Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/Today

Purge
Shortcut WP:AFD/T

19 January 2025

Read how to nominate an article for deletion.

Recent AfDs: Today Yesterday

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

< January 18	January 20 >

Guide to deletion

Purge server cache

Tony Alanis

AfDs for this article:

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

Doesn't meet GNG and no longer meets NMMA Nswix (talk) 07:20, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Martial arts-related deletion discussions. Nswix (talk) 07:20, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Deb Hutton

AfDs for this article:

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

Virtually non-existent, secondary, reliable source coverage for this individual in Canada, fails WP:NBASIC. Recreating previously AfD’d page (from 2006) but there has been an ounce of more coverage. Only really covered in one article (about her volunteer role as a “fixer” after a scandal) and the rest are passing coverage, mostly in what would probably be considered WP:NINI & WP:BIOFAMILY. She the wife of Tim Hudak.

Lots of trivia in the article, in an apparent attempt to bolster notability, such as passing mentions of affiliations, prior employers, or the fact that she was part of a debate prep “acting” the part of a well known politician. Even the bulk of the fixer story was basic quoting of either her or other people directly involved. While has worked with politicians, does not qualify as a politician for notability/BLP requirements.

Otherwise nobody seems to be really covering her.

Attempts to handle through notability tagging and talking with article creator have failed. Independent research has uncovered precious little for a WP:BIO.

Not to be confused with either of the two more notable Deborah Hutton’s of which come up in search results even for Deb.

Also was mentioned in Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Jaime_Watt which was also deleted, but now a redirect.

Would be okay with merging some into the husband, but there is precious more than a sentence or three worth moving. TiggerJay (talk) 06:40, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. TiggerJay (talk) 06:40, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Politics, and Canada. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 07:03, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

1. 2 articles discuss her role in the Greenbelt scandal. This fact is about her and not her relationship with Tim Hudak.

2. She was not Tim Hudak's wife when she became Premier Harris's chief of staff, that has nothing to do with her marriage. I think that there may be offline sources that cover this in greater detail, given the time period in question.

3. She is an independent political actor. She writes political columns which have been discussed: https://www.ombudsman.on.ca/resources/speeches-and-articles/speeches/2019/politicians-cannot-do-the-work-of-independent-officers-of-the-legislature-(qp-briefing) https://www.thestar.com/opinion/contributors/how-the-right-defends-policy-lite-brown-hepburn/article_1206a6f9-ea8b-56fd-9b3a-cab27386e28f.html I haven't been able to source the original columns yet or encyclopedic sources, but I think there's potential here.

4. There's another article which provides substantial coverage about her currently linked in the article and it has nothing to do with Greenbelt scandal.

5. She currently on the Metrolinx board of directors. Metrolinx is a controversial agency, and I may be able to find sources that are about her role as a director specifically. Such a source would could be paid, such as a transportation or engineering magazine, given the niche topic.

I may prematurely moved the article from draftspace. I think the most appropriate action is that it is moved back to draftspace, given the likelihood that more information can be uncovered. Legend of 14 (talk) 07:48, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I also found this article: https://nationalpost.com/news/politics/ontario-liberals-target-conservative-leader-hudaks-wife-over-cancelled-gas-plant. That's 4 independent sources, with substantial coverage, about 3 different topics. Legend of 14 (talk) 08:02, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yissum Research Development Company of the Hebrew University

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

WP:PROMOTIONAL article for a subsiduary of Hebrew University of Jerusalem that doesn't seem to have any presence in it's own right per WP:INHERITORG. Current sources are, a database entry which doesn't establish notability. Times Higher Ed and Jewish Post (archived) do mention Yissum (they call it Aleph-Yissum in the THE article) but only in passing. Also cited NYT, Jewish Press and The Verge articles which don't mention Yissum at all. -- D'n'B-📞 -- 07:26, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Technology, and Israel. -- D'n'B-📞 -- 07:26, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Article PROD'd so not eligible for Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:29, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Liz, added plenty of references today. Thank you for your support! Tvogelyissum (talk) 10:15, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep The Jerusalem Post article counts as significant coverage in an independent reliable source. Of the other sources, while two are from the Times of Israel the one that goes into more depth was written by Yissum's CEO, and the other has just a short paragraph about the company. ToI does have more stories about the company such as this and this constitute in-depth coverage from reliable sources, so I think the subject is notable. Perhaps it could be adequately covered in the article on the university? Richard Nevell (talk) 20:40, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, looking at the article, it doesn't seem like new sources have been added here.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:30, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Feng (surname 酆)

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

Not sure why this was deprodded since it still fails WP:NNAME. It could be redirected to the one person with the name but the parenthetical disambiguator would make it an implausible target, as someone searching up "Feng (surname 酆)" is going to expect information on the surname and not Feng Yunhe. Of the two sources in the article, one only mentions the name and the other is a dictionary. The sources I could find online are not much better, pretty much only WP:ROTM name websites of questionable reliability. I can't see anything suggesting evidence of notability for this name. AllTheUsernamesAreInUse (talk) 05:22, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Lists of people and China. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:33, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions. –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 19:06, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources.
1. 新編百家姓 [New Edition of the Hundred Family Surnames] (in Chinese). Taipei: Cheng Chung Book Company [zh]. 2005. p. 327. ISBN 978-957-0917-529. Retrieved 2025-01-13 – via Google Books.
  The book notes: "春秋時期,鄭穆公有個兒子叫豐,在鄭僖公時任大夫,豐的孫子施、卷以他們的祖父的名為姓氏,稱為豐氏。二是出自國名。周初,周文王的第十七子封於酆國,後人以國名為姓,稱為酆氏。後來,後人中有取酆(現簡化為豐)的左邊為姓,即豐姓。豐姓是當今少見的姓氏,人數不多,但分布很廣,天津、河北、山東、內蒙古、廣西、雲南、四川等地均有豐姓。歷代名人唐代有高僧豐幹。宋代有義士豐存芳。明代有狀元豐熙,書法家豐坊,詩人豐越人,學者豐寅初,進士豐慶。現代有著名教育家、畫家豐子愷。慶麼姓淵源慶姓來源主要有三. 豐姓始祖公子豐慶姓始祖慶輔."
  From Google Translate: "During the Spring and Autumn Period, Duke Mu of Zheng had a son named Feng, who served as a minister during the reign of Duke Xi of Zheng. Feng's grandsons Shi and Juan took their grandfather's name as their surname, and were called Feng. The second is that it comes from the name of the country. In the early Zhou Dynasty, the seventeenth son of King Wen of Zhou was granted the title of Feng State. Later generations took the name of the state as their surname, and were called Fengshi. Later, some descendants took the left side of Feng (now simplified to Feng) as their surname, namely Feng. The surname Feng is a rare surname nowadays. There are not many people with this surname, but it is widely distributed. People with the surname Feng can be found in Tianjin, Hebei, Shandong, Inner Mongolia, Guangxi, Yunnan, Sichuan and other places. Famous people throughout the ages: In the Tang Dynasty, there was the eminent monk Feng Gan. In the Song Dynasty, there was a righteous man named Feng Cunfang. In the Ming Dynasty, there were the top scholar Feng Xi, the calligrapher Feng Fang, the poet Feng Yueren, the scholar Feng Yinchu, and the Jinshi Feng Qing. In modern times, there is the famous educator and painter Feng Zikai. There are three main sources of the surname Qing. The ancestor of the surname Feng is Gongzi Feng and the ancestor of the surname Qing is Qing Fu."
2. "【姓氏小談】酆姓" [[Short Talk on Surnames] Feng]. Merit Times [zh] (in Chinese). 2010-08-05. Archived from the original on 2025-01-13. Retrieved 2025-01-13.
  The article notes: "出自姬姓：周武王滅商後，封自己的弟弟，即周文王的第十七子於酆邑，建立侯國，世稱酆侯。周成王時，酆侯被廢黜，其後人以酆為姓氏。酆姓主要分布在湖南、陝西、安徽、湖北等省市。據說，出自山西省洪洞縣的酆姓族人曾遭遇大災荒，多數向北方遷移，遷出的人們大多居住在山西省朔州一帶，大同也有一些。"
  From Google Translate: "From the Ji surname: After King Wu of Zhou destroyed the Shang Dynasty, he granted his younger brother, the seventeenth son of King Wen of Zhou, the title of Marquis of Fengyi and established a marquisate, known as Fenghou. During the reign of King Cheng of Zhou, Marquis Feng was deposed and his descendants took Feng as their surname. The surname Feng is mainly distributed in provinces and cities such as Hunan, Shaanxi, Anhui, and Hubei. It is said that the Feng clan from Hongdong County, Shanxi Province once suffered a great famine and most of them migrated to the north. Most of the people who migrated lived in Shuozhou area of Shanxi Province, and there were also some in Datong."
  The article lists these notable people with the surname:
  1. Feng Shu (Chinese: 酆舒) – a self-proclaimed king in the Lu State during the Spring and Autumn Period
  2. Feng Shenzhi (Chinese: 酆伸之), a jinshi during the Song Dynasty
  3. Feng Yingchu (Chinese: 酆寅初), director of the Imperial College during the Hongwu period. From the late Yuan dynasty and early Ming dynasty.
  4. Fengmou (Chinese: 酆謀) – a jinpi during the Taiping Heavenly Kingdom
  5. Feng Zhesheng (Chinese: 酆哲生), a translator and visiting lecturer at the University of Hawaii
3. Zhang, Xuexian 张学衔 (2000). 华夏百家姓探源 [Exploring the Origins of the Hundred Surnames of China] (in Chinese). Nanjing: Nanjing University Press [zh]. p. 129. ISBN 978-7-305-01708-7. Retrieved 2025-01-13 – via Google Books.
  The article notes: "酆〔 Fēng 〕京兆郡渤海堂酆姓起源京兆,祖宗酆侯。"
  From Google Translate: "The surname Feng originated from Jingzhao, and the ancestor was Feng Hou."
  The article notes: "【姓氏来源】《元和姓纂》记载: “周文王第十七子酆侯之后,以国为姓。”《左传》上说: “酆舒有二隽才,京兆。”由此可知,酆姓是出自 3000 多年以前周文王的第十七个儿子酆侯,由于被封于酆(今陕西户县东) ,所以,子孙也就按照当时的习惯,以国为姓,称为酆氏。望族居京兆郡(今陕西长安东)。【历史名人】春秋时潞国有执政大臣酆舒。宋代有著名道士酆去奢。【宗祠堂号】渤海堂。出自宋代酆去奢的故事。酆去奢,少为崇山官道士,精思忘瘦,一心行道,据传说去渤海向蓬莱仙岛,得道成仙而去。后世酆姓人家就以他去“渤海”成仙作为纪念,取堂号为“渤海堂”。【楹联】二擅隽才(酆舒) ,双成寿考(酆寅初)。"
  From Google Translate: "【Origin of surname】《Yuanhe Xingzhuan》 records: "The descendants of Fenghou, the seventeenth son of King Wen of Zhou, took the country as their surname." "Zuo Zhuan" says: "Feng Shu has two talented people, Jingzhao." From this, we can know that the surname Feng comes from Fenghou, the seventeenth son of King Wen of Zhou more than 3,000 years ago. Because he was granted the title of Feng (now east of Huxian County, Shaanxi), his descendants also followed the custom at that time and took the country as their surname, called Feng. The prominent family lived in Jingzhao County (now east of Chang'an, Shaanxi). 【Historical celebrities】During the Spring and Autumn Period, there was a ruling minister Feng Shu in Lu State. In the Song Dynasty, there was a famous Taoist priest Feng Qushe. 【Ancestral Hall Name】Bohai Hall. It comes from the story of Feng Qushe in the Song Dynasty. Feng Qushe was a Taoist priest in Chongshan when he was young. He was so devoted to Taoism that he forgot his weight and practiced Taoism. According to legend, he went to Bohai Sea and went to Penglai Island, where he became an immortal. In later generations, people with the surname Feng used his immortality in Bohai Sea as a commemoration and named their hall "Bohai Hall". [Couplet] Two talented people (Feng Shu), two longevity (Feng Yinchu)."
4. Peng, Guifang 彭桂芳 (1980). 五百年前是一家 [500 Years Ago, We Were One Family] (in Chinese). Vol. 1. Taipei: Li Ming Cultural Enterprise [zh]. OCLC 13993130. Retrieved 2025-01-13 – via Google Books.
  The book notes: "唐代的京城是建於長安,則當時酆姓人家最多的地方其中的道理,十分顯然。鄭姓的始祖是周文王的兒子酆侯;豐姓雖然是鄭穆公之子豐的後裔,但是,當時鄭國也是由周文王的後裔所建,則推算起來,豐姓豈不也是源自周文王?所以,酆姓與豐姓,實際上是一根兩枝,算起來都是黃帝軒轅氏的姬姓後裔。兩姓源異而本同說起來,我國姓氏的奧妙之處就在這裏,鄭姓與豐姓,雖然乍看之下各有各的來源,彼此之間並無淵源,但是如果再進一步認真地追溯起來,就可以發現另一番景象———在三千年以前,兩姓根本就是一家人。"
  From Google Translate: "The capital of the Tang Dynasty was built in Chang'an, so it is obvious that Chang'an was the place with the largest number of families with the surname Feng at that time. The ancestor of the Zheng surname was Feng Hou, the son of King Wen of Zhou. Although the Feng surname is a descendant of Feng, the son of Duke Mu of Zheng, the State of Zheng was also founded by the descendants of King Wen of Zhou. So, doesn't it mean that the Feng surname also originated from King Wen of Zhou? ?Therefore, the surname Feng and the surname Feng are actually two branches of the same root, and both are descendants of the Ji surname of Emperor Huangdi Xuanyuan. The two surnames have different origins but the same origin. This is the mystery of Chinese surnames. Although Zheng and Feng have their own origins at first glance and have no connection with each other, if we take a closer look, Looking back, we can find a different picture—three thousand years ago, the two surnames were actually one family."
5. Wang, Daliang 王大良 (2001). 当代百家姓 [The Hundred Surnames of Contemporary China] (in Chinese). Beijing: Meteorological Press 气象出版社. p. 194. ISBN 978-7502-9305-23. Retrieved 2025-01-13 – via Google Books.
  The book notes: "酆 feng 酆姓人相传是周文王的后代。早在商朝末年,周文王之子周武王灭商建国,为了扩大王室的势力,把自己的多位弟弟分封于天下,其中第 17 弟被分封于酆(今陕西户县一带) ,为侯国,史称酆侯。后来,酆侯的后代便以这一封国的名称为姓,姓酆,从而成为最早的一批酆姓人。鄭姓得姓以后,在历史上又以京兆等为郡望,并出现了春秋时潞人酆舒、宋朝进士酆伸之等著名人物。当代,酆姓也是一个分布较为广泛的姓氏,尤其是在陕西、四川等省,都较为容易见到以此为姓的人。"
  From Google Translate: "Feng. It is said that people with the surname Feng are descendants of King Wen of Zhou. As early as the end of the Shang Dynasty, King Wu of Zhou, the son of King Wen of Zhou, destroyed the Shang Dynasty and founded the state. In order to expand the power of the royal family, he divided the country among his brothers. Among them, the 17th brother was given the title of Marquis of Feng (now Huxian County, Shaanxi Province). , known in history as Feng Hou. Later, the descendants of Feng Hou took the name of this fiefdom as their surname, Feng, and became the earliest group of people with the surname Feng. After the surname Zheng was derived, in history, Jingzhao and other counties were considered as the ancestral home, and there emerged such famous figures as Feng Shu, a Luren in the Spring and Autumn Period, and Feng Shenzhi, a Jinshi in the Song Dynasty. Nowadays, Feng is also a widely distributed surname, especially in provinces such as Shaanxi and Sichuan, where it is easy to see people with this surname."
6. 中國百家姓解說辭典 [Dictionary of the Explanation of the Hundred Family Surnames of China] (in Chinese). Taipei: Shin Wen Feng Print Company 新文豐出版公司. 1985. p. 94. Retrieved 2025-01-13 – via Google Books.
  The book notes: "酆出中國有姓酆的人,也有姓的人,這兩個姓氏的讀音相同,其間只差了一個邑字旁。那麽,這兩者之間是不是有什麼特別的關係或淵源呢?要弄清楚這個問題,就得先行把兩個姓氏的姓源分辦一下一關於酆姓的姓源,「姓纂」和「名賢氏族言行類稿」都是這樣記載的:「周文王第十七子鄂侯之後,以國爲姓,左傳酆舒有二雋才,京兆。」鄭豐兩姓的來源,這兩者之間是不是有什麼特別的關係或淵源呢?相信這必然是一個大家所關心的問題。要弄清楚這個問題,就得先行把兩個姓氏的姓源分辨一下————中國有姓酆的人,也有姓的人,這兩個姓氏的讀音相同,其間只差了一個邑字旁。"
  From Google Translate: "There are people in China with the surname Feng, and there are also people with the surname Feng. These two surnames have the same pronunciation, with the only difference being the character "邑" on the radical. So, is there any special relationship or origin between the two? To clarify this question, we must first analyze the origins of the two surnames. Regarding the origin of the surname Feng, "Xingzhuan" and The "Records of Words and Deeds of Famous Clans" all record it like this: "The descendants of the seventeenth son of King Wen of Zhou, Marquis of E, took the country as their surname. Zuo Zhuan recorded that there were two talented people in Fengshu, Jingzhao." The origin of the two surnames Zheng and Feng, Is there any special relationship or origin between the two? I believe this must be a question that everyone is concerned about. To clarify this question, we must first distinguish the origins of the two surnames. In China, there are people with the surname Feng and people with the surname Feng. The two surnames have the same pronunciation, with the only difference being the character Yi.."
7. Less significant coverage:
  1. 宝宝的第一本国学启蒙书：三字经百家姓 [Baby's First Book of Chinese Classical Education: Three Character Classic and Hundred Family Surnames] (in Chinese). Beijing: China Textile Press [zh]. 2020. ISBN 978-3-16-148410-0. Retrieved 2025-01-13 – via Google Books.
    The book notes: "酆姓氏来源周武王建立周朝后,将他的弟弟封于酆邑,他的后代以地名为姓,酆姓就是由此产生的。"
    From Google Translate: "Origin of the surname Feng: After King Wu of Zhou established the Zhou Dynasty, he granted his younger brother the title of Marquis of Feng. His descendants took the place name as their surname, and the surname Feng came from this."
  2. Gao, Zhuguan 高諸觀 (1981). 台灣人的根: 八閩全鑑 [Taiwanese Roots: A Complete Guide to Fujian] (in Chinese). Yilan: Taiwan News and Culture Publishing House 台灣新聞文化出版社. OCLC 17074117. Retrieved 2025-01-13 – via Google Books.
    The book notes: "The exact time when the Feng surname migrated to Taiwan cannot be verified. Most of the surnames in Taiwan come from Fujian,"
    From Google Translate: "The exact time when the Feng surname migrated to Taiwan cannot be verified. Most of the surnames in Taiwan come from Fujian,"
There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow Feng (surname 酆) to pass Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline, which requires "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject".
Cunard (talk) 08:00, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate you finding these sources. Personally I don't believe these sources prove notability as they are all just lists of names repeating the same story about how the name supposedly originated. I don't think appearing on these kinds of lists suggests notability, especially since most of these sources have very similar titles. And they all contain only a brief paragraph about the name tantamount to a mere mention. Pretty WP:ROTM stuff. AllTheUsernamesAreInUse (talk) 22:51, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The sources were published in 1980, 1985, 2000, 2001, 2005, 2010. The sources show that the surname has been extensively discussed for decades. There is enough information that "addresses the topic directly and in detail, so that no original research is needed to extract the content" (quoting from Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline). This depth of coverage about the surname means that WP:NOTDICT is not violated. The guideline Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not a dictionary#Minor differences notes: "An article about a given name or a surname is an anthroponymy article that contains a list of people with this name as well as encyclopedic content about the meaning, etymology and history of the name." The sources provide enough information to write an article that has "encyclopedic content about the meaning, etymology and history of the name". Cunard (talk) 13:28, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Names still have to meet WP:NNAME, which states that a name that nobody with a Wikipedia article has is likely not notable unless it has exceptional sourcing, as names are just words above all. The sources you’ve provided are almost exclusively lists and dictionaries, and most of them are just different iterations of the same source, the Baijiaxing. I don’t believe that WP:NOTDICT hasn’t been violated. AllTheUsernamesAreInUse (talk) 16:05, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NNAME doesn't say anything about exceptional sourcing. It says that A properly sourced article about a name may still be notable without a list. In other words, a name that meets WP:GNG is presumed notable, like any other topic that meets GNG. —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 16:22, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes though like I said it is an anthroponym so any name without significant in-depth sourcing is not notable unless two or more people with Wikipedia articles have it. That’s why I said “exceptional sourcing” since there’s really no other way for a name to be notable if it there are no articles about people with the name. AllTheUsernamesAreInUse (talk) 17:18, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It doesn't need exceptional sourcing, just significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources. In any case, I've added several other notable people to the list in the article (they don't yet have articles on the English Wikipedia, but they do on the Chinese Wikipedia). —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 23:20, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, meets GNG per the sources found by Cunard. I suspect all surnames in the Baijiaxing will meet GNG, because of sources (like some of the ones above) that discuss the history of each surname in the poem. —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 15:46, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:21, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. I strongly suspected before seeing this AfD that the hundred surnames were all notable, and the in-depth source coverage uncovered above confirms it to me. —David Eppstein (talk) 06:31, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Khaled Azaiez

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

Bio of a footballer where most of the content is unsourced. Both sources in the article indicate that the subject was not n the team that won the Africa cup of nations in 2004 so there is literally nothing here that is sourced. A search for sources is complicated by the fact that there’s a Saudi player of the same name, but I don’t see in-depth coverage of this subject. Articles on ithe4 wikis are just sourced to databases. Mccapra (talk) 04:17, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Football and Tunisia. Mccapra (talk) 04:17, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:39, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 10:08, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - he won AFCON, the premier tournament in Africa. Really poor nomination. Giant Snowman 12:59, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep—Bad article, but certainly a notable player. Anwegmann (talk) 03:10, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - I couldn't find any SIGCOV in Arabic- or French-language sources for Azaiez. He did make a single appearance for Tunisia at the 2004 AFCON, but it was in a final group stage match after Tunisia clinched progress after winning its first two group stage matches and fielded a largely reserve side in that match. I found that he also played in a single AFCON qualifier (according to RSSSF), but otherwise only appeared in a handful of friendlies. We can't really say much else about this footballer as there are no other online sources available. Jogurney (talk) 19:50, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Jogourney. ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 15:53, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 06:12, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ramam Raghavam

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

Not able to find two full length reviews in reliable sources and there are not enough independent sources for GNG apart from routine coverage. Fails NFF/GNG. ATDR - Dhanraj (actor). Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 06:00, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film, India, and Andhra Pradesh. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 06:00, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Linda Tinker Watkins

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

Biography of a non-notable individual and a contested draftification. Unless being President General of the Daughters of the American Revolution is considered an inherently notable post (and I don't know of any consensus that would indicate such), she fails WP:GNG and WP:NBIO. A quick review of sources:

[1], unreliable per WP:ANCESTRY.COM
Non-independent sources from organizations Tinker Watkins was affiliated with: [2], [3].
WP:TRIVIALMENTIONS in non-independent sources: [4], [5], [6].
More trivial mentions: [7] and a single passing mention in a newspaper photo caption

I searched for more in the standard BEFORE search, but the page creator seems to have put every possible source into this article, making it unlikely that there is more out there since none of these sources qualifies for notability. Dclemens1971 (talk) 04:13, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women and Tennessee. Dclemens1971 (talk) 04:13, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. President General position in Daughters of American Revolution does not appear to be an inherently notable position, many of the others don't have Wikipedia pages. Can't find any non-trivial mentions of subject besides what is already included in citations. InsomniaOpossum (talk) 04:50, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Geoff Berman

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

Tagged for notability since 2018. Time for the community to discuss this and decide one way or the other. Not clear the subject passes WP:SIGCOV.4meter4 (talk) 03:47, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Law, Politics, California, Missouri, New York, and Virginia. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:44, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:49, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Via Vinci Academy

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

The Via Vinci Academy never really got off the ground. It was a short-lived project that went bankrupt in 2011. The only claim to fame is that the project prompted the dutch government to introduce a regulation that allows only recognized universities to carry the word "University" in its name. I think the so-called "Via Vincy Academy" does not pass WP:ORG and the best we can do is delete the article. Ruud Buitelaar (talk) 03:17, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and Schools. Ruud Buitelaar (talk) 03:17, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Netherlands-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:45, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:47, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - There is no sufficient coverage. Drushrush (talk) 06:26, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

HueningKai

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

The subject of this article has not yet demonstrated individual notability outside of his band, Tomorrow X Together, which is a criteria per the notability guideline at WP:BANDMEMBER. This is evident from the largely empty "Career" section that shows very little in the way of individual activity that would assist in establishing individual notability.

Subject has not released any solo singles that have charted anywhere that could assist in establishing individual notability, or participated in any activities of note outside of his membership in the band. The article mentions his individual participation in a YouTube series, which was uploaded onto the band's YouTube channel, but it doesn't seem to have received WP:SIGCOV outside of a few sources that are largely churned from a press release.

Recommend redirect to Tomorrow X Together

Note this AfD is the result of a contested WP:BLAR RachelTensions (talk) 03:09, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Korea, and South Korea. RachelTensions (talk) 03:09, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Draftify: as the person hasn't met WP:MUSICBIO in general. 𝙳.𝟷𝟾𝚝𝚑 (𝚃𝚊𝚕𝚔) 02:33, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:45, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Tomorrow X Together. Subject is not independently notable. Random86 (talk) 04:10, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Professor Backwards

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

Delete per WP:TNT. Been tagged since 2009 and nobody has pitched in. So many issues in this article, including the use of many quotes with no supporting attributed sources of potentially copyrighted materials. (his jokes probably are copyrighted and these quotes are likely copyright infringements unless we give attribution). The only source used is an SNL transcript which is a primary source. There's unsubstantiated claims of varying kinds that require a source because of the nature of the claim. This person is notable but the article requires a complete rewrite. Best to blow this up and start over from scratch.4meter4 (talk) 02:56, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Television, Entertainment, and Georgia (U.S. state). –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 03:05, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom and per not WP:NOTQUOTE Warm Regards, Miminity (Talk?) (me contribs) 03:11, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Meets WP:GNG, he has sources on him in Newspapers.com, Professor Backwards To Entertain At Taylorville Country Club Stag (The Taylorville Daily Breeze Courier), Prof. Backwards (Nosdnomde) Staging Swohs Twice Nightly (The Morning Call), Professor Backward Hit With 'drawkcaB' Actions (The Commercial Appeal), Professor Backwards Comes To Greenville (The Greenville News) and Professor's Murder Predictable (The Greenville News). It doesn't have to be deleted, it could still be rewritten in the same article. MoviesandTelevisionFan (talk) 04:09, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

We might have to get an admin to redact the copyright infringed material from the article history if you want to pursue this option.4meter4 (talk) 06:07, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - for goodness' sake, his murder made SNL's Weekend Update. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 19:21, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Notability was never the issue here. The article had copyright infringement violations and was entirely unreferenced (although much of that was gutted after it was brought to AFD). This was a WP:TNT nomination.4meter4 (talk) 03:55, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I should mention that this article has really been gutted including all of the details of his passing.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:38, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hancock Chapel, Indiana

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

The name of this as "Hancock Chapel" as opposed to just "Hancock", seems to be an accident of map updating/reading, because a topo in the 1950s just calls the place "Hancock". The actual chapel, which is still there, is a bit south of the label, on the west side of the T intersection. There is a scattering of buildings about, but not so obviously organized as to make clear it was a town. Baker says right out that Hancock was a 4th class PO, but it's not at all clear that the updated label was sup[posed to be for the church, and rural churches usually are labelled. Searching is impeded by the commonness of the name and by the presence of Hancock County. By all means, go ahead and try to clarify this, but at this point it seems to be a somewhat made-up place due to unclear map labels. Mangoe (talk) 03:30, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Indiana. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:39, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Beautiful India

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

A highly promotional page for a non-notable fragrance brand. (Sample puffery: True to India’s philosophical essence and its universal message of Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam—Sanskrit for “ The world is one family “— it is a reminder that we are all ONE and that PEACE is our true nature.) Not a single source would qualify for WP:NCORP; it's all press release-based churnalism, unbylined content in WP:NEWSORGINDIA sources, sponsored content, etc. Nothing qualifying found in WP:BEFORE search. Dclemens1971 (talk) 03:28, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Fashion, and France. Dclemens1971 (talk) 03:28, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Typical paid for advertorials and promotional content you would expect from likely UPE. Nothing meets WP:ORGCRIT. --CNMall41 (talk) 03:37, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:40, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Clearly promotional and nothing to suggest notability. InsomniaOpossum (talk) 04:52, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

1927 U.S. Figure Skating Championships

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

I am also nominating the following related pages:

Non-notable figure skating competitions. I had attempted to redirect these articles to U.S. Figure Skating Championships, as has been done with literally hundreds of similar articles over the past month, but was reverted on the grounds that "This page have [sic] a reference source". As if that was the problem. Since the medalists were the only information supported by what sources I could access, I added those sources to the parent article. Recommend deletion or forced redirect back to U.S. Figure Skating Championships. Bgsu98 (Talk) 03:08, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Sports, and Skating. Bgsu98 (Talk) 03:08, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:40, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: All pages have a references source, it's not non-notable. If you think it's not enough, you can add it more. The past year was so far and it need more time find the sources. Thanks. Stevencocoboy (talk) 03:44, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge/Redirect: There's no need for an individual page for each year; the information can be better presented on a single page for the recurring event as a whole. Espatie (talk) 04:27, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
To clarify, I have already merged what little there was of value. Bgsu98 (Talk) 04:28, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Espatie: No need for an individual page for each year, what does it means? If you agree that, all pages should be redirect. Stevencocoboy (talk) 04:34, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect per nom. Mccapra (talk) 05:13, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

International Commission of Agricultural Engineering

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

Blatantly promotional, unsourced article about an organization. It could be notable, but I see no reason for the article in its current to remain on the mainspace. KnowledgeIsPower9281 (talk) 02:38, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Food and drink, Organizations, Education, and Engineering. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:08, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Voice (Indiana)

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

Non-notable promo article. A google search only really yields self-published and primary sources. KnowledgeIsPower9281 (talk) 02:30, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Health and fitness, Organizations, Education, and Indiana. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:09, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Neoh Hui-min

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

Does the subject of this article meet the guidelines for notability for academics? Cannot find much independent or external references about her. Unsure if Deputy Director position confers notability but again limited search results aside from academic papers InsomniaOpossum (talk)

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2025 January 19. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 02:24, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Women, Biology, and Malaysia. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:10, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. The subject is an associate professor, which is a sign that it's probably unlikely that they meet WP:NPROF. I couldn't find any mention of major awards etc. and I don't think the Deputy Director position could confer any per se notability. So the only criteria they could meet would be WP:NPROF#C1. An h-index of 26 and about 4000 total citations in a relatively high-citation field is not bad, but I don't think it's quite enough for C1. MCE89 (talk) 03:38, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Breast implant illness

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

I've never attempted to invoke WP:TNT before, but I'm going to go ahead and try here, very cautiously. This is a stub article on a notable topic created by a user who has been blocked twice from creating new articles following their history of mass-creating short, poorly written, and poorly sourced stubs (like this one). There is absolutely nothing useful on this page or in its history. The sources are obviously inadequate for a medical topic. If someone wanted to improve this article, they would have to restart from scratch, and I mean that without a hint of exaggeration. Therefore, I am carefully suggesting we TNT this to encourage this to happen. To be clear, I understand that this is almost never a good reason to delete an article, and I understand that opposing views exist, such as WP:TNTTNT. Still, even after reading through opposing essays on the matter, this looks to be an extremely rare case where nothing associated with this article is salvageable (neither what's currently there nor in its history). I am fully expecting backlash over this, but I would like to emphasise that I wholeheartedly agree that using deletion as cleanup is almost always a bad thing. This is an extremely uncommon case where the entire article is unusable. All that said, and while I myself don't feel qualified enough to do so, if anyone else had the time to improve this, I would withdraw my nomination immediately, as again, notability is not the problem. Anonymous 02:06, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Health and fitness and Medicine. Anonymous 02:06, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment — I am not going to pretend that I don’t understand the TNT argument or have never considered it myself. That said, I’m not sure I understand it, here. It’s a stub. Just work on it as-necessary. From a quick Google, it appears that the topic is likely notable. (Not to get into WP:OR territory, but as a side-note, it’s not a proper diagnosis because it sounds like it is a mild post-operative infection) That said, it being a stub — in my opinion — works against the TNT argument. It would need to be just a huge set of information along with egregious errors for me to consider wiping an article completely. The title is salvageable, no? Breastcancer.org and the Mayo Clinic both refer it as BII. Surely someone from Wikipedia:WikiProject Medicine could assist with this?

MWFwiki (talk) 04:18, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Murugan Chillayah

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

Looking at the given sources:

[8] is not SIGCOV and only links him as a contact, also not independent as it's a partnership with his association
[9] and [10] do not mention him at all
[11] is IMDB
[12] is his association's official website (primary)
[13] only lists his association in a bullet list of many others, no SIGCOV
[14] is another of his websites
[15] is an interview he gave to a council his association joined, neither independent nor secondary
[16] is another SIGCOV-free bullet list
[17] doesn't mention him, and, looking at the context of how it was used, wouldn't have been independent either way
[18] is his speaker profile at an event, not independent
[19] is literally an advertisement
[20] is the same as the first source, but this time with the title of a different paragraph
[21] is yet another list with no content beyond names
[22] and [23] are open letters he helped writing, very primary
[24] gives me an error 404, but appears to be another open letter

All in all, out of 17 references, exactly zero provide secondary, independent SIGCOV, making this a very likely WP:GNG failure. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 01:35, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Hinduism, Malaysia, and India. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 01:35, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

2017 United Express passenger removal

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

No WP:LASTING effects apart of Wikipedia mirrors, thus fails WP:NOTNEWS. Protoeus (talk) 01:06, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2025 January 19. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 01:30, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I think this very easily passes the WP:LASTING test. It led to changes to USDOT rules, new legislation, and impacted United's financials and reputation into at least the medium term. Looking it up in Google Books and Google Scholar, it's an incident that continues to be very widely discussed in the fields of public relations and aviation law. I don't think this is a case of WP:NOTNEWS at all. MCE89 (talk) 02:41, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Police, Aviation, and Illinois. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:17, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This is not the article's first nomination; a 2022 renaming makes this less obvious. The earlier discussions were not too long after the incident, attracted many comments, and were quickly closed — Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/United Express Flight 3411 was a SNOW closure, and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/United Express Flight 3411 incident (2nd nomination) came too quickly after the first nomination and was a speedy keep. I'd expect a more reasonable discussion eight years later, though I myself have no opinion at this time. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:21, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and strongly so. This was a major news story that clearly had a WP:LASTING effect just by looking at the sources in the article. The clearest one is the NY Times article which led with the incident four years later. SportingFlyer T·C 03:23, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Per the above. Far more significance than, for example, a video game article, or even an article about a notorious crime that attracts morbid interest, but has no lasting effect. DonFB (talk) 05:19, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep seems pretty clear per the above votes and the impact of DOT legislation per MCE89. Also worth noting that WP:LASTING is only one guideline for establishing notability, and articles can still be notable without having inherently lasting effects (but I would argue this one has had them). - Epluribusunumyall (talk) 06:30, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tony Marano

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

Non-notable history denier. Few sources on google search, all of them more than 5 years old; this raises the prospect that the subject's notoriety was short-lived and has not endured. YouTube channel has fewer than 20K subscribers; most videos less than 5 years old have fewer than 500 views. There is mention in the Reuters source of one or more videos with over 300,000 views; however, it is not on the YouTube channel, and no other reference to this purported video could be located. Risker (talk) 00:46, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Noting here that the YouTube channel has a 16-year-old video, "Westboro Baptist neutralized by the Patriot Guard Riders" that has over 900K views; its SEO tags are "Patriot Guard Riders Westboro Baptist Fred Phelps gay military funeral army navy air force marines coast guard free speech propagandabuster propaganda buster tony WBC", several of which are heavily-searched terms. The article subject is not noted to have anything to do with either Westboro Baptist Church or the Patriot Guard Riders, in the article or in any reliable source that I could locate. That makes a single highly viewed video out of 2.6K videos. Risker (talk) 00:57, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Politics, Internet, Connecticut, and New York. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:28, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Do not delete this article because I need time to gather enough information about him. Beside I'm using information from Japan's wikipedia to create it. Besides he's one of the history deniers we need to worry about and avoid for non-Asians Youtubers. Besides, you can help me by translating the source citations from the Japanese wikipedia and get this issue resolved. Koreanidentity10000

Hello, Koreanidentity10000. I see you have been adding information from another project. Please read this information on how to copy information from another Wikimedia project, because you're not correctly attributing that information. Remember to include the reference sources when you are copying over the information. If it isn't referenced in that project, then it should not be coming to English Wikipedia. I will give you time to sort this out, but right now with your changes, it is now a copyright violation with poorly referenced or unreferenced material. Since this is a biography of a living person, this is a fairly big deal. Risker (talk) 06:18, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Texas-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:38, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Gio Talente

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

Promotional biography of a "social reputation analyst"; appears to have been constructed as WP:ADMASQ by an editor later blocked for sockpuppetry. Sources do not support notability under any criterion. They are:

WP:TRIVIALMENTION quotes in media on other topics that do not constitute WP:SIGCOV: [25], [26], [27], [28], [29], [30], [31],
WP:PRIMARYSOURCE interviews: [32], [33],
Primary/affiliated sources (official bios, course descriptions, etc): [34], [35],
One source does not mention him at all: [36]

Nothing else was found in BEFORE search. Dclemens1971 (talk) 00:45, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and Italy. Dclemens1971 (talk) 00:45, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

El Vaquero

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

Student newspaper of one college. Relies on Primary sources. Research has found no other significant sources.Fails WP:NNEWSPAPER Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 00:39, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Glendale Community College (California)#Student media: best I can tell, this is the standard alternative to deletion for otherwise non-notable student-run media entities. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:31, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: News media, Education, and California. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:31, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Naale (film)

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

Two unreleased films that fail to establish notability. The first film may have been unfinished, which is why it is listed here as a short film [37]. The first film was also incorrectly listed on the 2008 list of films, but the sources were emerging in mid-December 2008 and a release seemed unlikely [38].

In an attempt to salvage, the film article I added information about the second unreleased film, all passing mentions.

Additional sources assessment table

Source	Reliable?	Significant?	Notes
Indiaglitz [39]			See Wikipedia:WikiProject Film/Indian cinema task force#Guidelines on sources.
Filmibeat [40]

Although, I find this database site dubious [41] Kailash29792 assured me of its usefulness for Malayalam cinema. It lists all of the released films and some unreleased films. While it lists the 2017 version as unreleased (first with a pink U and then with [ പുറത്തിറങ്ങാത്ത ചിത്രം ] (transl. [Unreleased film]), it has no mention of the 2008 film, so without a doubt that film was never released. Without proper sourcing, redirect to Dileep filmography, the only page where it is mentioned. DareshMohan (talk) 01:03, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film and India. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:11, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting to see if there is more support for Redirection.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:25, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Rommy Sulastyo

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

Does not seem to meet WP:NACTOR. Two films are not on Wikipedia. Only source present is "top 10 pictures with sister" and her sister is not covered on Wikipedia either. Besides that, anything I could find is either not reliable or independent. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 00:14, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 00:14, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Indonesia-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:32, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Seacourt

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

This subject may be worthy of an article, but this writing isn’t yet an article. Nuke, draftify or something, but get it from mainspace. Qwirkle (talk) 00:06, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Archaeology, Geography, and England. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:32, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep this version is totally fine, though unremarkable. That someone added a bunch of questionably-sourced notes since doesn't change the notability here. Elli (talk | contribs) 03:43, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Elli. It needs some clean up, particularly to the section on the name, but the previous version is fine and the subject seems to be notable. I don't think this is in WP:TNT territory. MCE89 (talk) 04:42, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Morag McLaren

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

Can't find anything that suggests Morag McLaren is notable. The only source in the article is very weak. Guiy de Montfort de L'Amaury 00:02, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Artists, Music, Theatre, and Scotland. Guiy de Montfort de L'Amaury 00:02, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Women, and Dance. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:33, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]