Wikipedia:New_pages_patrol/Source_guide_discussions/Ghana ) is unclear. Even that I agree that it has a promotional tone but not marketing but I think educating you previously was important. The CBS news was only used to verify the subject’s education as it was mentioned. The Graphic newspaper is state owned newpaper that is considered generally reliable according to this (https://en.m.wiki.x.io/wiki/Wikipedia:New_pages_patrol/Source_guide_discussions/Ghana ) . You also shared a link to a discussion. The discussion was about Nigerian sources not Ghanaian. The only Nigerian source here is Vanguard. I agree with you on few things but your generalization and exaggeration is making it hard for me to agree completely. I think some sources should be removed but I still stand that on my point that the article should be kept. Maconzy3 (talk) 05:39, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I read the PeaceFM attribution of "Source" to Anderson to be the photos of Anderson, but if you're saying that Isaac Anderson wrote that piece, it's even less eligible to demonstrate notability since it's not remotely independent. Dclemens1971 (talk) 15:51, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Per nominator's reason and source analysis. Ibjaja055 (talk) 08:28, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Just noting that Soft Deletion is not an option as the article has been to AFD before and there is a Keep vote (yes, from a sock but it wasn't evading a block at the time).
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:13, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Still the flowery language in sources, "emerging force in the fashion world" [80]... With no coverage, likely hasn't emerged far enough yet... Delete for PROMO. Oaktree b (talk) 22:45, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Per nom. Promotional article without independent significant coverage. ~Darth Stabro^{Talk • Contribs} 03:40, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Kioumars Pourhashemi

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

Doesn't seem to be that important. All references are in passing or about his death, probably can be mentioned as a section in 2024 Battle of Aleppo Ladsgroup^overleg 17:37, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Keep I made this article because I believe he was an important figure in a very important event that led to the downfall of Syria. History is important. Yesyesmrcool (talk) 17:41, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Iran. Bobby Cohn (talk) 17:52, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:20, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Can be considered as a soldier killed in action. He is merely a member of the IRGC forces involved in the 2024 Battle of Aleppo, but not a key member. Jeeputer ^Talk 17:27, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep - on one hand, his rank of Second brigadier general (Iran) does not automatically pass WP:MIL, but he was not an ordinary soldier. On the other hand, he did get WP:SIGCOV in the Jerusalem Post and other reliable media. Bearian (talk) 03:22, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep(?) Quoting from this page: "Researchers Hassan Hassan and Michael Weiss argued that Pourhashemi's death -along with a number of other senior officers- greatly contributed to the collapse of the loyalist defenses of Aleppo." Sounds like a credible claim to lasting significance, though it depends on how much is being carried by the "other senior officers". Koopinator (talk) 09:58, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 19:32, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Raja Raghuraj Singh

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

Freedom activists are not inherently notable. The subject fails WP:ANYBIO, no indication of WP:SIGCOV or notable contributions to the independence movement. TheBirdsShedTears (talk) 10:00, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, History, and Uttar Pradesh. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 10:12, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Meets WP:NPOLITICIAN as a member of the United Provinces Legislative Council, a precursor to the modern-day Uttar Pradesh Legislative Council. From this PhD thesis, "Kiriti Vardhan is the scion of Mankapur royal estate, and he is the fifth-generation representative of a powerful family which had direct influence in the district’s politics even before independence. His great-great grandfather Raja Raghuraj Singh and great grandfather Raja Ambikeshwar Pratap Singh won elections for the provincial assembly (of the United Provinces) in 1920s and 1930s." [81] This article from the Pioneer Mail in 1923 seems to confirm that he was a member of the provincial legislature.[82] ⁂CountHacker (talk) 18:44, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I would also point out that if the article is kept, it should be moved to Raghuraj Singh per WP:TITLESINTITLES. Raja seems to be his title as the Raja of Mankapur, not part of his actual name. ⁂CountHacker (talk) 04:02, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 13:38, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ram Krishna Bantawa

AfDs for this article:

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

Doesn't meet WP:NAUTHOR and WP:SIGCOV as per Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!}. Rahmatula786 (talk) 05:43, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Rahmatula786 (talk) 05:43, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Bands and musicians, Hong Kong, and Nepal. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 08:38, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Rahmatula786,

I hope this message finds you well.

Thank you for raising concerns about the article on Ram Krishna Bantawa. I firmly believe the article meets the requirements outlined in Wikipedia’s WP:NAUTHOR and WP:SIGCOV guidelines. Below is an explanation supporting this assertion:

Notability as an Author (WP:NAUTHOR):

Ram Krishna Bantawa is a recognized author and lyricist in Nepali literature. He is known for his novel Saghan Tuwanlo (Shrill Mist) and novel Amalai Chithi (Letter to Mother-whose English translation is forthcoming.) His work has made a significant cultural impact, particularly within the Nepali community.
His lyrics and songs are available on platforms such as YouTube.
Saghan Tuwanlo is included in the curriculum of Tribhuvan University, highlighting its academic and cultural significance.His novels address meaningful societal issues such as women’s rights, untouchability, and Sati Pratha (the practice of widow immolation), further emphasizing his contributions to literature and social discourse.

Significant Coverage (WP:SIGCOV):

Independent and reliable media outlets, including Kantipur, Annapurna Post, and various Hong Kong-based Nepali newspapers, have provided coverage of Bantawa’s work. This demonstrates his influence in Nepali literature and music.
He has been featured in interviews and podcasts that delve into his life, literary contributions, and societal impact, providing further evidence of significant independent coverage.
Bantawa has received several awards and certificates from reputable organizations, including:Nepalese Literary Academy Hong Kong , Heavenly Path Hong Kong , Charu Sahitya Pratisthan , Hong Kong Nepalese Federation , Lyricist Association of Nepal

The article references independent and verifiable sources that discuss Ram Krishna Bantawa’s work in detail. Taken collectively, these factors satisfy the standards for inclusion in Wikipedia under WP:NAUTHOR and WP:SIGCOV.

If additional information or sources are required to further support this assertion and enhance the article, I would be happy to assist.

Best regards, Rasilshrestha (talk) 09:06, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I feel you know the person very well so you are aware of so many information. When i search on internet , I hardly find anything of significance covered in reputable media outlet about him .

regarding references, plz go through all the references, and let me know if a single source in reputable Nepali media from NPOV meeting WP criteria. If your have such sources plz put it here other than what you have kept in references. Plz note that sources in reference are not of significance. Rahmatula786 (talk) 10:06, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Rahmatula786,

Thank you for your message. I want to clarify that I do not personally know the person. The information I’ve provided is based solely on my research.

I understand your concerns regarding the importance of meeting Wikipedia's notability criteria. Unfortunately, there is limited online information due to the lack of archived articles in Nepali media. However, I have collected pictures of old newspaper articles about the author, including coverage from Nepali Hong Kong newspapers during a book launch press meet.

I believe the article is written from a neutral point of view. While I cannot attach the offline sources here, I’d be happy to share them via email. Additionally, I can provide relevant YouTube(https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=Ram+Krishna+Bantawa) links of his Songs, Interviews. Please let me know how you’d like to proceed.

I look forward to your guidance and support, as I am currently gathering resources and information for my next article of Nepali Singer "Kuma Sagar" . Your insights will be invaluable in helping me refine my work. Please let me know how best to proceed.

Best Regards, Rasilshrestha (talk) 07:13, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

According to Wikipedia's guidelines, contributors are discouraged from writing about individuals they personally know to maintain neutrality and avoid conflicts of interest. I can assure you that I have no personal connection with, nor do I know, the author.

In my case, I refrained from including details about the author's awards and certificates, as I was unsure about their accuracy and could not verify them through reliable sources all i had were photographs of certificates and some mentions in newspapers. However, I conducted thorough research and included information about the author's books, song lyrics, and album, as these are well-documented and publicly available.

I can provide you with ISBN of the books they were published through Sajha Publications and ASIA 2000 Ltd. Also you can search in youtube for his songs and interviews. I can additionally provide you with offline sources(Newspaper Articles, Magazines) relating to the author. Rasilshrestha (talk) 15:54, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - there appears to be some sourcing not available easily online (the "surface" of the Internet). I'm going for a dive. Bearian (talk) 03:40, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I searched under three different names for this author and his book, Shrill Mist. I also reached out to a Nepalese friend. I've come up with zero reliable sources. Bearian (talk) 02:26, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hello,

Thank you for letting me know.I am actively working on gathering reliable links and additional information to support it. I’ll share them in refrence of the article.

The reason your friend might not have found information about the novel could be because it is an older work, first published in 2008. The author is not as widely recognized as prominent Nepali literary figures like Parijat, Laxmi Prasad Devkota, or Bhanubhakta Acharya, whose biographies are included in school curriculum. Additionally, the novel hasn’t been published online, limiting its accessibility to a broader audience. However, I’ve heard that the author’s new book is being published or translated into English, which might bring more attention to their work.

It’s also worth noting that the author has spent a significant amount of time outside Nepal, particularly in Hong Kong. If you search for his name on YouTube, you’ll find his songs, which might provide some additional context.

For now, I can provide the ISBN number of the book or any other available details. I’m actively working on finding more reliable sources and digging through news archives to provide further information Rasilshrestha (talk) 03:04, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello.

I have posted the photos of news archive i have clicked (Ram Krishna Bantawa News Articles : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive) in archive.org Rasilshrestha (talk) 17:53, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I have added the link to external site as Ram Krishna Bantawa News Archive. Rasilshrestha (talk) 18:02, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. There is an unbolded Keep here and a previous visit to AFD which means that Soft Deletion is not an option. It usually all comes down to sources so a source analysis of what is present in the article would be helpful at this point.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:04, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment.

Ref 1 : non neutral source ( media with no reputation has review of some book not a notable work , no findings on search on internet )

Ref 2 & 3 - not active link, neither found on google

Ref 4 - not at all a media of even minor entity

Ref 5&6 - he attends book inauguration program ( that’s all . Just his name mentioned)

Ref 7. Controversial piece about some legal issues being taken. Doesn’t support the article in any sense.

Rest sources - all are either repetition of above news or your tube material or some small contributions not covered in any genuine source. Rahmatula786 (talk) 15:02, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have added Ram Krishna Bantawa News Archive in external Links. They consist of photographs from old newspaper(offline Source). Rasilshrestha (talk) 16:36, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

From what i heard, his book "Aamalai Chitthi" is currently being translated and is expected to be published soon. Once it becomes available, I believe I will be able to provide you with more relevant online sources for further reference. Rasilshrestha (talk) 14:45, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep as there is now clear evidence of significant coverage in multiple reliable sources newspapers as shown in the news archive link mentioned above in the external links section of the article. Passes WP:GNG in my view, Atlantic306 (talk) 20:53, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - COI - looking at the Archies i wonder how so much personal info (like old newspapers copies) and he is planning to make an English version of some book , can be gathered unless editor knows and have approach with the subject. Recent update in the article also describes the same thing. Nothing but a Desperate attempt.Rahmatula786 (talk) 04:15, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hello,

I appreciate your concern, but as I mentioned earlier, I have photographs of offline sources that I have used for my research. Regarding the English translation, it is based on news related to Aamalai Chitthi (https://annapurnapost.com/story/451773/), where the translator Devi Panthi has spoken about it.

I assure you, this is not a desperate attempt, If it were, I would have included additional details of the author. Instead, my article focuses primarily on the subject's songs, novels, and books that he has written. For example, I have read Shrill Mist and am currently reading another work. The song I referenced is also publicly available on YouTube.

Thank you for understanding, and I hope this clarifies any confusion. Rasilshrestha (talk) 05:06, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
How did u get all photographs , newspaper cuts , u kept in archives. What kind of research ur doing on him, can u clarify. Rahmatula786 (talk) 05:23, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I collected photographs from various sources, including a news archive where old newspapers are stacked. Unfortunately, I couldn’t obtain any materials from Gorkhapatra, as they dont allow. Some of the newspapers I used were already in my possession at home, while others were gathered during my visit to a book launch event.

The event was held to celebrate the author’s return from Hong Kong and his book launch. It featured displays of certificates for his awards and documents with official letterheads. However, I chose not to mention these certificates or documents in my article, as I wasn’t entirely certain about their authenticity or relevance Rasilshrestha (talk) 06:35, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Unless you are related with him, how come you find or keen to find those stuff. Have you ever done such efforts to make any other article in Wikipedia. So far i can see , you are here just to make this article. If ur a genuine editor. You might have participated in various other articles, agenda . Did you understand it now. U have altogether 63 edits and almost all for this article only since May 5. That clearly shows what you are looking for . I guess u will come with some other explanations. Rahmatula786 (talk) 10:20, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hello,

Thank you for your concern. I’m currently a student in my final year, and I have a deep interest in Nepali literature, arts, and culture, especially Newar traditions and history, as I am a Newar myself. I also enjoy learning about historical topics and sharing knowledge.

I want to clarify that I am not connected to the author mentioned in the article, nor am I being paid for my contributions. If this were a paid effort, I believe the author would have hired someone more experienced than me. As a newcomer to Wikipedia, I am still learning and this article has been my starting point.

I plan to work on more articles in the future and am currently gathering resources for my next article as i have already mentioned earlier. Regarding the current article, my intent has been to present information in a neutral tone. If I were biased or paid, my contributions would likely reflect that, but I have strived to adhere to Wikipedia's guidelines.

Wikipedia encourages contributors to improve content where they can, and I believe my contributions are consistent with this principle.

While it’s true that I haven’t contributed extensively to other articles yet, everyone starts somewhere. My current focus on this article does not diminish my genuine intention to support Wikipedia’s mission of providing accurate, unbiased information.

If you have specific concerns about my edits, I’d be happy to discuss and address them transparently. I value constructive feedback and aim to contribute positively to the platform. Rasilshrestha (talk) 13:22, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Your explanation doesn’t justify how you gathered all those photos and newspapers pieces put in archives . Anyway i leave it for now. And want to see how other editors put their views. Rahmatula786 (talk) 14:09, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hello,

I respect your concerns and your efforts to make Wikipedia a reliable and comprehensive source of information for everyone. As a newcomer, I would greatly value your feedback on how I can improve my article. Could you please guide me on how to make it more effective? Also, do you think there are any changes I should consider?

Thank you for your time and assistance in advance. I truly appreciate your support and feedback. Rasilshrestha (talk) 04:40, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 08:14, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Naftali Schiff

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

Fails WP:GNG. The article reads a lot like a CV. The piece "Rabbi Naftali Schiff: Aish UK's wonderwall" by The Jewish Chronicle might be one source that counts towards notability, but other than that, I haven't been able to find much. Mooonswimmer 15:35, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Judaism, and United Kingdom. Shellwood (talk) 15:44, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep. Thanks for the nomination -- I had thought about AfDing this article when originally creating Josef Lewkowicz. Most of the sources currently in the article are poor, and it needs a WP:TNT. But there are multiple, in-depth profiles in the Jewish Chronicle and Jewish News over the years [83], [84], [85], multiple=page coverage in a book [86], with additional coverage of Schiff role in his charities [87], [88], [89], that could suffice for notability. Longhornsg (talk) 16:30, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Israel and England. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:04, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as a professional at work. Misses the bar of the GNG. gidonb (talk) 03:36, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per sources provided by Longhornsg. Whizkin (talk) 19:57, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:37, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:59, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Jim_Leisy

AfDs for this article:

Articles for deletion/Jim Leisy

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

I believe Jim Leisy fails the WP:GNG criteria. Not enough independent secondary sourcing to prove notability.

The majority of the article is unsourced self-promotion. According to the one reference in the article the artist won a 'Caldera Gold Spot Award' but I can find no explanation of what that is or how notable it might be. He also has a work catalogued by the Smithsonian https://www.si.edu/object/solar-eclipse:nasm_A20170021000 that was gifted by the artist.

Additionally, there appears to be WP:COI from Leisy himself, creating the page in the first place, removing other editors' issue taggs without fixing issues, and multiple edits of the page under User:Jimleisy.

SallyRenee (talk) 12:19, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Photography, and Texas. Shellwood (talk) 13:05, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Nothing in the Getty ULAN [90], nor much of any mention for a photographer with this name. Nothing in the article shows notability. I don't find any book reviews. Oaktree b (talk) 19:29, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The COI editing doesn't help, but the subject has been deceased for a decade, I don't really think it matters much at this point. Oaktree b (talk) 19:30, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: I have added two references. Leisy meets WP:PHOTOGRAPHER, in particular point 4D: the person´s work has been represented within the permanent collections of several notable galleries or museums. The Smithsonian, the Portland Art Museum, among others.Ruud Buitelaar (talk) 03:06, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Works represented in the Smithsonian, Portland Art Museum, and 'National Air and Space Museum' were all gifted by the artist, apart from one at Portland that I could find that was intentionally purchased with funds provided by the Photography Council (Leisy was on the board of directors - so there's clear WP:COI there): http://www.portlandartmuseum.us/mwebcgi/mweb.exe?request=record;id=70706;type=101 SallyRenee (talk) 09:21, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The works may have been donated by the author but the guideline Wikipedia:Notability (people) does not make a distinction between purchased and donated works, so that is not a relevant argument. By the way, it is not at all easy to donate work to museums. Ruud Buitelaar (talk) 03:28, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - I am leaning towards delete but not iVoting until I look deeper. I understand the nominator's thoughts about self-donated works in collections, however many institutions would still run a donated work through their acquisitions board; however in the case of the Portland Community College Collection, it's doubtful if they have one. The work in the Houston MFA seems to be donated by another person. The LensScratch article is a good source, however more like that are needed to meet NARTIST and GNG. A GoogleBook search found nothing. Netherzone (talk) 21:22, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - After searching more, I think there is enough for him to meet notability standards. Here's what I found online: a comprehensive obituary: [91], article in LensScratch: [92], a comprehensive narrative about his work in the collection of the Smithsonian's Air & Space Museum [93], he's quoted here as an expert: [94]. These items along with the permanent collections (even tho several were donations by the artist), [95], however the work at the Portland Community College Collection was not donated by him [96], and has a decent narrative: [97]. The COI content or unsourced self-promo can be trimmed from the article; I think he meets notability, not in the strongest sense, but I do think he is notable. Netherzone (talk) 15:14, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 13:52, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:17, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Charlotte Barker

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

This has existed for 18 years without a single source which is actually about the actor, and I can't find any sources that are actually about her, as opposed to her being mentioned in articles about her father. Black Kite (talk) 11:10, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Actors and filmmakers. Black Kite (talk) 11:10, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women and England. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:44, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
~~OK to delete (and recommend deletion rather than redirect, as there are other people with the same name who may be more notable).~~ There actually are more negative reviews of the play her father wrote for her, like "Daddy's girl could do without his help" in The Financial Times. But these are arguably not really about her (the FT review says things like "on this terrain it is hard to judge how good an actress she is"), and otherwise she is mentioned in passing in her father's obituaries and articles about her fugitive brother facing child porn charges. Does not meet WP:GNG. Cielquiparle (talk) 21:41, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no major roles, nor even supporting roles. Very minor roles in one well-reviewed film and a few guest spots on TV. Bearian (talk) 03:19, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The article says "As an actress she worked mostly in theatre", but gives no details, apart from the play Mum. It's not hard to find reviews of her stage work in digitised newspapers - I will add info and references and then consider whether she meets WP:BIO or WP:BASIC. RebeccaGreen (talk) 06:56, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sometimes it's kinder to delete. But I will bite and expand the article and let everyone else decide. (Perhaps there are 5k pageviews in the last month for a reason.) Cielquiparle (talk) 12:16, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Cielquiparle There is a TikTok "influencer" with the same name. Black Kite (talk) 16:58, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Right. Plus everyone else with the same name, like the Director of Film Restoration at Paramount Pictures. Cielquiparle (talk) 17:21, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisted to give Cielquiparle and RebeccaGreen a chance to dig up more sources.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 13:37, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Two of us have now added information and sources to this article, which demonstrates that she does meet WP:GNG. There are plenty of reviews of her stage appearances, with significant, positive mentions about her ability and performances. She had major roles in Stepping Out in the West End and Nice Girls in Newcastle, and in several other professional performances of notable plays in Derby, Newcastle, Chester, etc, for which she received very positive reviews (I have not included quotes about all her performances here). There are articles about her (eg here and here) - they do mention her father, but they are about her, not him. No, she did not star in films or TV shows, but WP:NACTOR specifically states "The person has had significant roles in multiple notable films, television shows, stage performances, or other productions;" (my emphasis). RebeccaGreen (talk) 11:14, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - It appears there is sufficient sourcing showing in the footnotes to get this subject over the GNG hurdle. Carrite (talk) 23:36, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: @Bearian and Black Kite: given the new sources do you still think this should be deleted?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Barkeep49 (talk) 01:48, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per WP:HEY. Bearian (talk) 01:51, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Westballz

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

Top esports player who lacks significant coverage to prove notability. The profiles from Red Bull and ESPN are a good start, but the rest are either web articles of questionable reliability or independence (theScore eSports, EventHubs, G2 Esports) or routine coverage of changes in teams / sponsorships. Bridget (talk) 20:36, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Video games, and California. Bridget (talk) 20:36, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - These two ESPN sources [98], [99], the Red Bull source [100], as well as published unauthorized biography [101] probably pushes the subject over the edge in terms of notability. 14:00, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
Thanks Pbrks, were you able to find more info about the book or its author and publisher? The lack of info makes it look a bit suspect, and the blurb isn't too useful. Bridget (talk) 14:40, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Beeblebrox ^Beebletalks 22:15, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Passes GNG per above, this pretty clearly gets the article over the line.

Noah ^💬 23:12, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. We have one strong Keep argument but I don't see that the nominator's concerns and questions have been fully addressed.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:11, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Subject clearly pass GNG, the article already has good references as a start as the subject has much profiles with reputable organizations. Sources from Gametyrant, EventHub and Redbull alone covers for the article. That's clearly my own opinion, reason why I added comment instead. Cameremote (talk) I came from a remote place 00:08, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Cameremote: EventHubs isn't a reliable source, per the discussions listed in Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Sources. What GameTyrant sources are you talking about? Their website doesn't mention any full-time staff and editorial processes, so that's cause for concern from me. It looks like a small game company based in Utah which has hosted some tournaments. Bridget (talk) 00:30, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Faris Al-Hammadi

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

The subject does not meet WP:GNG. The article fails to demonstrate any proof of notability and relies heavily on sources from social media platforms such as X, Instagram, and LinkedIn, which are generally not considered reliable. The few non-social media sources included are either trivial mentions or lack the depth and significance required to establish notability.

Based on my research, and after conducting a WP:BEFORE, I could not find independent, reliable sources that provide in-depth coverage of the subject. While the individual is a social media influencer with a large following, this alone does not suffice to meet Wikipedia's notability standards. ZyphorianNexus (talk) 08:33, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. ZyphorianNexus (talk) 08:33, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Internet and United Arab Emirates. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 10:40, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Fail to meet WP:GNG (WP:ANYBIO / WP:CREATIVE). Available sources fail to support WP:V. QEnigma talk 13:49, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. The current sourcing by the author is a major issue, but the subject seems to have relevant prominence with 750k+ followers. Per WP:BEFORE, subject also appears to be related to Hussain Al Hammadi and other UAE gov operatives. OrebroVi (talk) 16:58, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like to point out that, per WP:INVALIDBIO, notability is not inherited. A subject's relationship with notable individuals or entities doesn't automatically make them notable. According to the notability guideline, notability is determined by significant, independent, and reliable coverage of the subject, not follower counts.

If you or another editor can provide reliable sources showing significant coverage, the article may be reconsidered. ZyphorianNexus (talk) 23:55, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 09:19, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 13:07, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Putra Adhiguna

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

I am unable to find any independent coverage of this BLP. The 15 sources cited in the article are author listings, biography listings, interviews, articles written by the subject, alumni listings, coverage from events, seminars, conferences, summits and more interviews. It is unclear what makes the subject notable or what their contributions are which could be used to assess whether any SNG is met. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 14:57, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Finance, Economics, Technology, Asia, and Indonesia. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 14:57, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. No WP:SIGCOV in the sources. ~Darth Stabro^{Talk • Contribs} 23:39, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dear editor, this below is planned to be add to outline his contribution to the energy transition field. Look forward to your advice whether this will be sufficiently relevant. Thank you.

Putra has made notable contributions to research on Southeast Asia's energy transition. His research expertise spans various aspects of the energy transition, including in outlining the key enablers and challenges for Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) technology application (1), critical transition minerals sourcing and related industrial developments (2), as well as key factors to drive Indonesia’s energy transition (3)(4).

His perspectives on the energy sector have been regularly featured in major news outlets in the region, covering wide-ranging topics in energy such as gas investments in Southeast Asia (5), Singapore’s clean energy imports (6), and regional green energy cooperation in ASEAN (7).

His research works have also been cited in publications such as the International Energy Agency (IEA) report on Enhancing Indonesia’s Power System (8), RAND Corporation report on China’s Role in the Global Development of Critical Resources (9) and an article in Communications Earth & Environment journal (A part of Nature journal) titled The viability of co-firing biomass waste to mitigate coal plant emissions in Indonesia (10)

He was part of the team of international peer reviewers for the IEA report titled An Energy Sector Roadmap to Net Zero Emissions in Indonesia (11) and his insights and contribution has been acknowledged in International Institute for Sustainable Development publication titled Boom and Bust: The fiscal implications of fossil fuel phase-out in six large emerging economies (12)

(1) https://ieefa.org/resources/carbon-capture-southeast-asian-market-context-sorting-out-myths-and-realities-cost

(2) https://energyshift.institute/work/0-4-of-global-battery-production-capacity-indonesias-battery-and-ev-developments-are-far-out-of-step-with-its-nickel-exploitation-promise/

(3) https://ieefa.org/resources/indonesia-wants-go-greener-pln-stuck-excess-capacity-coal-fired-power-plants

(4) https://ieefa.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/Indonesias-Biomass-Cofiring-Bet_February-2021.pdf

(5) https://www.straitstimes.com/asia/se-asia/gas-investments-in-se-asia-undermine-green-energy-climate-push-report

(6) https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/st-explains-s-pore-announced-more-ambitious-clean-import-targets-what-would-this-mean-for-our-energy-transition

(7) https://www.chinadailyhk.com/hk/article/583121

(8) https://iea.blob.core.windows.net/assets/247b5328-2cd7-4fbb-a800-dd1c71f6e562/EnhancingIndonesiasPowerSystem.pdf

(9) https://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/research_reports/RRA2000/RRA2096-1/RAND_RRA2096-1.pdf

(10) https://www.nature.com/articles/s43247-024-01588-0

(11) https://www.iea.org/reports/an-energy-sector-roadmap-to-net-zero-emissions-in-indonesia

(12) https://www.iisd.org/system/files/2022-07/fossil-fuel-phase-out-briics-economies.pdf

**Viewpoints and research

*Carbon Capture and Storage*

Putra’s view on Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) technology is that it will not be easily deployed in cost-sensitive regions such as Southeast Asia (13). However, more affluent countries, such as Singapore or Japan, might be interested in exporting their carbon dioxide emissions to countries that can provide storage locations (14). Nevertheless, he advocated that such export activities will require stringent standards with clear long term liability agreements (15) (16).

(13) https://ieefa.org/articles/widespread-adoption-carbon-capture-utilization-and-storage-technologies-south-east-asia

(14) https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/singapore-japan-sign-agreement-to-collaborate-on-carbon-capture-and-storage-tech

(15) https://asia.nikkei.com/Opinion/Japan-cannot-make-CO2-disappear-just-by-exporting-it

(16) https://www.thejakartapost.com/business/2024/05/27/new-rules-set-to-kick-start-japanese-co2-exports-to-ri.html

*Critical Minerals for the Energy Transition*

His research on critical minerals primarily focused on nickel development and the battery and electric vehicle industry (2). He has advocated for more ambitious industrial developments to further enhance the role of producing countries in the battery and electric vehicle value chain (2).

Putra has also raised significant concerns about the low social and environmental standards of nickel development in Indonesia, including its implications for indigenous populations (17) and the potential use of forced labour (18). He has urged the government to conduct transparent assessments and implement improvements in these areas, as he outlined in his interviews with BBC News and Voice of America (17) (18).

(17) https://www.bbc.com/indonesia/articles/c1e5x2k7kp8o

(18) https://www.voaindonesia.com/a/amerika-serikat-masukkan-nikel-indonesia-ke-daftar-pekerja-paksa-/7816453.html

His expertise on critical minerals in Southeast Asia is evident from his interviews featured in prominent international publications such as The New York Times (19), Barron’s (20), NPR (21), The Straits Times (22), Channel News Asia (23) and Bloomberg news (24)

(19) https://www.nytimes.com/2023/08/18/business/indonesia-nickel-china-us.html

(20) https://www.barrons.com/news/indonesia-bets-on-se-asia-s-first-battery-plant-to-become-ev-hub-8328fe72

(21) https://www.npr.org/2024/02/13/1231061492/a-leading-candidate-for-president-in-indonesia-wants-the-country-to-increase-coa

(22) https://www.straitstimes.com/asia/se-asia/indonesia-set-to-become-ev-battery-battleground

(23) https://www.channelnewsasia.com/watch/indonesias-industrialisation-has-fallen-short-its-regional-peers-analyst-4122381

(24) https://www.bnnbloomberg.ca/business/international/2024/10/17/indonesias-fixer-in-chief-bows-out-as-prabowo-takes-the-helm/

*Trump election, China and Southeast Asia’s Energy Transition*

With the recent election of Trump as President of the United States, Putra has shared his views on its impact toward the Southeast Asia’s energy transition in Asia's prominent news outlet, Nikkei Asia. According to him, Trump's withdrawal from international climate agreements will have a notable impact on climate diplomacy in Southeast Asia's energy transition, although its effect on energy investments in the region will likely remain limited. (25)

In separate publications featured in China's major news outlets, Caixin and China Daily, he argued that Trump's rise to power would likely create a larger role for China in Southeast Asia's energy transition (26) (27). Major Southeast Asian countries, such as Indonesia, stand to benefit significantly from increased engagement with China due to its capacity for rapid investment deployment. However, raising the standards of Chinese overseas investments remains essential. (27) Prior, he has also commented on Xinhua News how China’s coal provinces and their rapid industrial development toward clean energy can also provide inspirations for coal reliant economies to transition to greener industries (28)

(25) https://asia.nikkei.com/Opinion/How-Trump-might-shake-up-Southeast-Asia-s-clean-energy-transition

(26) https://www.caixinglobal.com/2024-12-06/commentary-will-a-trump-presidency-give-china-a-bigger-role-in-southeast-asias-energy-transition-102265317.html

(27) https://www.chinadaily.com.cn/a/202412/10/WS67579329a310f1265a1d1fb0.html

(28) https://english.news.cn/20240917/b74ec11d54c244978a5b866ba286716f/c.html

*Indonesia’s energy Transition*

Putra has also been a notable voice in outlining the key enablers and challenges in Indonesia’s energy transition. This includes highlighting the considerations for the use of biomass to generate electricity on Reuters (29) and International Monetary Fund Finance & Development Magazine (30). He has also shared his views on Indonesia’s role in the climate and energy transition in international events held by the University of Maryland (31) in College Park and United States - Indonesia Society in Washington DC (32).

His views on the use of biomass and nuclear energy in Indonesia has been featured in Channel News Asia’s feature documentary titled “Power to the People – Bioenergy” (33) and “Insight - Will Indonesia Go Nuclear” (34).

His work while at IEEFA covering the plan for the use of Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) for Indonesia’s power generation (35) has been cited by Indonesia’s Corruption Eradication Commission report on its Corruption Vulnerability Assessment (Kajian kerentanan korupsi) (36).

He has also advocated the need to transition to greener energy in the islands of the archipelago, as outlined in an Associated Press article (34). Putra has also emphasized the need to optimize international assistance such as the $20 billion funding by U.S. and its allies (35) and anticipate energy consumption growth and emissions in new sectors such as the data centres (36).

(29) https://www.reuters.com/article/business/energy/feature-betting-on-bamboo-indonesian-villages-struggle-to-source-safe-green-po-idUSL8N2LU4I6/

(30) https://www.imf.org/en/Publications/fandd/issues/2022/12/country-case-indonesia-solar-future-jacques

(31) https://cgs.umd.edu/events/indonesias-climate-future-land-energy-and-governance-open-forum-discussion

(32) https://usindo.org/feature/special-open-forum-discussion-on-indonesias-climate-future-land-energy-and-governance/

(33) https://www.channelnewsasia.com/watch/power-people/bioenergy-4439271

(34) https://www.channelnewsasia.com/watch/insight-2022-2023/will-indonesia-go-nuclear-3029031

(35) https://www.kpk.go.id/id/publikasi-data/kajian/kerentanan-korupsi-program-gasifikasi-pembangkit-listrik-pt-pln

(36) https://apnews.com/article/business-indonesia-g-20-summit-bali-climate-and-environment-a73dcbcb60d9a42904f7d81025b5feac

(37) https://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-allies-announce-20-billion-package-to-wean-indonesia-off-coal-11668503675

(38) https://www.scmp.com/week-asia/economics/article/3235499/dark-clouds-ahead-indonesias-emissions-surge-asias-need-data-centres-singapores-offshore-push 222.124.125.10 (talk) 06:52, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. It would be nice to see at least a partial review of these newly found sources.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:34, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep I think they might meet criteria 7 of WP:NPROF. NPROF applies to anyone involved in scholarly research, so I think Adhiguna's roles at policy research think tanks qualify them to be considered under NPROF. Criteria 7 is that the subject must have "had a substantial impact outside academia in their academic capacity", and it notes that being "frequently quoted in conventional media as an academic expert" may qualify. Adhiguna is clearly very widely quoted as an expert on the Indonesian energy transition, including in publications like the NYT, BBC and WSJ. They also seem to have had a significant impact outside of academia by using their scholarly research to inform Indonesian policymaking, including contributing to some influential reports like the IEA one and being a regular columnist on the energy transition for one of Indonesia's largest newspapers. I agree that they definitely don't meet WP:GNG, but I think they make a reasonable case under criteria 7 of WP:NPROF as an influential subject-matter expert. MCE89 (talk) 00:16, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Can you please list their 'substantial impact' and explain how they are 'very widely quoted as an expert' after you have actually read the articles from the NYT, BBC and WSJ? Also, please clarify how you determined that these quotes have meaningful impact? I believe they are merely routine/run of the mill statements. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 04:51, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I did read the articles. I'm not sure what you mean by routine/run of the mill statements - they are pretty clearly being quoted by each of these publications in their capacity as a subject matter expert, which is exactly what is described under 7(a) of WP:NPROF. As I said, I'm not claiming that any of these articles constitute SIGCOV or that the subject meets WP:GNG, but as someone engaged in "scholarly research" all that needs to be established is that they meet one of the seven criteria under NPROF. I think the most applicable criteria is that they have "had a substantial impact outside academia in their academic capacity", which may be satisfied if they are "frequently quoted in conventional media as an academic expert in a particular area" (note "quoted" - I'm aware that they are not a major focus of any of the articles, but they are certainly widely quoted as an expert on the Indonesian energy transition). So the reason I think they meet criteria 7 is that (a) they have been widely quoted in prominent international media outlets, including the WSJ, NYT, BBC, Reuters etc., as an expert in their area of research, satisfying 7(a) of NPROF, and (b) they have clearly influenced Indonesian policymaking in their area of research, as demonstrated by being cited or consulted on various government projects and publications. MCE89 (talk) 05:36, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
So, TLDR: you actually don’t have anything meaningful or substantial to show from the NYT, BBC or WSJ articles? Instead, you’ve decided to explain NPROF#7 to me. Fascinating, but I’m still waiting for evidence of this so called ‘significant impact’.

Let's take the NYT example: Putra Adhiguna says “One way or another, Europe and the U.S. will need Indonesia nickel" and "They should be coming to this country figuring out how they can do it better." This is just a routine interview byte as he was part of Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis.. They almost always comment on everything and that’s why this falls under routine coverage.

The entire article reads like a collection of his viewpoints and arguments - Putra Adhiguna emphasized this, Putra Adhiguna shared his views on that, Putra Adhiguna argued this, Putra Adhiguna commented on that - just a series of views, emphasizes, comments and arguments. Yet, there’s nothing about the work he has done or his achievements, because there aren’t any. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 07:33, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe tone it down a bit? My point was just that all of those articles are very standard examples of what it looks like when an expert in a particular field is quoted in the mainstream press about their area of expertise, which is exactly what 7(a) describes. Yes, it's a routine interview bite, but that's what "quoted in conventional media as an academic expert" is describing. I'm not claiming that any of these sources are SIGCOV of Putra Adhiguna, but that's not what's required - NPROF specifically says that researchers may be "notably influential in the world of ideas without their biographies being the subject of secondary sources". It seems like you're applying the GNG standard and asking for secondary SIGCOV of the work he has done and his achievements, but I don't think NPROF requires that at all. What I'm saying is that the fact that he is a public-facing expert who frequently comments in the international press, writes for major Indonesian newspapers and seems to have some measurable influence on policymaking processes in Indonesia is enough to show that he is "notably influential in the world of ideas" per NPROF, even without the secondary SIGCOV that would be needed to meet GNG.

We're in agreement about the absence of SIGCOV though and I don't think this is particularly productive, so let's maybe leave it there? MCE89 (talk) 08:53, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Without concrete examples of specific policies shaped by his work or recognition within academic or policy circles, it’s hard to see how his routine media mentions meet the bar set by NPROF. It seems more like he was quoted in conventional media as a person working for the Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis rather than as an academic expert. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 09:31, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I can't evaluate the wall of text and citation dump, but I can see very clearly that the subject badly fails WP:PROF: he lacks any engineering, teaching, education, or scientific degree – as well as an earned doctorate of any kind. He has never published or even written any peer-reviewed articles. He is a basically a talking head. For that, he should be evaluated using WP:SIGCOV. Bearian (talk) 00:39, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Many resources are not related to the subject of this biography article. Even more do not discuss this subject. More citations/resources needed that discuss this subject significantly. I'm agree with the nominator talk about this article. Ariandi Lie ^{Let's talk} 04:16, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Hopefully with some more time some further ability to consider the sources presented can be made.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Barkeep49 (talk) 01:33, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

weak keep: In addition to the quotes above, appears to be a semi-regular columnist in the Jakarta Post on energy issues. I think we can have a !weak keep for the PROF as explained aobve. Oaktree b (talk) 03:01, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Sorry, here [102] and [103]. Oaktree b (talk) 03:02, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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

People proposed deletions