Wikipedia:XfD today
Deletion discussions |
---|
|
Articles |
Templates and modules |
Files |
Categories |
Redirects |
Miscellany |
Speedy deletion |
Proposed deletion |
This page transcludes all of the deletion debates opened today on the English-language Wikipedia, including articles, categories, templates, and others, as a convenience to XfD-watchers. Please note that because this material is transcluded, watchlisting this page will not provide you with watchlist updates about deletions; WP:DELT works best as a browser bookmark checked regularly.
Speedy deletion candidates
[edit]Articles
[edit]
- Jamila Musayeva (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
The sources cited in the article do not meet WP:SIGCOV. They include blogs, Medium posts, interviews, and primarily passing mentions. The article from The Caspian Post appears promotional or sponsored to me, and we also lack consensus on its reliability. Even if we ignore that, a single article cannot establish notability for the subject. I searched for more reliable sources with significant coverage but was unable to find any, only passing mentions similar to what is already in the article. The subject also fails to meet WP:AUTHOR, as their books have not been reviewed by multiple reliable sources. GrabUp - Talk 09:12, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Businesspeople, Women, and Azerbaijan. GrabUp - Talk 09:12, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Estonian exonyms (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Wikipedia is not a dictionary; an alternative to reading this article would be reading an Estonian dictionary. Also see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/French exonyms, which resulted in the French equivalent of this article being deleted. As argued there, this list is an indiscriminate list of place names. I agree that an article about the linguistic and historical aspects of the formation of place names in Estonian would be notable, but that is not what this is. SJD Willoughby (talk) 01:02, 25 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Language, Lists, and Estonia. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:20, 25 September 2024 (UTC)
- Trim: A few names in the list are evidently not cognate to the respective endonyms, and I'd preserve these. Otherwise, delete as trivial; each language adapts foreign words to its own phonology and orthography, okay, we get it. —Tamfang (talk) 03:46, 26 September 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Already at AFD (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Afrikaans exonyms) so not eligible for Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 04:26, 2 October 2024 (UTC)- Comment: While this Afd discussion was up, the articles for Galician/Maltese/Catalan/Swedish exonyms were deleted for the same reasoning
- SJD Willoughby (talk) 02:50, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
- You're right but I know other articles on exonyms that were sent to AFD have been kept. Liz Read! Talk! 00:26, 5 October 2024 (UTC)
- Keep. There is a definition of exonyms given by the UN that means that such lists are not indiscriminate, but instead pass WP:LISTCRITERIA. By all means cull items that should not be there (such as toponyms that are the mere result of orthographic rules in different languages). But such lists themselves are encyclopedic. As for appealing to recent rulings, what's actually happened is that there has been a huge bunch of individual nominations, some closed very quickly, without any notification placed on the page most people interested in the topic would see: Talk:Endonym and exonym. OsFish (talk) 08:24, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
- The UN's definition says "differing in form", which is easily broad enough to encompass those that you (or I) would cull! —Tamfang (talk) 04:06, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 06:06, 9 October 2024 (UTC)Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 09:02, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Ingemar Burgström (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Fails WP:SPORTSCRIT and WP:NOLY. Only sources I could find were 2 directory listings in Google books. LibStar (talk) 02:25, 25 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Boxing, Olympics, and Sweden. LibStar (talk) 02:25, 25 September 2024 (UTC)
- Keep, there's 146 mentions in Swedish newspaper archives, of which a lot seem like they might contain sigcov. We need someone with access to verify their content though. AlexandraAVX (talk) 19:33, 25 September 2024 (UTC)
- Comment The article doesn't show significant independent coverage that meets WP:GNG. Losing in the first round of the Olympics and compiling an 8-7 record as a pro boxer means he also fails WP:NOLY and WP:NBOX. I can't comment on what coverage might exist in Swedish, so I am not voting as this time. Papaursa (talk) 00:59, 30 September 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 03:45, 2 October 2024 (UTC)
- Keep, appears very likely notable per AlexandraAVX. BeanieFan11 (talk) 23:08, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
- Which sources in Alexandra's search meet significant coverage for WP:BIO? LibStar (talk) 04:25, 5 October 2024 (UTC)
- They are paywalled – however, given that we know that over 140 pieces of coverage do exist, someone would need to look at them to determine otherwise that he's not notable. BeanieFan11 (talk) 15:39, 5 October 2024 (UTC)
- Which sources in Alexandra's search meet significant coverage for WP:BIO? LibStar (talk) 04:25, 5 October 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 05:59, 9 October 2024 (UTC)Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist to assess the Swedish sources.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 09:02, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- VASP Flight 780 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
While tragic, there is no indication that this airplane crash meets WP:GNG or WP:NEVENT; if there was significant, long-lasting coverage, I can't find any sources to prove it. And I have no reason to believe there is likely to be long-lasting coverage: three deaths, crashed into the forest, and the crash was caused by pilot error.
Current three sources/links, used here and on the deWiki article, are unusable for notability/unusable.[1] is a user-generated wiki, [2] is a government report on the crash (they're required to make these for every single incident), [3] is a YouTube video of a cockpit recording. My WP:BEFORE revealed two YouTube videos:[4] [5], both unusable.
I have no prejudice against selectively merging/redirecting, should a suitable target be found. Given the limited ramifications of the initial crash, even if the topic can be shown notable a stand-alone page would likely not be warranted GreenLipstickLesbian (talk) 03:04, 2 October 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Aviation and Brazil. GreenLipstickLesbian (talk) 03:04, 2 October 2024 (UTC)
- Weak keep: it received reasonable coverage in Portuguese-language sources, as per pt:Voo VASP Cargo 780#Referências (note: there was no interlanguage link before). fgnievinski (talk) 03:13, 2 October 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you for the link! I'll have a look through them. The ptWiki does appear to be of better quality than the enWiki and deWiki articles.
- Then there's four 1992 news reports, all dated to within a day of the accident. The ptWiki links are broken, but the headlines appear to be the fairly routine "a plane crash happened, people died" type story that, while useful, was something I knew was likely to exist and doesn't change my arguments about WP:NEVENT, lasting coverage, WP:GNG, and WP:PAGEDECIDE.
- The information about a social media user visiting the plane crash is new to me, however. For reference, here are the links:
- Both of these article, to me, mostly seem to focus on the influencer's trip to the site of the planecrash. They each spare a paragraph or two to sum up the crash itself, but it's mostly spent discussing the influencer. I'm also not an expert in Brazilian newspapers, especially very local ones, but I'm having a hard time finding information about either news source. juruaonline.com.br does not have an "about me" type page- all attempts to get one redirect you to their "advertise with us"/"submit a story" type pages. juruaemtempo.com.br does actually give you some information about its reporters, but none of them were apparently willing to attach their name to this piece. So far, they are still the only examples of any WP:CONTINUEDCOVERAGE we have for this crash. And while these two sources are not enough to prove notability to me (I really don't think this article says anything that isn't already covered in List of accidents and incidents involving the Boeing 737#1990s), they might be enough for somebody else to decide this is notable. So, thank you again for finding them @Fgnievinski! GreenLipstickLesbian (talk) 03:46, 2 October 2024 (UTC)
- I also did a quick search for sources and can't find any online newspaper articles about the event. [12] fgnievinski (talk) 03:59, 2 October 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:18, 2 October 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 09:33, 2 October 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nom – Per WP:GNG and WP:EVENTCRIT: The event does not have in-depth, significant nor sustained continued coverage. Additionally, no lasting effects nor long-term impacts on a significant region have been demonstrated as a result of the accident. Criterion #4 of the event criteria states that routine kinds of news events including most accidents – whether or not tragic or widely reported at the time – are usually not notable unless something further gives them additional enduring significance, which this accident lacks. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 09:42, 2 October 2024 (UTC)
- Redirect to VASP#Accidents and incidents per WP:ATD-R. S5A-0043Talk 10:46, 2 October 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 03:24, 9 October 2024 (UTC)Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 08:58, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Jason Parker (security researcher) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Autobiographical article, content is not substantiated by the sources and it does not seem possible to write more than a stub about the subject. The sources almost entirely briefly mention the subject in connection with a security vulnerability, some include short quotes from the subject, none seem to provide details on the subject themselves. Brandon (talk) 02:15, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Computing. Brandon (talk) 02:15, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Could you please provide more details about what isn't substantiated by the sources? The small handful of paragraphs without citations have information that's given in articles cited elsewhere. If you could point to any specifics, I would be happy to either show which article(s) it comes from, or if one of the more recent citations that discuss it have been missed, add them.
- In a lot of cases, the notability of a subject comes from their work, so I'm a bit confused how this would be different from many other articles on Wikipedia. Is this simply a categorization problem? In the public sector circles where this information travels, the name and works are quite well known; the number of high quality sources would also suggest this.
- As for your comment about it not being possible to write more than a stub, I have to disagree. There is a lot more detail about the works and their specific effects that could be added, but I didn't find it prudent for myself to add that. Additionally, WP:Stub suggests that some editors and the bot would find that 250, 300, or 500 words (this one is 650 as of this note) is an appropriate length to not be considered a stub.
- Having said all of that, I note your status on Wikipedia, and understand that there is little likelihood of this article staying. NorthAntara (talk) 03:06, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Please ignore the admin icon, I'm just someone who used to spend too much time on Wikipedia and enjoys computer security. My AfD nominations end with the article being kept as often as anyone else.
- Being the primary author of an article about yourself is not recommended. You were extremely transparent, which is appreciated, it is just very challenging to write a neutral article based entirely on verifiable sources as the subject of the article yourself. With that said, here are some article about security researchers that have a tone and structure I'd suggest emulating: Tavis Ormandy, Eva Galperin, and Charlie Miller. Cutting inferences such as "leading to increased awareness and remediation of these issues" and the entire impact section would be the first edits I personally would make. Brandon (talk) 04:40, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- If I were the type to make bets on AfD results, I'd say this'd most likely close as no consensus like the Ian Coldwater AfD. Not sure if I'll dig in to see if I can find more sources for this one. We don't really do field specific versions of BIO for "coverage is pretty rare for this field" (except for academia) but on a quick review I'd say it's borderline for BASIC, not an outright fail. Not (yet) going to make it a !vote though, even if should it be possible or make sense to enter one for no consensus (wouldn't make much of a difference anyway since it's not a vote). Alpha3031 (t • c) 12:10, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Law and United States of America. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:12, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Keep - Leaving aside the autobiographically-ness of the article, I think having ArsTechnica, a variety of legal sources, TechCrunch and SC Media go into depth about a specific vulnerability and explicitly accredit the discovery of said vulnerabilities to a person, should push the said person over the bar of WP:GNG, since, such coverage is pretty rare in the field of cybersecurity and would count as significant coverage (imo).Sohom (talk) 06:03, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 08:58, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Flagon and Trencher (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
I wasn't able to find significant coverage of the subject in reliable sources, only mentions and brief descriptions (for example, on ProQuest). toweli (talk) 14:00, 24 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, History, Organizations, and United States of America. toweli (talk) 14:00, 24 September 2024 (UTC)
- Keep. Found some pieces that document the activity of the organization. Take a look [13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20]. Piscili (talk) 14:48, 24 September 2024 (UTC)
- Those don't provide significant coverage and/or aren't reliable sources. toweli (talk) 12:33, 27 September 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:45, 1 October 2024 (UTC)Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 01:26, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Delete: I have to agree with the nom. The sources don't appear to be reliable and keeping this article based on the provided coverage doesn't make sense to me. Clearly fails GNG. — Saqib (talk I contribs) 15:20, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist. A clearer source eval on the newly found sources would be helpful.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 08:57, 16 October 2024 (UTC)- The Herald, Where are the newly found sources? Both @Toweli: and I objected to keeping the article based on the coverage provided on 24 September, as it’s nowhere near reliable. — Saqib (talk I contribs) 09:17, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Modhalum Kaadhalum (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
This is actually the third deletion discussion. Originally deleted under this discussion in early 2023 prior to being recreated under alternative name which was then a no consensus at this discussion. Out of the 21 references listed on the page this is the only reference that may be notable but I cannot read it so not sure. The rest fall under WP:NEWSORGINDIA or are otherwise unreliable. Would recommend a redirect to the original program it is based on (Yeh Hai Mohabbatein). CNMall41 (talk) 03:15, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and India. CNMall41 (talk) 03:15, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
- Strong Keep: There are reliable sources present, opposed to deletion. Also have a strong references from (The Times of India, medianews4u.com, Dinamalar, Indian Express Tamil). It was one of the famous show, and also notable cast. Original program and Tamil version are very different.. story was also changes. also cast also different. the original version was aired 1,895 episodes (lot of cast and long story), Tamil version was aired only 304 episodes. i am against of recommend a redirect to the original program. i don't Kmow why, You are very interested in deleting this article. This is third time for Nomination of Modhalum Kaadhalum for deletion. Strong Keep--P.Karthik.95 (talk) 06:34, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
- The references that you state (which I am assuming are the ones on the page) are all unreliable and fall under WP:NEWSORGINDIA. Cast, number of episodes, it being a "famous show" has no bearing on notability unless there is significant coverage from RELIABLE sources to support. Can you link to the sources that are significant (and reliable)? Please do not link to anything that falls under NEWSORGINDIA. --CNMall41 (talk) 07:27, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
- Keep: and add sources like https://tamil.timesnownews.com/entertainment/modhalum-kaadhalum-serial-last-episode-coming-soon-at-vijay-tv-big-shock-to-fans-vikram-vedha-thanvi-article-110957049 (or similar articles in the same media, all bylined) or https://www.skspread.com/vijay-tv-modhalum-kaadhalum-serial-ending-soon-latest-news/ ; some of the numerous TOI articles can be used for verification; at the very least, redirect to List_of_programs_broadcast_by_Star_Vijay#Scripted_series_2 or merge with the article about the series it is a reboot of (Kalyanam Mudhal Kadhal Varai#Spin-off, rather than the original series, but would that help the reader as much as a page? Not sure. And a lot of informations would be lost. (Opposed to deletion, too) -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 08:19, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
- Delete or Redirect to Yeh_Hai_Mohabbatein#Adaptations. Per nom. Sources are poor to unreliable like source 1,2,4,6,12,13,18,20,21 and the others fall in WP:NEWSORGINDIA criteria with promotion and launch of the show, mentions on debut of an actress, exit of an actress and cast additions. RangersRus (talk) 14:16, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
- Redirect to Kalyanam Mudhal Kadhal Varai: or other target as proposed to be enforced by blocks or protection. I was AfD1 closer and AfD2 nom and I still don't think this meets the requirements for independent notability as sourcing is far from sufficient. Star Mississippi 02:12, 2 October 2024 (UTC)
- DELETE or REDIRECT: Poor sources. Low notability. Jellysandwich0 (talk) 02:53, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
- Requesting a source evaluation: simply grouping all the TOI sources under RSNOI without properly evaluating each and every source seems inappropriate especially when the RFC on TOI does acknowledge that only some articles have issues.
- After all, this is an Indian TV show and the only sources that will discuss this is Indian sources. Simply eliminating almost every source under this RSNOI from an information page doesn’t seem like a well thought-out rationale, especially when only TOI is on WP:RSPS. — Karnataka 20:08, 2 October 2024 (UTC)
- You are assuming that was not done. They were evaluated and are churnalism falling under NEWSORGINDIA. If there is one you feel isn't, please provide the link and I will have a look. --CNMall41 (talk) 20:20, 2 October 2024 (UTC)
- Keep: Sufficiently sourced. Times of India is usable per WP:TOI. Kailash29792 (talk) 03:12, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
- That is a perspective to have. However, being usable does not mean it can be used to establish notability. That is also the reason why I did not discredit these simply for being from the TOI. The many RfCs have concluded that the TOI needs additional consideration to determine if if it reliable for that specific reference. I checked them all and these are churnalism and promotional. If you want to provide some that you feel can be used to establish notability, I will have a look and withdraw the nomination if they are usable to establish notability. --CNMall41 (talk) 19:00, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 15:33, 8 October 2024 (UTC)Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 08:54, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Rafey Kazi (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
I draftified the BLP, but J1477 (talk · contribs) the creator of the BLP reverted my draftification, leaving me no choice but to take it to AFD. I don’t understand why new editors aren’t using the AFC route and instead revert draftifications, which just leads articles to deletions. Anyway, the BLP definitely reads like PROMO and I suspect there’s a COI at play as the same creator also attempted to make a BLP on the subject back in 2021, but it was deleted under G11.I don’t see it meeting GNG at all, nor does it fulfill any of the criteria outlined in the additional criteria for BLPs. Fwiw, an IP 98.201.3.11 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) also edited the BLP from Houston and COBAIT, whose CEO is Rafey Kazi, is also based there. — Saqib (talk I contribs) 08:44, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. — Saqib (talk I contribs) 08:44, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Interesting finding. J1477 also previously created a BLP for Laura Mohiuddin, who works as a Digital Marketing Strategist at the U.S.-based company COBAIT, where Rafey Kazi is the CEO. This definitely proves a COI, even though J1477 isn't ready to acknowledge it on the their talk page when asked. Also, J1477 created a BLP for Mohiuddin Ahmed (diplomat) who's Laura's father, according to Laura's own website. @Axad12: Do you think I should bring this up at COI/N as well? — Saqib (talk I contribs) 08:57, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, definitely. The related nature of the article subjects and the user's evasion in relation to answering about non-financial CoI gives it away. Axad12 (talk) 09:34, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Delete: I see that the user denied any CoI (well, technically they have denied being paid, they haven't actually denied any relationship with the subject). However, it is a demonstrable fact that as least one of the sources (PressNewsRoom) that they point to on their talk page [21] is not a WP:RS source. From the relevant link (here [22]) select 'add your story' (top right of page) and you arrive at a page starting
If you are interested in adding your story, press release or other news, [etc]
, which presumably explains why the article is highly promotional and was only published a few weeks ago in an apparent attempt at astroturfing (i.e. installing articles in the media in an attempt to later demonstrate notability on Wikipedia). Similarly, the other source (The Org, [23]) appears to be user generated content and thus also is not WP:RS compliant. Axad12 (talk) 09:32, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Tommy Clark (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Google search only returns brief mentions/plot summaries that do not contribute to notability. Has been tagged for notability since June 2022. Spinixster (trout me!) 07:43, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements and Television. Spinixster (trout me!) 07:43, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Santhosh Suvarna (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Non notable individual, all coverage is just routine information about updates/events from poker news sites. Fails WP:NBIO and WP:SIGCOV. Ratnahastin (talk) 07:37, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Coinrule (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Run-of-the-mill crypto company, no noteworthy third party coverage to speak of unfortunately. Had meant to nominate this two weeks ago but it slipped my mind. In any case, here it is now. Alpha3031 (t • c) 06:28, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Cryptocurrency, Companies, and United Kingdom. Alpha3031 (t • c) 06:28, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Daisuke Tsuda (YouTuber) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
WP:NPEOPLE Paradoctor (talk) 07:12, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Authors. Paradoctor (talk) 07:12, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Delete: Appears to fail the notability guidelines for WP:NPEOPLE. JustARandomEditor123 (talk) 08:08, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Mr.Tsuda is a prominent figure in Japan's internet scene, with over 20 years of experience. From the early days of Twitter Japan's service, he has engaged in various activities as a "media activist(a term he coined)", creating the buzzword "tsuda-ru". He served as a forum committee member for Asahi Shimbun, one of Japan's leading quality media outlets, from 2015 to 2019, and in 2019, he was the artistic director for the Aichi Triennale, an arts festival organized by Aichi Prefecture, establishing himself as a significant presence in the public discourse. His activities have been recognized by public institutions, having been appointed as a member of various government councils and positions in the aforementioned Aichi Prefecture events. Since 2020, he has shifted his focus to his self-established YouTube channel, "POLITAS TV", where he operates as a political opinion YouTuber, engaging in a range of discourse activities. Therefore, he should not be deleted. MihariHarukaze (talk) 10:11, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Please point to the independent sources that show him being "a prominent figure in Japan's internet scene". Geschichte (talk) 10:33, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Follower Count on X (formerly Twitter): As of October 9, 2024, Tsuda's X account has 1.466 million followers, ranking among the top influencers in Japan. For comparison, the Prime Minister of Japan, Shigeru Ishiba, has 418,000 followers (Shigeru Ishiba X account), and the left-wing journalist Isoko Mochizuki, known as the model for the Netflix global series "The Journalist", has 319,000 followers (Isoko Mochizuki X account). This shows that Tsuda is one of Japan’s leading left-wing influencers (Daisuke Tsuda X account).
- Official Profile: According to a 2017 profile published by the public relations department of Aichi Prefecture, Tsuda has been active as an internet expert since the 2000s and has appeared in various mass media outlets. He has authored several books on the internet and has held positions as a professor at higher education institutions and as a member of various government committees (Aichi Prefecture PR Document).
- Asahi Shimbun Opinion Committee Member: Tsuda served as a member of the opinion committee for Asahi Shimbun, one of Japan's leading quality media outlets, highlighting his recognition in the world of public discourse (Asahi Shimbun Daisuke Tsuda Opinion).
- Mention in Ryukyu Shimpo: In 2018, Tsuda was listed as one of the "famous people (著名人)" in an article by Ryukyu Shimpo, Okinawa’s leading regional newspaper, indicating his influence is acknowledged even in regional media (Ryukyu Shimpo).
- Artistic Director of Aichi Triennale: In 2019, Tsuda served as the artistic director of the Aichi Triennale, an arts festival hosted by Aichi Prefecture. This event was sponsored by global corporations headquartered in Aichi Prefecture, such as Toyota Motor Corporation, further demonstrating Tsuda's public activities and societal recognition. (Aichi Prefecture Document, Triennale Report)
- This evidence shows that Tsuda is not only an expert on internet issues but also a well-known figure with influence across multiple fields. MihariHarukaze (talk) 12:10, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Uh, have you read WP:NPEOPLE? If not, please do now. While you're at it, you may find Wikipedia:Why is BFDI not on Wikipedia? instructive.
- BTW, that "Official Profile" you mentioned? That's a one-page chronological list of Tsuda's contributions, basically what you'd find as part of a CV. That's not significant coverage in accord with NPEOPLE. Paradoctor (talk) 14:32, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Selected as a Young Global Leader (2013): In 2013, Tsuda was selected as one of the “Young Global Leaders Honourees” by the World Economic Forum in Davos. (The selection list is available here)
- Appeared in FOX News (2010): In June 2010, Tsuda appeared as an expert in an Associated Press's article titled "Twitter a hit in Japan as 'mumbling' tweeters give micro-blogging a distinctly Japanese flavor", which was featured on FOX News. (The FOX News article is available here)
- Controversy at Aichi Triennale 2019: In 2019, Tsuda served as the artistic director of Aichi Triennale 2019, which featured works such as a piece that involved burning an image of Emperor Hirohito and a statue symbolizing "comfort women". This exhibition sparked nationwide protests, with critics labeling it "disrespectful" toward the Emperor. The controversy received extensive media coverage, and Takashi Kawamura, the Mayor of Nagoya, staged a sit-in protest in opposition to the exhibition's content. The matter was also discussed in the Japanese parliament, leading to a prolonged national debate. Tsuda faced widespread criticism from various sectors. (NHK article, Mainichi article)
- Keynote Speech at "Critics in Residence @KYOTO EXPERIMENT 2024": On October 8, 2024, Tsuda delivered the keynote speech at the "Critics in Residence @KYOTO EXPERIMENT 2024”, hosted by the Delegation of the European Union to Japan. The event's introduction describes him as "widely known for his critical writing about recent shifts in the Japanese and international media environment as well as for establishing his own platforms for independent journalism".
- Cited in Google Scholar: A search for "Daisuke Tsuda Media Journalism" on Google Scholar reveals numerous academic papers citing Tsuda, showcasing his influence in the field of media and journalism. (Google Scholar search results)
- Appearances on NHK Programs: A search for "津田大介" of NHK’s program database reveals that Tsuda has frequently appeared as an expert on various programs. (NHK Archives search results)
- Mentions in CiNii: A search for "津田大介" on CiNii, the academic database operated by Japan's National Institute of Informatics, shows several articles related to media, internet, and journalism that mention Tsuda, aside from mentions of researchers with the same name. (CiNii Research search results)
- Featured in Major Japanese Newspapers: A search for "津田大介" in Japan's three major newspapers (The Asahi Shimbun, The Nikkei, and Sankei News) reveals that Tsuda has appeared in numerous articles, excluding those concerning a Dentsu employee with the same name. (The Asahi Shimbun search results, The Nikkei search results, Sankei News search results)
- MihariHarukaze (talk) 17:49, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Please point to the independent sources that show him being "a prominent figure in Japan's internet scene". Geschichte (talk) 10:33, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Mr.Tsuda is a prominent figure in Japan's internet scene, with over 20 years of experience. From the early days of Twitter Japan's service, he has engaged in various activities as a "media activist(a term he coined)", creating the buzzword "tsuda-ru". He served as a forum committee member for Asahi Shimbun, one of Japan's leading quality media outlets, from 2015 to 2019, and in 2019, he was the artistic director for the Aichi Triennale, an arts festival organized by Aichi Prefecture, establishing himself as a significant presence in the public discourse. His activities have been recognized by public institutions, having been appointed as a member of various government councils and positions in the aforementioned Aichi Prefecture events. Since 2020, he has shifted his focus to his self-established YouTube channel, "POLITAS TV", where he operates as a political opinion YouTuber, engaging in a range of discourse activities. Therefore, he should not be deleted. MihariHarukaze (talk) 10:11, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Journalism and Japan. Shellwood (talk) 09:29, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politics and Internet. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:09, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Delete: I tired a .jp website search, nothing comes up. This in a Korean paper [24] briefly mentions this person. Likely more in Japanese sources? I don't know. Oaktree b (talk) 12:05, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- In today's Asahi Shimbun Digital article titled "How did you view the party leaders' debate before the snap dissolution? With Daisuke Tsuda and Seiko Mimaki (スピード解散前の党首討論、どう見た? 津田大介さんと三牧聖子さん)", Tsuda appears as one of the experts. While there are differing opinions about Tsuda’s political views and activities, it is undeniable that he is a well-known public figure. MihariHarukaze (talk) 13:14, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- We require articles about him, not just him speaking on a particular subject, that's the issue. Oaktree b (talk) 21:14, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- WP:NPEOPLE:
"Notable" in the sense of being famous or popular—although not irrelevant—is secondary.
Paradoctor (talk) 14:09, 10 October 2024 (UTC)- (Reading the Wind) "If You Want to Exhibit the Comfort Woman Statue" - Editor-in-Chief Masato Inui (Source: Sankei Shimbun, August 6, 2019) Link to article
- Event Exhibiting Comfort Woman Statue in Aichi: Chief Cabinet Secretary Suga States "We Will Carefully Examine the Facts and Respond Appropriately" (Source: Sankei Shimbun, August 2, 2019) Link to article
- Daisuke Tsuda Apologizes: "The Situation Exceeded Our Expectations. I Take Full Responsibility." (Source: Asahi Shimbun, August 3, 2019) Link to article
- The Year of Survival for News Apps: What Will Determine the Winners and Losers (Source: The Nikkei, January 9, 2015) Link to article
- "No System in Place to Prevent the Director’s Judgment Errors" – Final Report on the Aichi Triennale (Source: The Nikkei, December 18, 2019) Link to article
- MihariHarukaze (talk) 15:56, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
- All of these articles with the exception of the short third one only features the name ("津田大介") a single time. E.g. the last article is about the "After Freedom of Expression?" exhibition and mentions the guy once as a director. It does not provide in-depth coverage of him. Cortador (talk) 08:17, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- In today's Asahi Shimbun Digital article titled "How did you view the party leaders' debate before the snap dissolution? With Daisuke Tsuda and Seiko Mimaki (スピード解散前の党首討論、どう見た? 津田大介さんと三牧聖子さん)", Tsuda appears as one of the experts. While there are differing opinions about Tsuda’s political views and activities, it is undeniable that he is a well-known public figure. MihariHarukaze (talk) 13:14, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Can we get a review of the sources brought to this discussion. It would have been helpful if there had been a more comprehensive deletion nomination statement that demonstrated a BEFORE had been done instead of just a policy acronym which doesn't explain much at all.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 05:06, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Alexander Allen (bridge) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
I can find no significant or independent coverage of this bridge player, which is demanded by WP:GNG and WP:SPORTCRIT. The NYT source is not significant coverage, just a mention, and likewise the bridgewinners.com source. And the bulletin published by the American Contract Bridge League is not independent. Geschichte (talk) 07:31, 2 October 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Virginia. Shellwood (talk) 08:49, 2 October 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:48, 2 October 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 06:14, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nom and my own searching for additional sourcing. The sources currently in the article are not sufficient for GNG, particularly for a BLP. ~ Pbritti (talk) 04:32, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Already PROD'd so Soft Deletion is not an option.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 05:02, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Sandeep Kumar (racing driver) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Fails GNG as they have only competed in domestic categories (despite the success listed in the tables, none of the championships meet GNG for articles about them), is in clear violation of COI and reads like promotional material MSportWiki (talk) 05:00, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Motorsport-related deletion discussions. MSportWiki (talk) 05:00, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Matt Palmer (racing driver) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Fails GNG as a low-level domestic Australian amateur racing driver who achieved no notable success, and none of the sources are appropriate (one primary, one social media and one from a business register). MSportWiki (talk) 04:47, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Motorsport-related deletion discussions. MSportWiki (talk) 04:47, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Vincent Moscaritolo (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Fails WP:NBIO, effectively zero reliable and secondary sources. Brandon (talk) 04:06, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Computing. Brandon (talk) 04:06, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Oregon-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:11, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
Please don’t delete. Vincent MOSCARITOLO made a significant contribution to the end to end cryptography used by modern messaging systems today.
He is still active, publishing on Substack. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 4th-amendment (talk • contribs) 12:09, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
Formatting issue resolved.
|
---|
|
- Delete the article is very poorly written, and "having a Substack" is far from the threshold for notability. I do not see any secondary sources, either in the article or in a Google search. Walsh90210 (talk) 23:47, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: There is an unbolded Keep in here so not eligible for Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 04:41, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Delete fails GNG, page reads like promotional material (violation of COI) and features no reliable secondary sources. MSportWiki (talk) 05:04, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Emily Duggan (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Fails GNG as they have only ever competed in entry-level categories and one obscure international category where they did not make a notable impact. Page history indicates the page was either self-created or COI, although an attempt has been made by an IP to clean it up, and the sources are mainly social media or primary. MSportWiki (talk) 04:38, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Motorsport-related deletion discussions. MSportWiki (talk) 04:38, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Naoto Ueno (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Does not seem to meet WP:N WP:NBIO. No third-party sources indicating notability. Also severe WP:COI editing, including some that is clearly by the subject of the article. ~Darth StabroTalk/Contribs 02:30, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Medicine. ~Darth StabroTalk/Contribs 02:30, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Japan, Hawaii, and Texas. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:11, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Delete Subject lacks significant coverage to meet WP:BIO Tesleemah (talk) 07:54, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Weak delete. Obvious WP:COI issues, an argument could possibly be made for WP:NACADEMIC. There are a handful of in depth interviews in academic journals, director of the UH Cancer Center, and while the highest cited papers on Google Scholar are with many authors with the subject in the middle, there are quite a few papers for which he is the lead/corresponding author that are relatively highly cited for the age of the paper. I'm not convinced of the magnitude of impact of the scholarly work and independence/possible journalistic COI of interview coverage is not clear.
- Cyanochic (talk) 09:18, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Keep, tentatively. He has 30,000 citations and an h-index of 84, but in a very high-citation field. However even ignoring the highly-cited consortia papers, he still has several impactful research articles as the last/corresponding author (top cites: 576, 342, 231) and as first author (223), not to mention a lot of reviews in those authorship positions (554, 538, 237, 208; 235), though I don't give these as much weight. I've collected some of the more in-depth secondary analyses of work attributed to him as first/senior author below, which might help demonstrate a stronger case for C1. These could also be used to make his research section more NPOV.
Secondary/independent analysis
|
---|
|
JoelleJay (talk) 01:40, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
- Clear Keep -- As @JoelleJay has noted, the nominator's notability guidelines omit the most relevant, WP:PROF (a notability criteria that predates and is independent of WP:N) where it is clear that Ueno is clearly more accomplished and notable than the average professor. Full-professor, head of a major NIH research program, at an R1 University, with significant third-party coverage of the appointment: ASCO-Post is the publication of the American Society for Clinical Oncology, so their coverage is very relevant. As far as the actual citation numbers, these vary from field to field hugely, but I can't remember a researcher in any field with an h-index of 84 or above ever being deleted -- medicine is a high pub. + high citation field, so the numbers need to be much higher than say Estonian studies, but my experience is that borderline is usually 30-50 in that field.
- The article was probably created too early: the notability tags from 2011 were probably correct and I would have likely been on the delete side then, but much has changed since then and regardless of past COI or other mistakes, now the subject of the article is notable; thus keep. -- Michael Scott Asato Cuthbert (talk) 10:19, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- Keep. Google scholar has him with an h-factor of 105. He is still active, I counted 39 publications in 2024. While this may be a high citation field, and many of these papers have multiple authors, I feel he passes #C1 of WP:NPROF. Ldm1954 (talk) 14:25, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 04:38, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Sam Tinnesz (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Non-notable musician. A few billboard chart listings doesn't satisfy WP:GNG. ZimZalaBim talk 02:19, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Tennessee. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:12, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 03:33, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Bulgaria–South Africa relations (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Article currently contains no sources. Unable to find evidence the topic meets WP:GNG as lacking significant coverage in secondary sources. AusLondonder (talk) 03:18, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bilateral relations, South Africa, and Bulgaria. AusLondonder (talk) 03:18, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Delete unreferenced for 16 years. The only sources I found were primary sources from the respective governments. Fails WP:GNG. LibStar (talk) 03:21, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Shigakishi (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Possibly a hoax article. The non-English text given on this article is fake; the Chinese characters given correspond to Prince Imseong, whose Japanese name reading is Rinshō Taishi and Korean name reading is Imsŏng t‘aeja. The references given are incredibly vague; it's just the overall names of some really extensive works of history. Searching online I can't find any reference to this person existing. seefooddiet (talk) 03:10, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Royalty and nobility, Buddhism, and Korea. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:12, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Phycomin (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Stub was previously blanked and redirected but term is not mentioned at target, so currently it does not make a good redirect. The cyanobacteria extract contains other compounds besides phenethylamine (like phycocyanin), so redirect may be confusing. Page should be deleted unless there is consensus for a partial merge or for keeping as an article (though it does not appear notable). Mdewman6 (talk) 02:44, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Biology and Medicine. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:13, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. I had done the BLAR as "redirect non-notable brand-name product to its active ingredient. See also Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Blue Green Algae". But if the brand/product is so unworthy to mention in the article about its active ingredient, then I agree it's a poor redirect. And if the branch/product contains other ingredients, such that a simple redirect to the active ingredient is conceptually poor, then delete outright as a non-notable topic itself (the specific combination of components or its source). DMacks (talk) 05:02, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Luxor Records (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
After doing a preliminary WP:BEFORE search, I've come up with no lead on being able to satisfy WP:ORGCRIT. Graywalls (talk) 02:24, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Music, Business, Companies, and California. Graywalls (talk) 02:24, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Merge a few sentence worth's of information to As They Sleep, the band that runs the label. Mach61 03:24, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Nedd Brockmann (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Contested redirect to List of people who have run across Australia, which is what it was originally created as. Sourcing present and via BEFORE does not establish notability for Brockmann as a businessman or athlete so bringing it here for discussion Star Mississippi 02:02, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Businesspeople, Sportspeople, and Australia. Star Mississippi 02:02, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- I believe that Nedd has notability for the charity work he is doing, the following article lists a number of his accomplishments over the last 2 years. https://www.foxsports.com.au/more-sports/its-just-pain-australian-cult-hero-nedd-brockmann-chases-1000mile-record-two-years-after-crosscountry-run/news-story/a2ab5b36dce447aa5fd3d3e42495fac0 He is currently attempting a 1000 Mile 10 day challenge that at the time of writing has raised over AU$800,000 https://www.neddsuncomfortablechallenge.com/donate?fbclid=PAZXh0bgNhZW0CMTEAAaZp9BUhSfSoAwtHkA614j4edKE2jy3QNvWiBomLMEbQrUp4AaCubWFUu_U_aem_cGZvq4c65wTGynCbFYeQfQ Campbell.jr.Smith (talk) 07:13, 12 October 2024 (UTC)
- — Campbell.jr.Smith (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. Star Mississippi 18:26, 12 October 2024 (UTC)
- I believe that Nedd has notability for the charity work he is doing, the following article lists a number of his accomplishments over the last 2 years. https://www.foxsports.com.au/more-sports/its-just-pain-australian-cult-hero-nedd-brockmann-chases-1000mile-record-two-years-after-crosscountry-run/news-story/a2ab5b36dce447aa5fd3d3e42495fac0 He is currently attempting a 1000 Mile 10 day challenge that at the time of writing has raised over AU$800,000 https://www.neddsuncomfortablechallenge.com/donate?fbclid=PAZXh0bgNhZW0CMTEAAaZp9BUhSfSoAwtHkA614j4edKE2jy3QNvWiBomLMEbQrUp4AaCubWFUu_U_aem_cGZvq4c65wTGynCbFYeQfQ Campbell.jr.Smith (talk) 07:13, 12 October 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Seeking more participation in this discussion and an evaluation of sources would be helpful.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 01:41, 16 October 2024 (UTC)- Google his name and you will realise he needs an article.. 210.84.50.88 (talk) 09:04, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Brussels International Festival of Eroticism (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Fails WP:GNG due to not having any WP:SIGCOV. Only took placed for two years and doesn't not meet notability Demt1298 (talk) 01:32, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film, Entertainment, Events, Sexuality and gender, and Belgium. Demt1298 (talk) 01:32, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Keep: I found coverage in French: https://www.moustique.be/tendances/2019/03/19/ete-au-festival-de-erotisme-de-bruxelles-176446 ; https://www.dhnet.be/actu/sexualite/2014/03/06/on-etait-au-salon-de-lerotisme-video-YUCJW544NBCEPKHBAJJMCGKTIY/ and so on (and apparently sources exist in German and Dutch); if that is not enough, redirect to List_of_festivals_in_Europe#Belgium or to another target. Needs cleanup. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 15:13, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 01:30, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Basque exonyms (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Indiscriminate mostly unreferenced list of proper names, Wikipedia is not a dictionary. Other such articles have recently been deleted, see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/French exonyms. toweli (talk) 12:12, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Language, Geography, Lists, Europe, France, and Spain. toweli (talk) 12:12, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
- Delete: Fails WP:INDISCRIMINATE and is consistent with similar decisions—I see no reason why so many exonym lists exist. Are any such articles notable? pluckyporo (talk • contribs) 09:41, 2 October 2024 (UTC)
- Keep. There is a definition of exonyms given by the UN that means that such lists are not indiscriminate, but instead pass WP:LISTCRITERIA. By all means cull items that should not be there (such as toponyms that are the mere result of orthographic rules in different languages). But such lists themselves are encyclopedic. As for appealing to recent rulings, what's actually happened is that there has been a huge bunch of individual nominations, some closed very quickly, without any notification placed on the page most people interested in the topic would see: Talk:Endonym and exonym. OsFish (talk) 08:21, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
- WP:LISTGLOSSARY provides that a list of words is encyclopedic only when the article provides an in-depth explanation for the significance of such a list (see, for example, List of English words containing Q not followed by U. I don't believe the list of Basque exonyms provides opportunity for such analysis. pluckyporo (talk • contribs) 04:54, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
- By that definition, a List of Basque words would also not be indiscriminate. —Tamfang (talk) 04:09, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Trim: A few names in the list are evidently not cognate to the respective endonyms, and I'd preserve these. Otherwise, delete as trivial; each language adapts foreign words to its own phonology and orthography, okay, we get it. —Tamfang (talk) 23:55, 6 October 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 01:25, 9 October 2024 (UTC)Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 01:24, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Jeffrey Johnson (actor) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Couldn't find any SIGCOV, and while prolific, doesn't seem to be particularly notable. Unsourced BLP. GraziePrego (talk) 01:01, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Bands and musicians, Television, Video games, Advertising, California, and Massachusetts. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:15, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Delete for lack of significant coverage and existing for 10 years as an unreferenced biographical article about a living person. I think Boleyn correctly nominated this article; the past AfD had minimal participation. I did a couple of Google searches and found scant support for notability: this interview, some self- or fan-created sources, Amazon, IMDB, etc. Bearian (talk) 10:05, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Already brought to AFD so not eligible for a Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 01:13, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Stephen Harrison (author) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
As much as I think Harrison's writing about Wikipedia is insightful, I simply don't think he passes WP:NJOURNALIST. He's not really been the subject of significant coverage. I don't think interviews or reviews of his books in student newspapers (Student Life) are sigcov. The Fix interview might be significant coverage, but I am unfamiliar with the publication. 1A is a podcast interview, which I don't think counts for notability. The Salon, Slate and HuffPost links are just to his journalism and obviously don't count. The New America link is the description of an event that Harrison was participating in, and I don't think its sigcov either. The WashU entry is a "look what one of our alumni is up to" post and therefore it's not independent or sigcov. The Yahoo interview is part of the Yahoo for Creators program, which has an unclear level of editorial control from Yahoo itself, and may be published with little editorial oversight like WP:FORBESCON, but I'm not sure, and I think its status as significant coverage is questionable. Hemiauchenia (talk) 00:00, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Journalism, Technology, Internet, and Texas. Hemiauchenia (talk) 00:00, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors and Missouri. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:49, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Delete: I don't find much beyond articles he's penned. Seems notable, but I don't find any sourcing we can use. Article now is mostly sourced to author profiles. Oaktree b (talk) 01:21, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Keep: With the publication of The Editors, Harrison satisfies #3 under creative professionals. I also just added two more sources, including an ABC affiliate WFAA and NBC Bay Area. 1A (radio program) is not a podcast, it's a radio program. - Wil540 art (talk) 02:38, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- The Editors hasn't even received a proper book review by a professional outlet so I hardly see how it passes the part of #3 that says
such work must have been the primary subject of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews
. The book was notably also deleted when taken to AfD, see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Editors (novel). I hardly see how being a guest on a radio or local television program is enough to pass GNG. Hemiauchenia (talk) 04:26, 9 October 2024 (UTC) - If you haven't looked at it already, something from [25] might be of use. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:53, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- The Editors hasn't even received a proper book review by a professional outlet so I hardly see how it passes the part of #3 that says
- I would like to see more input before making up my mind. Bearian (talk) 10:10, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 00:48, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Delete: I mostly agree with Oaktree above. Simply having published a book is definitely not enough to meet point 3 of WP:NCREATIVE, especially when that book's coverage has been pretty minimal. Going through the article's sources - author pages don't establish anything, the Yahoo article is misleading as it's aggregated from a Substack, and I would not consider alumni magazines to be sufficiently WP:INDEPENDENT. There may eventually be enough coverage for an article on his book, but it doesn't seem like there's enough here for an article on him. ThadeusOfNazereth(he/him)Talk to Me! 02:34, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Regrettably (I think he's one of best WP-journalists around) I can't disagree. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:12, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Sphere Media (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Seems to be a push to get this into the mainspace. Attempted to clean up the promotional tone just added by IP but it seems to be WP:TNT territory. Since last deletion discussion, the only thing I see is an announcement of a purchase which is a routine announcement (followed by multiple sources engaging in churnalism) and falls short of meeting WP:ORGCRIT. CNMall41 (talk) 00:18, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film, Television, Companies, and Canada. CNMall41 (talk) 00:18, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Creator was notified via script. Pinging other previous participants @Timtrent:, @DoubleGrazing:, @Robert McClenon:, @Vanderwaalforces:, @Jumpytoo:, @JMWt:. For the references used other than I mention in the nomination, there is a great source assessment in the first deletion discussion.--CNMall41 (talk) 00:23, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2024 October 16. —cyberbot ITalk to my owner:Online 00:42, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Delete I don't see anything has changed from the previous AfD to make it pass WP:NCORP. Jumpytoo Talk 01:07, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Comment - Of course there is a push by the company and their people to get it into mainspace. That is why some members of the Wikipedia community are pushing back. Robert McClenon (talk) 06:46, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Comment - This is an improvement over the previous version, in that it no longer contains puffery. It now reads as if it was written by the corporate technical writer from the company's viewpoint. Robert McClenon (talk) 06:46, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Delete: Rammed full of "Sphere has announced" and doesn't even bother to hide the fact that it is an advert. Fails WP:GNG. Is WP:PROMOTION 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 07:45, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Still keep, it would be quite weird, in my opinion, if a production company which made series for major broadcasters wasn't notable. Previous AfD has an alternative source assessment which I agreed with, and I think the case is even stronger now. JMWt (talk) 09:10, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Josette Baisse (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
I feel like this article should be deleted because it's too insignificant of a person to have their own Wikipedia article — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yusuf Michael (talk • contribs) 00:40, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2024 October 16. —cyberbot ITalk to my owner:Online 00:07, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Women, Olympics, and France. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:47, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Keep, perhaps speedy given the lack of a valid deletion rationale. Regardless, there is WP:SIGCOV of her in two obituaries, in the ski magazine Ski Chrono, regional newspaper Le Dauphine Libere and regional magazine Chamonix-Mont Blanc, resulting in a WP:BASIC pass. Dclemens1971 (talk) 01:40, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
Files
[edit]- File:DavidFeldman.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Fws10170 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).
Unused, possibly out of scope or non-notable person. The main article was deleted per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/David N. Feldman. 146.196.41.141 (talk) 07:23, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
Categories
[edit]NEW NOMINATIONS
[edit]Category:History of Yugoslavia
[edit]- Propose merging Category:History of Yugoslavia to Category:Yugoslavia
- Nominator's rationale: Because Yugoslavia is a historical topic as such, this title is redundant, all this should simply be upmerged into the parent category, there's no apparent benefit in having the readers do an extra click. Joy (talk) 06:59, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- NB: if there's actual historiography topics that should be categorized, we should make a Category:Historiography of Yugoslavia for that. --Joy (talk) 07:20, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Disagree The "History of Yugoslavia" category is one of about 20 country categories in Category:History of Europe by former country and there are more “Histories of former countries in the “other continent” countries. Hence it should not be deleted or upmerged. Hugo999 (talk) 08:50, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
Category:Articles on pre-1900 earthquakes
[edit]- Nominator's rationale: No longer used in Template:Infobox earthquake and was added in 2018 at Talk:List_of_historical_earthquakes#Proposal_to_redefine_as_"before_1900"_(not_1901) and was removed from the template in 2019. See more discussion. Cowboygilbert - (talk) ♥ 01:50, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- There is still an article AD 17 Lydia earthquake in the category, how did that happen? Marcocapelle (talk) 05:03, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
Category:Second ladies and gentlemen of the Philippines
[edit]- Nominator's rationale: WP:NEOLOGISM, Second Ladies are not a thing in Philippine politics. We are not like the United States which uses such term. Second Ladies/Gentlemen at best are just a synonym for the Vice President's spouse, unlike the First Lady/Gentlemen who actually serves a role for being the host at the Malacanang Palace and is distinct from the Spouse of the President of the Philippines Hariboneagle927 (talk) 02:24, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Unfortunately, this category has been emptied by the nominator, Hariboneagle927. Liz Read! Talk! 06:14, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
- For full disclosure, there were four entries under it Mans Carpio, Elenita Binay, Celia Díaz Laurel, and Loi Ejercito Hariboneagle927 (talk) 06:21, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose. This category is spouses of the vice president, that's a defining feature regardless of whether the role is official. Please don't remove pages from categories like this. I've reverted you removals. Mason (talk) 13:08, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
- Comment this is plain neologism. You would be hard pressed to see consistent/sustained usage of the term "Second Lady/Gentleman" by Philippine national broadsheets or government agencies. First Lady and Gentlemen are likewise not a formalized institution but unlike Second Lady, the term (Second Lady) is not used by the media or the government.
- The argument is "Second Ladies" as a role does not exist in the Philippine context. Sure the category could be renamed as Category:Spouses of vice presidents of the Philippines to accurately portray its member pages. We do not created fictitious roles and present it as fact, regardless if official or not. Hariboneagle927 (talk) 04:44, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- To re-emphasis the role of First Lady and Second Lady is distinct from the President's and the Vice president spouses. Hariboneagle927 (talk) 04:51, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose. This category is spouses of the vice president, that's a defining feature regardless of whether the role is official. Please don't remove pages from categories like this. I've reverted you removals. Mason (talk) 13:08, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
- For full disclosure, there were four entries under it Mans Carpio, Elenita Binay, Celia Díaz Laurel, and Loi Ejercito Hariboneagle927 (talk) 06:21, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
- Local circumstances, both with respect to the question whether it is a defining characteristic, as well as with respect to the name of the category, should play an important role in the discussion. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:44, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
- Two of the four entries are notable for being elected politicians, one is a theater actress and Mans Carpio is noted for being involved in a smuggling scandal and his membership in the wider Duterte family who had Rodrigo Duterte, his father-in-law. None of the given citation asserts they held the role of "second lady/gentleman". Again we are talking about the fictitious role. I understand in some context such as the US context its synonymous to the vice president's spouse.Hariboneagle927 (talk) 04:56, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- I do not know anything about Philippine politics myself but I think your arguments are good and this should only be opposed if spouse of vice president is a defining characteristic in the Philippines after all. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:51, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Two of the four entries are notable for being elected politicians, one is a theater actress and Mans Carpio is noted for being involved in a smuggling scandal and his membership in the wider Duterte family who had Rodrigo Duterte, his father-in-law. None of the given citation asserts they held the role of "second lady/gentleman". Again we are talking about the fictitious role. I understand in some context such as the US context its synonymous to the vice president's spouse.Hariboneagle927 (talk) 04:56, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: More participation needed to form consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 01:30, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
Early abbots by century
[edit]- Propose deleting Category:5th-century abbots
- Propose deleting Category:6th-century abbots
- Propose deleting Category:7th-century abbots
- Propose deleting Category:8th-century abbots
- Propose deleting Category:9th-century abbots
- Propose deleting Category:10th-century abbots
- Propose deleting Category:11th-century abbots
- Propose deleting Category:12th-century abbots
- Nominator's rationale: the earliest non-Christian (Buddhist) abbot that we have an article about is Yishan Yining who lived in the 13th century. These categories don't contribute to navigation until we have articles about earlier Buddhist abbots. All Irish abbots of this period were Christian abbots and can be added as subcategories thereof. It would be naieve to state that these Irish abbots do not belong in Christian abbots just because the Irish category name does not specify "Christian". Wikipedia should reflect the real world and not get stuck too much in its internal organization. The real world is that there weren't Buddhist abbots in medieval Ireland, they were all Christian. This nomination is of course without objection to recreation once we have articles about earlier Buddhist abbots. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:07, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose. > It would be naieve to state that these Irish abbots do not belong in Christian abbots just because the Irish category name does not specify "Christian".
- I never said that the individuals in the page don't belong in the Christian abbots category. I said that you shouldn't be conflating nationality and religion at the category level. Three things: I don't see why you're suggesting deletion, instead of merging. This deletion is going to break the abbot by nationality template. This seems premature, given that I asked you about this on your talk page. Mason (talk) 21:47, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
- @Nederlandse Leeuw and Fayenatic london: what do you think of this? Better to have third-party input here. The discussion is in the first place about whether (medieval) Irish abbots should be a subcategory or a sibling of Christian abbots. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:42, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Well first of all, why would you delete these categories rather than upmerging them to Category:Medieval abbots? NLeeuw (talk) 05:52, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Keep. Since these have subcats for both Irish and Christian abbots by century, and are part of e.g. 12th-century religious leaders and 12th-century monks, it seems to me best to keep the hierarchy intact. – Fayenatic London 10:23, 11 October 2024 (UTC)
- I think that Marco's point is that everyone in the Irish abbot tree is also a Christian abbot. I'd already tried to discuss this issue, but they're intentionally ignoring me. Mason (talk) 20:24, 11 October 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Merge, as suggested by NL?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 01:28, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Apart from Byzantine abbots there isn't anything specifically medieval about abbots. Should we then also create a separate category for medieval Christian abbots, and for medieval Irish abbots? I don't think so, the century categories seem to suffice. Having said that, I have not nominated Category:Medieval abbots and it's probably too late to add this now. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:10, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
Category:Society of Ukrainian Progressors members
[edit]- Nominator's rationale: Emptied: no refs. No such society. Mistranslation? --Altenmann >talk 21:41, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
- Comment This is an empty category, it doesn't need a discussion. Next time, consider tagging it CSD C1. Liz Read! Talk! 23:35, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
- Next time, consider not emptying the category beforehand. Discussion can be useful when you know which articles were in there. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:36, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- @Altenmann, I'm going to say it more bluntly. Please don't empty categories like this. We can't tell if there's a mistranslation or if the category has sources in another language, if we don't know who was in it. Mason (talk) 22:34, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- I support the comments of Marcocapelle and Mason. For the record, the six biographies removed out-of-process by Altenmann are here: [26].
Maybe the last word should be "progressionists" like [27].– Fayenatic London 10:39, 11 October 2024 (UTC)- What's this "out-of-process" nonsense? The removed categories in bios were not supported by sources. Aren't we forgetting our most fundamental rule? --Altenmann >talk 16:23, 11 October 2024 (UTC)
- You really need to consider the feedback you're getting here. "The removed categories in bios were not supported by sources." That's the problem. You removed them so how do you expect the CFD to go? I've rolled back the removal so other people can actually evaluate the category contents. Mason (talk) 20:16, 11 October 2024 (UTC)
- "how do you expect the CFD to go?" - easily. Check in Wikipedia or in the internets whether such society exists or existed. --Altenmann >talk 20:38, 11 October 2024 (UTC)
- Your reversal is a blatant violation of Wikipedia rules: WP:AGF and WP:V unreferenced information can be deleted at any time. Here are the bios in question, if someone questions my senses:
- You really need to consider the feedback you're getting here. "The removed categories in bios were not supported by sources." That's the problem. You removed them so how do you expect the CFD to go? I've rolled back the removal so other people can actually evaluate the category contents. Mason (talk) 20:16, 11 October 2024 (UTC)
- What's this "out-of-process" nonsense? The removed categories in bios were not supported by sources. Aren't we forgetting our most fundamental rule? --Altenmann >talk 16:23, 11 October 2024 (UTC)
13:16 Smasongarrison talk contribs (Dmytro Doroshenko added to category, this page is included within other pages) diffhist
13:16 Smasongarrison talk contribs (Mykhailo Hrushevsky added to category, this page is included within other pages) diffhist 13:16 Smasongarrison talk contribs (Mykola Vasylenko added to category, this page is included within other pages) diffhist 13:16 Smasongarrison talk contribs (Symon Petliura added to category, this page is included within other pages) diffhist 13:16 Smasongarrison talk contribs (Serhiy Yefremov added to category, this page is included within other pages) diffhist 13:16 Smasongarrison talk contribs (Volodymyr Vynnychenko added to category, this page is included within other pages) diffhist
- Meanwhile I am restoring my deletions done in total agreement with Wikipedia rules. --Altenmann >talk 20:32, 11 October 2024 (UTC)
- I don't understand why you even brought this up for CFD if you are just going to make it difficult for wikipedians to temporarily evaluate the category. I've reverted the change and ask that you be patient. You're the one who made the nomination. Mason (talk) 00:17, 12 October 2024 (UTC)
- Meanwhile I am restoring my deletions done in total agreement with Wikipedia rules. --Altenmann >talk 20:32, 11 October 2024 (UTC)
- The last word should be "Progressives", see User_talk:Aleksandr_Grigoryev#Category:Society_of_Ukrainian_Progressors_members. But in the same discussion, the category's creator accepts deletion. – Fayenatic London 11:05, 11 October 2024 (UTC)
- That's helpful to know. From that conversation it seems like merge to Category:Ukrainian_Democratic_Party_(1904)_politicians is a viable solution. Mason (talk) 00:19, 12 October 2024 (UTC)
- No; these are not the same establishments. YOu cannot categorize unless the articles say so that they are, i.e., you cannot do an automatic merge. --Altenmann >talk 03:10, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- That's helpful to know. From that conversation it seems like merge to Category:Ukrainian_Democratic_Party_(1904)_politicians is a viable solution. Mason (talk) 00:19, 12 October 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Now that the premature emptying issue is resolved, do people support a merge to Category:Ukrainian Democratic Party (1904) politicians (as suggested by Mason)?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 01:10, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- It is not clear to me whether these two organizations were interconnected or synonomous. By all means add articles to Category:Ukrainian Democratic Party (1904) politicians insofar they mention membership of that party. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:13, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
Redirects
[edit]Jamie Jungers
[edit]- Jamie Jungers → Tiger Woods#TWInfidelity (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Not mentioned at target. (As below, Redirects from people seem a little more urgent than most Redirects to an article without mention.) jlwoodwa (talk) 01:42, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Searching for other mentions on Wikipedia: the set index article Jungers says she's a
woman associated with Tiger Woods
, and she's described tangentially asone of Tiger Woods' alleged mistresses
at Be-Shure § Notes and Dog's Most Wanted § ep6. Be-Shure only cites TV guides for that claim, and the other is uncited. Since there's no good target elsewhere, I think the redirect should be deleted unless a WP:BLP-satisfying mention is added to Tiger Woods. jlwoodwa (talk) 04:18, 9 October 2024 (UTC) Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 09:20, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
Srishti
[edit]Not mentioned at target (not now, and not when a hatnote was added). Looking at Special:PrefixIndex/Srishti, there's a name (Srishti Kaur, Srishti Rana, Srishti Jain), Srishti (film), Srishti Manipal Institute of Art, Design and Technology, and the partial title matches of Srishti Madurai and Srishtidnyan. Looking at the pageviews, I'm unsure whether the name is the primary topic, or if there's no primary topic; I think it might depend on whether the other uses are all derived from the name. It would also help if I had any idea why it was redirected to Hindu units of time; I'll ping Vinay Jha in case they remember. jlwoodwa (talk) 02:11, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Comment: The Sanskrit term means "creation".[28] Hindu units of time doesn't really talk about creation the way Hindu cosmology might, but rather units of time that can be associated to personalities (Brahma) involved in creation. Jroberson108 (talk) 02:29, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 09:18, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
Japetus
[edit]No apparent reason why this spelling would not have the same primary topic as Iapetus. Would boldly retarget, but it's been a redirect to the moon for 18 years with a hatnote, seems like it's worth a discussion first. Mdewman6 (talk) 07:00, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
Substituted
[edit]- Substituted → Substitution reaction (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Even with my chemistry bias, I feel like this is too broad to redirect to its current target. If the chemistry use is really primary, substituent would likely be a better target. Retargeting to substitute, soft redirecting to Wiktionary, or deletion may be better options. Mdewman6 (talk) 02:03, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget per nom ; tag {{R from verb}} and {{R from adjective}} -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 03:05, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget where? Mdewman6 (talk) 03:22, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget to substitute (disambiguation) per the above. Tevildo (talk) 07:47, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
Β-aminoethylamine
[edit]- Β-aminoethylamine → Phenethylamine (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
This bot redirect makes no sense, replacing phenyl with amino. Delete to avoid confusion. Mdewman6 (talk) 01:38, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. The redirect-term would mean Ethylenediamine, but I've never heard this term used for that chemical. DMacks (talk) 05:06, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Yeah, but I suppose it would be just aminoethylamine or α-aminoethylamine, which aren't used, whereas β-aminoethylamine just makes no sense. Mdewman6 (talk) 06:08, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
Wikipedia:PCR
[edit]- Wikipedia:PCR → Wikipedia:Writing better articles#Provide context for the reader (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
What do editors think of a retarget to Wikipedia:Reviewing pending changes? In my experience I've often seen this initialism used to refer to the pending changes reviewer user group, and absolutely never for this essay section. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 01:02, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- It's used a lot in mainspace, but I think it's all through {{context inline}}. It would be easy to not use this shortcut in that template. jlwoodwa (talk) 01:31, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget to Wikipedia:Reviewing pending changes per nom after updating the template to not use the shortcut. Seems like what most users would be seeking who would type this. Mdewman6 (talk) 03:34, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
Beta-ethylphenethylamine
[edit]- Beta-ethylphenethylamine → Β-Methylphenethylamine (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
This indicates a different compound than the target (one with an additional carbon atom, ethyl instead of methyl), one for which enwiki does not seem to have any content (see C10H15N, versus target's C9H13N). Delete. Mdewman6 (talk) 00:48, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. It's a different chemical, which is known but does not appear notable enough to merit an article. DMacks (talk) 05:38, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
Ra'ad 1
[edit]- Ra'ad 1 → RAAD (anti-tank guided missile) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
The more I research this redirect, the more confused I get. For starters, this redirect formerly targeted the article that is currently at Fajr-3 (artillery rocket), and did for the past six years. However, before that, this redirect, targeted the article which currently targets. However, to throw some more confusion into the mix, another similarly-titled article, Raad-1, exists. I may have figured out a better plan for what to do with this redirect by now if it were not for its incoming links; I am not clear what subject these links are meant to refer to. I'm thinking disambiguate is the way to go here, but I'm incredibly unclear what the base title should be for such a disambiguation page. Steel1943 (talk) 00:41, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Comment both RAAD (anti-tank guided missile) and Raad-1 say they mean Thunder and Thunder-1. ; while Fajr-3 (artillery rocket) seems to mean Aurora-3 or Dawn-3 ? -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 03:09, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
Glenn Trumpkin
[edit]- Glenn Trumpkin → Glenn Youngkin (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Amy Covid Barrett → Amy Coney Barrett (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Leningrad Lindsey → Lindsey Graham (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- But his laptop → Biden–Ukraine conspiracy theory#Laptop and hard drive (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Mthreegan → M3GAN (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
The nomination for Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 October 15#Rapey McForehead led me to examine the past redirects of Jasonbres (talk · contribs), who has a mile-long talk page of warnings (including for the inexplicable redirect of Donald Faison's character Christopher Turk on Scrubs to Black Scrubs) and one past block on their record, and these are the most inappropriate and provocative out of all of them, unlikely to be used, and after being asked by Traumnovelle (talk · contribs) why they'd even fathom creating such a provocative rd, answered "I think at the time, it was trending on Twitter, and I created a redirect for people who wanted to know who that name was referring to", which for the first three, I don't consider post-sink Twitter's trending topics a source for anything, much less redirect material. The last one is just clear nonsense, but the first three are undeniable WP:BLP violations, while the laptop reference is for terminally online political folks only (re: a 'blue-check' counterpoint to this). Nate • (chatter) 00:58, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Glen Trumpkin is used in RS: [29] [30] and whilst a non-neutral name I don't think it is a BLP violation, although the lack of views suggest this redirect is not useful and not worth the lack of neutrality. It isn't like these articles aren't using his full name.
- 'Amy Covid Barnett' is a clear BLP violation, only search result I get is a forum that is filled with offensive remarks about Barnett.
- 'Leningrad Lindsey' is used here: [31] and has 53 page views so might be an okay non-neutral redirect, although the RS clearly identifies his full name.
- Last two are highly unlikely search terms as demonstrated by their 6 views in the past year.
- Delete all bar Leningrad Lindsey where I am neutral on keeping it for now. Traumnovelle (talk) 01:12, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Comment, I don't think the last one is nonsense, and imo it should be unbundled from the rest of the political-people redirects. We should be discussing redirects based on their individual merits, not bundling based on assumptions about the creator. "Mthreegan" is a very common spoken-name for the film. (Also, the block was for 24 hours in 2008. Recent warnings and RfDs aside, I'd hope one would be able to consider that event looong past). Utopes (talk / cont) 01:16, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
Templates and Modules
[edit]Was reverted here citing duplication of Template:Reading Crusader. Gonnym (talk) 09:13, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
Unused template for an entity that is not a country and has no flag (the image used in the template is a logo). S.A. Julio (talk) 05:28, 16 October 2024 (UTC)