Wikipedia:WikiProject Biography/Deletion sorting

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

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

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

If possible, please use one of these instead:

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

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

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

Adding a new AfD discussion

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

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

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

Removing a closed AfD discussion

Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.

Other types of discussions

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

Further information

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

Purge page cache

watch

People

Alejandro Hernandez (lawyer)

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

Lawyer article without a claim to notability. Note that the article did cite some articles in the past[1] that included local Victoria TX media quoting this gentleman. On my reading nothing other than a local top lawyer award and quotes from him about his clients and cases, which seem non-notable (and if the cases/clients were notable any effect would be inherited at best). Oblivy (talk) 00:46, 4 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Law and Texas. Oblivy (talk) 00:46, 4 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: The name is too common to find anything for this person. There's a real estate lawyer that comes up with the same name, not much of anything for this person. The one source used now in the article isn't enough. Oaktree b (talk) 00:51, 4 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
He's not too hard to find - here are NY attorney pages for him,[2][3]. And as I noted above there's an earlier revision of the article that has more citations. IMHO, none of it helps show notability but I'm open to arguments to the contrary. Oblivy (talk) 01:21, 4 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 01:18, 4 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment In one of the lines he mentions that he is known for carrying out lawsuits for compensation, however there is no encyclopedia source that supports such a mention. AgusTates (talk) 01:56, 4 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. A few press releases [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] and a handful of mentions in articles about cases he's worked on, but nothing usable. I wondered whether his unsuccesful election candidacy might allow for a redirect, but he's not mentioned in 2012 Texas House of Representatives election or Texas's 30th House of Representatives district. MCE89 (talk) 02:33, 4 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Muhydeen Okunlola Kayode

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

Subject fails WP:GNG or WP:ANYBIO. Sources are either paid puff and advertorials, or they're talking about MOK Foundation directly (of course, promotionally) and not about him directly. Cannot find sufficient sources that satisfy reliability and independence and provide substantial coverage. The assessment below gives more details.

Source assessment table
Source	Independent?	Reliable?	Significant coverage?	Count source toward GNG?
https://thenationonlineng.net/muhydeen-kayode-i-am-driven-by-strong-belief-to-give-back/	Interview, fails WP:INDEPENDENCE.	Ditto		✘ No
https://punchng.com/foundation-advocates-govt-private-sector-partnership-on-food-production/	“My current priorities lie in the realm of philanthropy..., Okunlola insisted that grassroots philanthropy, voluntary contributions...		About the foundation and not the subject directly.	✘ No
https://tribuneonlineng.com/entrepreneur-seeks-collaboration-between-govt-private-philanthropy-to-address-poverty/	This call was made by Muyideen Okunlola Kayode..., etc	Fails WP:INDEPENDENT already.	Ditto	✘ No
https://www.vanguardngr.com/2023/12/empowerment-the-inspiring-journey-of-muideen-okunlola-kayode/	~ Highly and ridiculously promotional; Muideen Okunlola (MOK) is a remarkable individual whose profound humility and selflessness are deeply rooted in his upbringing., In conclusion, Muhydeen Kayode Okunlola’s journey from humble beginnings to becoming a beacon of hope and progress...	Ditto		✘ No
https://thenationonlineng.net/muhydeen-kayodes-benevolence-continues-in-2024/	~ Alhaji Muhydeen Okunlola Kayode stands as a shining example of what can be achieved through dedication, hard work, and a commitment..., etc.	~ No evidence of where details about his "personal life" for that matter was gotten from.		~ Partial
https://thenationonlineng.net/house-developers-facing-challenges-in-abuja/#google_vignette		Lacks a proper byline.		✘ No
https://www.vanguardngr.com/2024/12/government-must-collaborate-with-private-philanthropists-to-effectively-tackle-poverty-amongnigerians-muyideen-okunlola/	Kayode emphasized the critical role of the media in bridging these gaps...	Ditto		✘ No
https://tribuneonlineng.com/mok-foundation-procures-tractor-to-assist-farmers-in-offa-oyun-lgas/		Lacks a proper byline.	About MOK Foundation and not the subject.	✘ No
https://tribuneonlineng.com/kwara-ngo-installs-solar-powered-street-lights-in-offa-community-market/			About MOK Foundation and not the subject.	✘ No
https://von.gov.ng/foundation-donates-cash-to-persons-with-disability-in-kwara/			About MOK Foundation and not the subject.	✘ No
https://leadership.ng/foundation-supports-plwds-in-kwara/			About MOK Foundation and not the subject.	✘ No
https://thepapers.ng/2024/01/20/muhydeen-kayode-a-beacon-of-leadership-entrepreneurship-philanthropy/	Regurgitation of https://thenationonlineng.net/muhydeen-kayodes-benevolence-continues-in-2024/			? Unknown
https://tribuneonlineng.com/foundation-presents-waec-scholarships-to-130-kwara-indigent-students/				✘ No
https://leadership.ng/foundation-awards-scholarships-to-30-students-in-kwara/				✘ No
https://thenationonlineng.net/ancopss-hails-group-for-buying-jamb-forms-for-indigent-students/#google_vignette				✘ No
https://pmnewsnigeria.com/2019/04/20/greatness-the-story-of-a-nigeria-born-change-maker/	Highly and ridiculously promotional. FWIW, where were details this personal gotten from?			✘ No
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{source assess table}}.

Vanderwaalforces (talk) 16:11, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Businesspeople, and Nigeria. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 16:11, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Very much non-notable individual, the chart above explains it pretty well. PROMO, easily. Oaktree b (talk) 17:26, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Karen S. Evans

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

Not every government official, even political appointees, is inherently notable. Evans is one of those. Coverage is WP:ROUTINE in the context of her official or professional duties, not about Evans as a notable person. There is not WP:SIGCOV to meet WP:GNG or WP:NBIO. Separately, article appears to have been created by a PR firm without WP:DISCLOSEPAY. Longhornsg (talk) 15:20, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Technology, and United States of America. Longhornsg (talk) 15:20, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:23, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Fails WP:POLITICIAN. Who??? And she served Who??? This reads like a low-level political appointee for multiple Republican Party administrations. Honorary doctorates are not the same as having a doctoral degree. If she served multiple administrations, even as a press secretary, we would know who she was. — Maile (talk) 19:07, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Fails WP:NPOL#1 and #2. Best, Reading Beans, Duke of Rivia 19:32, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of West Virginia-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:56, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I know nothing about her but she was CIO of the US. Wikipedia has numerous men's articles with far lesser accomplishments. -SusanLesch (talk) 20:28, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
She was CIO, not even that senior an official, of the U.S. Department of Energy, not the U.S. While acknowledging that WP:SYSTEMICBIAS exists here on Wikipedia, we go by the guidelines of WP:GNG, not WP:RGW. Longhornsg (talk) 20:31, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Maria Salomea Schweppenhäuser

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

This person is not notable as such, only as a distant relative of the British royal family (WP:NOTINHERITED). Marcelus (talk) 14:05, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Marcelus (talk) 14:05, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Not notable by any stretch of the imagination.TheLongTone (talk) 15:38, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women and Germany. Shellwood (talk) 16:14, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to her husband's article or delete, no evidence of notability. —Kusma (talk) 16:41, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ikmal Amry

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

Sources presented for this actor do not show that they meet WP:NACTOR. Thie foreign language Wikipedia article is similar to this and with just about three sources. Before search did not show anything beyond trivial mentions in what look like gossip blogs. Mekomo (talk) 13:52, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, and Malaysia. Mekomo (talk) 13:52, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There are multiple source about Ikmal involvement in Malaysian cinema. He already appear in Indonesia TV, thats why i know him and also from Soloz: Game of Life Ryan Nambou (talk) 16:45, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ravinder Kumar (wrestler)

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

A non-notable priest of a Temple, It was actually a redirect to Ravinder Singh (wrestler) but it is vandalised by User:Ravinderkumarpriest, see [9]. There is Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. The citation Mapping Histories and Kashmiri Pandits are not about this subject as he is a 1994-born and books were published in 2002 and 2001 respectively. The citation 1 is a blogspot website, 2 is a X (Twitter) post and 3 is an official website. Taabii (talk) 06:28, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Hinduism, India, and Himachal Pradesh. Taabii (talk) 06:28, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
~~Speedy delete~~: Blatant promotion; qualifies for WP:G11. Helpful Raccoon (talk) 06:33, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Actually the redirect needs to be restored, so I guess I should !vote Redirect. Is there a better way to handle G11-deletable material that overwrites a redirect? Helpful Raccoon (talk) 06:39, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I came across this last night on NPP and was going to come back to it today, after seeing there was a redirect involved when I went to the talk page and ended up on a different article! (Wanted to wait until I had a clearer head!) Redirect the article, per Helpful Raccoon. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 12:43, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Taabii,

I was planning to make further changes, including adding news and articles to this, but you have requested its removal without giving any time for discussion. This suggests that you are promoting individuals like Repest and Seril Keler on Wikipedia, and encouraging the misuse of such a reputable and growing platform to rank them on the first page of search results. 182.77.60.22 (talk) 16:07, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Remember to log in when editing and commenting. Wikipedia does not promote anyone, see WP:NOTPROMO. Articles created for promotional purposes are not appropriate here, and Wikipedia's criteria of who should have an article are stated at WP:Notability. It is unfortunate that you have the same name as a notable criminal, but this is not a problem that Wikipedia can solve. Helpful Raccoon (talk) 22:59, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Gholam hossein Davani

AfDs for this article:

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

This article has been around for more than 10 years and does not indicate how the subject is notable per WP:GNG or WP:BIO. All the sources given are to works written by him, not about him. The Persian language article does not seem to have much more in support of notability. ... discospinster _talk 23:51, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Authors, Business, and Iran. ... discospinster _talk 23:51, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy delete per G11. –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 01:24, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom @LaundryPizza03. Eelipe (talk) 04:11, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Blatantly fails WP:GNG. This article has been tagged for notability concerns since 2015. There is just nothing to establish notability. ZyphorianNexus ^Talk 13:03, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Nigh-incoherent article. No sources to establish notability. Best, Reading Beans, Duke of Rivia 19:15, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:G11 and nom. 🪐Kepler-1229b | talk | contribs🪐 19:54, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Hits on the name here [10], but it doesn't seem to be the same person. Tagged for a decade with not much to show notability brought up in that time. I don't see notability. Oaktree b (talk) 00:53, 4 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Robert Anwatu

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

A non notable business man. The article fails WP:GNG and the sources are press releases mostly from unreliable news media. Ibjaja055 (talk) 21:23, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Businesspeople, and Nigeria. Ibjaja055 (talk) 21:23, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Fails WP:GNG. Gheus (talk) 11:13, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Jim Chimezie Okolo

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

A non notable business man and politician. All the sources are either from unreliable sources, press releases or promotional piece likethis Ibjaja055 (talk) 21:12, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Businesspeople, Politicians, and Nigeria. Ibjaja055 (talk) 21:12, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Moremi Ojudu

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

Being a Senior Special Adviser does not make her notable. I tried to check online but couldn't find anything that makes her fit for an article on Wikipedia. Ibjaja055 (talk) 20:58, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Politicians, and Nigeria. Ibjaja055 (talk) 20:58, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Fails NANYBOY, GNG and NPOL. Cassiopeia talk 23:45, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: The office of the SA or SSA does not confer ipso facto notability. Best, Reading Beans, Duke of Rivia 08:25, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Muyiwa Awoniyi

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

Non-notable business executive who fails WP:GNG or WP:ANYBIO. Notability is not inherited. Sources are either iffy, are promo, or are lacking substantial coverage of the subject. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 16:51, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Businesspeople, and Nigeria. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 16:51, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:11, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep I agree with the nominator that some of the sources lack substantial coverage on the subject, although the Rolling Stone and Music Week references do mention him in slightly more detail. The page was also created on February 1, 2025, one day before it was nominated for deletion, so I would prefer if this article was given some additional time to develop before we proceed any further with deletion. Dobbyelf62 (talk) 17:18, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Almost all the sources are either interview or press releases. They can neither establish WP:GNG nor WP:SIGCOV. Ibjaja055 (talk) 20:23, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, this is a manager of notable singer-songwriters including Tems who has just won a Grammy Award and Omah Lay among notable others. It is this manager that managed Tems from their early career to Grammy Award. This manager meets WP:NBASIC when all sources that discuss him are combined. Some of those sources are here[11][12][13][14][15][16][17]. The subject is mentioned multiple times in the sources above. Some of the articles are based on his social media posts suggesting that he is notable and the media keep watch of his social media activities and writing about it. Lacent Pak (talk) 05:50, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If you feel that these sources can further enhance the article, I encourage you to integrate them. However, I worry that the Pulse reference is too gossipy for Wikipedia as it hinges on a tweet that supposedly received some controversy. A few of the other sources you just provided, including the "Dating Rumor" article, are also unlikely to be of much help for similar reasons as the Pulse reference. As such, I would exercise caution to ensure that the content being added is encyclopedic in nature.Dobbyelf62 (talk) 18:22, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Matthew Huttle

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

Does not pass WP:NCRIMINAL, his killing does not pass WP:NEVENT. Minor figure in a very large event and the killing does not make him more notable than the other ones. Not a lot here besides routine criminal proceedings. PARAKANYAA (talk) 08:17, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Crime. PARAKANYAA (talk) 08:17, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Indiana-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 09:35, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Prem Chauhan

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

Fails WP:NPOL. Taabii (talk) 07:37, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Politicians, Politics, India, and Delhi. Taabii (talk) 07:37, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: For now; recreate if they eventually win their election as a lawmaker. Councillors of local government areas are not inherently notable per WP:NPOL#1. The sources therein are not substantial to meet WP:NPOL#2. Best, Reading Beans, Duke of Rivia 08:37, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: As of now fails WP:NPOL. Will get notability if he wins the assembly election 2025. TheSlumPanda (talk) 19:04, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment It's arguable this is a procedural/speedy keep in that the nomination lacks grounds for deletion WP:CSK. NPOL is criteria for inclusion, not exclusion. Not satisfying NPOL does not automatically make a subject not notable. Regards, --Goldsztajn (talk) 10:31, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy keep On further thought, given above and given the proximity of the election results being announced (five days) - no decision should be made regarding the article until after the results are announced so as not to have any effect on the election or the candidate in any way. If anything, this reinforces the need for a speedy keep, with no prejudice to renominate if not elected. Regards, --Goldsztajn (talk) 10:42, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Jacob Barber

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

A well-written and WP:GF entry, however, I believe it may fail WP:BLP1E and WP:GNG. This may be a case of WP:TOOSOON.

BLP1E: Subject is known only for his appearance on NewsNation in which he claimed he was in psychic contact with space aliens or something.
GNG: Most sources are either NewsNation or rely exclusively on NewsNation reporting. NewsNation has been determined by the community as consensus unreliable as a source for UFO/UAP coverage per WP:UFONATION.

Chetsford (talk) 05:12, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Military, and United States of America. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:06, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. The individual in his own right fails to fulfill WP:N. Eelipe (talk) 04:15, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete fails WP:GNG. Mztourist (talk) 08:24, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Patrocles (half-brother of Socrates)

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

Not notable. He has precisely one mention in the complete works of Plato. All the information is extrapolated from what we know of Socrates. Remsense ‥ 论 00:22, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Greece. Shellwood (talk) 00:58, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 00:59, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect (if possible?) to Phaenarete, which already mentions him. No need to merge, as there is no useful information here, and one of the sources is not reliable (geni_family_tree), and the other only has a sentence saying that Socrates had a half-brother Patrocles. The disambig page Patrocles could say "Patrocles, son of Phaenarete and half-brother of the philosopher Socrates". (If any other editors are aware of more information and sources about this Patrocles that could be added to improve this article, I'd be happy to reconsider.) RebeccaGreen (talk) 01:21, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Having reconsidered, as per my reply to Uncle G below, I am striking my Redirect !vote. Nails 2002 is clearly SIGCOV, and with the other, shorter sources and explanation of his roles, adds up to at least WP:BASIC. RebeccaGreen (talk) 14:21, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Many decent 21st century sources (e.g. Miller's and Platter's Plato's Apology of Socrates: A Commentary (UOP, 2012, ISBN 9780806186054)), as opposed to the family tree WWW site that is used in the article, point to Nails 2002, pp. 218–219, Patrocles of Alopece, son of Chaeredemus harvnb error: no target: CITEREFNails2002 (help) as a good recent authority. It has the original Greek name, the citations to classical sources (including Euthydemus), and a lengthy discussion of Patrocles's possible career on the Board of Ten archons (that followed the fall of the Thirty Tyrants) after age 30. Uncle G (talk) 04:21, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  - Nails, Debra (2002). "Patrocles of Alopece, son of Chaeredemus". The People of Plato: A Prosopography of Plato and Other Socratics. Indianapolis/Cambridge: Hackett Publishing. pp. 218–219. ISBN 9781603840279.

Uncle G, I'd be happy to reconsider, but I have no access to Nails' book myself (Google Books preview does not show those pages, nor the Works cited and consulted (which might provide other sources too)). Other sources I have found have at most a sentence or two about Patrocles, though admittedly more than is in this article. Xenophon: Ethical Principles and Historical Enquiry p286-287 says "Socrates' half-brother Patrocles was King Archon of the board of ten oligarchs who replaced the Thirty after their downfall"; Socrates in Love p 170 says Patrocles "may have had political ambitions; he is named as holding an official position in the Athenian treasury in the late fifth century". The Bloomsbury Companion to Socrates names Patrocles as one of seven who fled into exile as a result of the scandals and failed oligarchic coup of 415. That does sound like he was notable. I do not feel competent to add that info to the article, though! RebeccaGreen (talk) 09:40, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect as above, unless additional detail sufficient to prove notability is forthcoming: the best way to prove that would be to add some substantial, reliably cited mentions. If you do this, feel free to ping me to reconsider my !vote. Brief and passing mentions (even in good sources, as those discussed above seem to be) are not in themselves sufficient to do this. Chiswick Chap (talk) 14:12, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Frank Sumner Capen

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

Insufficient WP:SIGCOV to meet GNG. Sources only prove existence, not notability. Fails WP:NPROF according to this discussion on article talk page. Bgv. (talk) 23:51, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Academics and educators, and Education. Bgv. (talk) 23:51, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. An odd case. He moved from being faculty at Colby to being principal of a high school in the late 19th century when sources were sparse. The high school later became a degree-granting university. However, just as notability is not inheritable, I don't see how it can retroactively promote to pass WP:NPROF#C6. I am not convinced, but I am happy to leave this one to others -- hence Abstain. Ldm1954 (talk) 03:54, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
As a point of clarification: Subject became principal of the New Paltz Normal School, and I'm not sure if it's completely appropriate to denote that as a high school. Normal schools were post-secondary institutions with abbreviated (1-2 year) programs to train school teachers, in a similar system as technical colleges. Most normal schools in the United States later became or were absorbed by state colleges (see examples in Normal schools in the United States). Does this make them "major academic institutions"? Likely not, but I also wouldn't group them into the same bucket as secondary school administrators. Bgv. (talk) 05:14, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
OK, clarification accepted (I did not grow up in the US). Ldm1954 (talk) 06:09, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Newspapers.com shows that there was coverage of why he was asked to resign, and also of his suicide and the manner of it. A newspaper report of his appointment to Colby University says that he was elected to the "chair of Natural Philosopy and Astronomy" - the article describes this as a "professor of physics", which seems a bit different, although a report of his resignation does say "professor of physics". I'm not sure about this one, and not sure I have the time to expand the article to assess whether he meets WP:GNG (or anything else). RebeccaGreen (talk) 09:52, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Fidelis Chibueze

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

The subject of this article fails WP:ANYBIO and WP:GNG. The article is written in a promotional tone and is definitely a soapbox. The subject is the founder of a non-notable platform and is a member of a non-notable council. Versace1608 ^{Wanna Talk?} 19:49, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Businesspeople, and Nigeria. Versace1608 ^{Wanna Talk?} 19:49, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Mathematics, Kansas, and Texas. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 23:21, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: A non notable subject that is full of puff pieces as sources. Ibjaja055 (talk) 20:34, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete He is widely known as the founder of Fixtops, an AI-powered... Yeah, that digs a big hole which the article utterly fails to climb out of. Searching finds no means by which WP:GNG can be met. XOR'easter (talk) 22:29, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - by now, everyone should know that we are not a social media platform for you to sell your version of AI. Bearian (talk) 05:19, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Subject fails WP:GNG or WP:ANYBIO. Sources either fails WP:INDEPENDENT or a promotional puffery. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 16:31, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per everyone above. Best, GPL93 (talk) 19:39, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ayobami Aranmolate Rasheed

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

The subject of this article does not meet Wikipedia's notability requirements, specifically WP:GNG and WP:ANYBIO. The article reads like a WP:SOAPBOX and contains promotional wording. Multiple sources in the article are about the surgery he performed on Tonto Dikeh. I've read most of the sources cited in the article, and they're all promotional. Versace1608 ^{Wanna Talk?} 19:43, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Businesspeople, and Nigeria. Versace1608 ^{Wanna Talk?} 19:43, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Medicine. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:45, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. "Africa Magic Showcase" is some kind of YouTube channel, akin to the "pimple popping" video channels. It's not serious scholarship. It's soap and spam. Bearian (talk)
Delete: "He is a Fellow of the West African College of Surgeons and also a Fellow of the American Academy of Aesthetic Medicine" was the only paragraph that caught my attention, but then, it is hoax because the cited sources do not even say such. Fails WP:GNG overall. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 16:26, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- User:Vanderwaalforces, I'm sorry, but that one paragraph was so bad and so badly sourced, as you indicated, that I removed it from the article. Drmies (talk) 16:30, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  - @Drmies I'm telling you. If I decide to go deeper, I might find more hoax that this might just end up being a G3. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 16:33, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    - User:Vanderwaalforces, user is now CU-blocked. I don't think it's a hoax, I just think it's deceptive. Drmies (talk) 16:41, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
      Well, thanks for tending to it. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 16:42, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Suporn Watanyusakul

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

Does not meet notability requirements. Sources are unreliable. one source not in the article (unsure of reliability) says his clinic is renowned. Not convinced that makes him notable. ꧁Zanahary꧂ 19:06, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Medicine and Thailand. ꧁Zanahary꧂ 19:06, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 19:24, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Is mentioned in this Thai journal article[18], master's thesis[19], and an article on the Society of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery of Thailand's website[20] as a pioneer of sex-reassignment surgery in Thailand, though none of the mentions are particularly in depth. --Paul_012 (talk) 08:04, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Aarne Arvonen

AfDs for this article:

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

This article about a Finnish supercentenarian was merged to List of supercentenarians by continent in 2018 as a result of this discussion. The page was recently restored by Wwew345t, along with many other articles on supercentarians that were merged or redirected (see, e.g., [21][22][23]). I'm starting another AfD to get a feel for the community's current consensus, as this article is one of many similar bios that were recently restored to mainspace. Notability is definitely borderline: although there are sources that discuss this person, I think it's pretty clear-cut case of WP:BIO1E, as all the sources focus exclusively on his age. I'm interested to get the community's input here to guide my decisions on the many similar articles remaining in the new pages queue. Lord Bolingbroke (talk) 18:50, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Finland. Lord Bolingbroke (talk) 18:50, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
keep he was not just the oldest living man in finland but also the last living veteran of the Finnish civil war that's two events so WP:BI01E doesn't apply — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wwew345t (talk • contribs) 19:34, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I think some source hutning could turn up a source or two covering his ww1 service Wwew345t (talk) 19:42, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There are sources that covdr his age and status as the last finnish civil war vet such https://yle.fi/a/3-5847448 Wwew345t (talk) 19:44, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep. He was famous in Finland for being one of the oldest men in Finnish history, the last living man born in the 19th century and the last living veteran of the Finnish Civil War. He is already listed at the list of supercentenaries but I think there is potential to write even more about him. Nonetheless, regardless of the outcome, he should be kept at the list of supercentenaries. JIP | Talk 01:59, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Per his involvement in the Civil War, detailed in Sotahistoriallinen aikakauskirja 29 (pp. 213-224) Jähmefyysikko (talk) 20:28, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wild Cookbook (Youtuber)

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

All sources are primary, seems non-notable, only a couple of trivial mentions on the internet in secondary sources DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 13:29, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Sri Lanka. Shellwood (talk) 13:43, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Food and drink and Internet. ZyphorianNexus ^Talk 13:44, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: No coverage at all about this person that I can find. Sources in the article are social media/video websites. Nothing at all for RS or any sort of media coverage. Nothing for notability and the lack of sourcing doesn't help. Oaktree b (talk) 15:32, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
No !vote at present, but wonder if we need to look in non-Latin script for references. His youtube channel has 9.7 million subscribers. I found some interviews with him, news about a restaurant opening, but only one in-depth reference: https://www.sundaytimes.lk/211226/plus/their-recipe-to-success-466461.html . Anyone who can search in his native language's script? — rsjaffe 🗣️ 18:30, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, as per Oaktree b’s comments - social media is not an acceptable or reliable independent secondary source - fails WP:ANYBIO. Dan arndt (talk) 00:35, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Has not received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject - does not meet WP:GNG. Obi2canibe (talk) 12:33, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Seems way too promotional in nature. No significant coverage either.Plasticwonder (talk) 19:07, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment article was made by a sock/meat puppeter. DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 19:08, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Maria Strong (attorney)

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

Fails GNG. She assumed some positions at the United States Copyright Office, but none of them was extraordinary enough to confer her notability. Even if some positions she held are notable enough to have a stand-alone page, that doesn't automatically make her notable.

[24] Blog source.
[25] Routine announcement, which most people who get appointed to assume relevant federal roles usually get.
[26] Mostly Strong talking about her own work, not an independent source. Badbluebus (talk) 04:06, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Women, Law, and United States of America. Badbluebus (talk) 04:06, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: California and Washington, D.C.. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:10, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep for the valid arguments made by @TJRC
Nayyn (talk) 23:33, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. She didn't just assume "some positions" at the Copyright Office; she was acting Register of Copyrights, the top position, the head of the entire Copyright Office, with responsibility for all U.S. policy relating to copyright law. I know that "register" sounds like a purely ministerial title, like a county register, but it is the equivalent to a position like the head of the US Patent and Trademark Office. It's just that the USPTO head's title has changed from the mundane U.S. Commissioner of Patents to the more ornate Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property, while the Copyright Office has stuck to its original title. Frankly, each of the registers in the List of registers of copyrights merits an article.

No objection to improving the sourcing.

Disclosure: I'm the editor who initially wrote the article. Frankly, I think it was better -- in content, sourcing and clarity of notability -- in its original form. I agree it should be cleaned up; but not deleted. TJRC (talk) 04:26, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep as per TJRC. For the record, most active Wikipedians are 2 or 3 degrees of separation from the subject via the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Directors member Kat Walsh, who's a mutual connection on LinkedIn and Copyright Counsel at Creative Commons. Bearian (talk) 06:24, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I don't necessarily understand the views above about WP:GNG. Serving non significant or perhaps public political or literary offices doesn't meets WP:NPOL. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 07:45, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Appears to be the head of a government corporation, doesn't seem to pass political notability. They’re a business person in the employ of the government, not a politician that's elected. Best, Reading Beans, Duke of Rivia 12:26, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Dean Kaelin

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

Fails GNG and WP:NMUSIC. Only this source talks about him in some depth [27], all others only mention him briefly. Some of the people he taught and collaborated with are notable, but he is not. Badbluebus (talk) 03:35, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Artists, Bands and musicians, Music, United States of America, and Utah. Badbluebus (talk) 03:35, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: To be very honest, this would be considered nothing in Nigerian standard talk more of here in the West. I honestly don’t see any source. Best, Reading Beans, Duke of Rivia 07:48, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:NOTINHERITED. Yes he has trained some notable singers and achieved a feature story in his local newspaper, but otherwise he is only ever mentioned in reliable media as a background figure for more notable people. This article functions as an attempted resume and a pretty uninformative one at that. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 15:04, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Arnold Philimon Peter

AfDs for this article:

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

Soft deleted previously due to lack of in-depth coverage. Still fails WP:GNG. Gheus (talk) 01:19, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Law, and California. Shellwood (talk) 02:27, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Arnold Dix

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

Fails WP:NPROF ([28]) and is a case of WP:BIO1E. Indian sources are without bylines and are likely paid (WP:NEWSORGINDIA). I suggest to restore the redirect per WP:ATD. Gheus (talk) 23:18, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Law, Engineering, and Australia. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 00:20, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I think? I definitely agree that there's no WP:NPROF pass, but I think he probably passes WP:GNG. He got plenty of coverage in very reliable Australian media sources with no WP:NEWSORGINDIA issues. He got an entire episode of Australian Story, which is a very prominent Australian documentary television program [29]. Other good sources include [30] [31] [32] [33]. I do see the WP:BLP1E concerns, but I don't think he really meets any of the three criteria. There is some coverage of him outside of this event, he's not a low-profile individual (he is frequently quoted or interviewed as an expert about similar incidents), and his role in the incident seems to have been quite significant. Finally, I think in a couple of weeks time he may well meet WP:NAUTHOR. He literally just had a book come out with Simon & Schuster three days ago — I can't find any reviews yet given that it's so new, but it's gotten a fair bit of publicity so I expect we'll probably see enough reviews for an NAUTHOR pass pretty soon. MCE89 (talk) 07:12, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A. J. Reynolds

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

Fails WP:GNG and WP:ANYBIO; has very few references that don't support its information, and a google search reveals nothing on the article's subject. Sophisticatedevening ^(talk) 14:31, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Radio-related deletion discussions. Sophisticatedevening ^(talk) 14:31, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This page has been up for over a decade and I was the one updating it. It does not require deletion. Alfred AJ Reynolds has been a long time broadcaster and entrepreneur in Canada and there are plenty of resources. 76.11.17.31 (talk) 16:44, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply][reply]

Also here are contributing references on all details:

https://www.imdb.com/name/nm2271293/

https://www.novascotiaobits.com/about

https://www.cbislandshine.ca/who

https://www.saltwire.com/cape-breton/caper-behind-mic-on-hit-national-radio-program-18869

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canada%27s_Top_20_Countdown

https://web.archive.org/web/20140717134011/http://canadastop20.ca/index.php/about/

Reynoldsaj (talk) 16:53, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Canada. Shellwood (talk) 14:45, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This page has been up for over a decade and I was the one updating it. It does not require deletion. Alfred AJ Reynolds has been a long time broadcaster and entrepreneur in Canada and there are plenty of resources. 76.11.17.31 (talk) 16:44, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Also here are contributing references on all details:

https://www.imdb.com/name/nm2271293/

https://www.novascotiaobits.com/about

https://www.cbislandshine.ca/who

https://www.saltwire.com/cape-breton/caper-behind-mic-on-hit-national-radio-program-18869

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canada%27s_Top_20_Countdown

https://web.archive.org/web/20140717134011/http://canadastop20.ca/index.php/about/ Reynoldsaj (talk) 16:50, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This page has been up for over a decade and I was the one updating it. It does not require deletion. Alfred AJ Reynolds has been a long time broadcaster and entrepreneur in Canada and there are plenty of resources. 76.11.17.31 (talk) 16:44, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Also here are contributing references on all details:

https://www.imdb.com/name/nm2271293/

https://www.novascotiaobits.com/about

https://www.cbislandshine.ca/who

https://www.saltwire.com/cape-breton/caper-behind-mic-on-hit-national-radio-program-18869

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canada%27s_Top_20_Countdown

https://web.archive.org/web/20140717134011/http://canadastop20.ca/index.php/about/ Reynoldsaj (talk) 16:54, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Reynoldsaj, My concern is that all of those sources you just listed were created and owned by the article's subject, making them WP:PRIMARY sources. Also imdb is generally not seen as reliable. (see WP:GUNREL list). Sophisticatedevening ^(talk) 17:13, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This is a reputable news source (https://www.saltwire.com/cape-breton/caper-behind-mic-on-hit-national-radio-program-18869) , IMDB all entries require a confirmation process, (https://www.novascotiaobits.com/about

https://www.cbislandshine.ca/who) are company websites that all discuss the owner and founder. 76.11.17.31 (talk) 18:23, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Does not appear to have sufficient notability as evidenced by extensive valid secondary sourcing to suffice WP:GNG. The IP 76.11.17.31 is registered in Halifax, NS and may have a WP:COI commenting on this AfD. m a MANÍ^{1990(talk | contribs)} 16:54, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Jason Ross (political consultant)

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

Sources available do not show that this subject meets WP:NPOL or WP:ANYBIO Mekomo (talk) 12:37, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Politicians, Politics, and United States of America. Mekomo (talk) 12:37, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Massachusetts-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:26, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Of the four sources that aren't primary or non-independent, all but one's a namedrop, and the fourth is an interview of the subject, which cannot count towards supporting the subject's notability. Doesn't come within a country mile of NPOL with his relatively minor elected small town position (if so, then I'll claim a Wikipedia article for myself based on my elected small town position, topped by my election to the regional transit authority's board of trustees). Article also appears to be a coatrack for the subject's consulting business. Ravenswing 20:31, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Very clear WP:RESUME for someone in government for themselves and not the people; nothing about their policy positions or what they actually do for people who ask for the subject's help. Nate • (chatter) 21:11, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Available sources do not show that this topic meet the general notability criteria. As someone I know would say, Wikipedia is not LinkedIn. Best, Reading Beans, Duke of Rivia 07:53, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - written by an SPA with a history of creating a BLP that was deleted 4 years ago, I see a total lack of significant coverage, much less any actual allegations of notability. This is practically speedy deletion ready. FWIW, I was a candidate (as an independent) for local government office, but lost. Bearian (talk) 02:18, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per everyone above. Wikipedia is WP:NOTLINKEDIN. Best, GPL93 (talk) 16:26, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Other activities of Elon Musk

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

Random collection of bits and pieces from his career. Those with a separate article should be linked to from his main biography and don't need another page to summarize them, which would leave us with just two small sections, which probably just don't need mentioning at all as they are such minor aspects. Fram (talk) 12:21, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and United States of America. Fram (talk) 12:21, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Expanding the scope of Business career to Career of Elon Musk and merging there might make sense if editors believe the content should be kept but not as standalone. It'd be just under 6,000 words if merged there. Edit: If wasn't clear from nomination, the subject was split from main BLP due to size issues, as documented on the talk pages. What's left is a child article summary in the parent now. CNC (talk) 17:43, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Finance, Business, and Technology. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:26, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Resort This was moved from his main article yesterday. Someone just took random unrelated things to move to a new article. Things should be sorted in a proper manner. Dream Focus 14:49, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Per the attribution on the talk page, the split is the section Other activities from this version of Elon Musk to the child article with this edit. The content is based on what was considered due in the main article as the status quo for sometime now and was previously a significant part of the main article (appoox. 20%). I think the proper way to resolve this would be expand the scope of business career article and merge there, but otherwise best to wait until the end of this discussion before opening an RM for that. CNC (talk) 16:40, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge back That is the way to go - for the reasons stated.Lukewarmbeer (talk) 18:28, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge back It's not a cohesive subject. ~ HAL333 21:35, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge back Having summarised remaining section there's plenty of room for it to move back into. CNC (talk) 21:50, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge back, this should not have happened in the first place... It's just not a coherent independent topic. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 03:38, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:TNT and WP:SYNTH. What a mess. You can't throw random words on a page, name-drop celebrity friends, and call it English. You can't just throw random unconnected facts, even if sourced, on to a page and call it an encyclopedia article. I have lots of criticisms of Wikipedia, but at least we make an effort to make some sense. Sorry not sorry. Bearian (talk) 02:23, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ira Brad Matetsky

AfDs for this article:

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

I know this subject has survived a previous AfD, but the last one was six years ago and I think the project has leaned a bit more deletionist over time in regards to BLPs. This is something I've run into a few times myself in a Wikipedia-related context (I nominated myself for deletion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hannah Clover and I have written an article about a different Wikipedian since then that I actually think meets our current notability requirements). I think Matetsky's biography is a lot like mine... in that we're not really notable. I took a look at the cited references and the closest any of them gets to WP:GNG is the Princeton one here. My short-lived biography also only had one SIGCOV reference at the time. Everything else is a passing mention. I did my own before and did not find any other sources with more significant coverage (they were just more passing mentions). Deletion might not be the only answer here, a partial merge to the article about ArbCom might make sense, with the subject's name as a redirect. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 05:08, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Law, and Internet. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 05:08, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Well, if the nom is about making comparisons to other articles (which I don't "think" we normally do) I've seen far fewer references in other articles that have been kept... - jc37 10:29, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Jc37: Look at the quality of the references. Most literally just list his name and are directory-like entries on websites. I've definitely seen people compare articles/AfDs in an AfD before to show precedent and differences in regards to level of secondary coverage. I'm going to try and keep my commenting at a minimum here but I hope that people try to distance themselves from the Wikipedia aspect and just see this as a normal biography. Is there enough coverage for a standalone biography? I don't think so. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 14:50, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sorry, but I disagree with your "hand wave" assessment of the page's sources.

That said, "standalone" biography? Are you intimating that you want to see this listified somewhere? - jc37 16:12, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
In that case, I ask you to give me three sources that demonstrate GNG coverage. As for standalone biography, I did mention the possibility of a partial merge (and then redirect) to ArbCom. The passing mentions of this subject are usually in that context. Kind of like how my name is a redirect. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 16:33, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the clarification. And I see that you adjusted that redirect [34].

I think there's more to this article than merely his Wikipedia work, notable as it may be.

Anyway, I really am trying to AGF here, but from what others have noted below, and from the seeming tone of your comments, this is starting to feel like "sour grapes" here.

I think I'll wait to see what other commenters have to say. - jc37 16:42, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I wasn't referencing that redirect, but the discussion about a standalone article. I'll maintain that this AfD is WP:NOTPOINTY (I'd say everything about that section applies here), but I'm open to other people's perspectives. I started this AfD because I had genuine concerns about notability. I'll note that the previous AfD closed as "no consensus" so it's not like I'm the first person to have this opinion. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 17:38, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I do realize that the timing was probably a dumb decision on my part but it really wasn't intended in any malicious kind of way. I was working on List of Wikipedia people lately. I've been considering the notability of other articles and whether other Wikipedians are notable in their own right. I try really hard not to be a hypocrite and apply consistent standards across the board. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 17:48, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Noting for anyone new to the discussion that I opened this before one of the articles I mention above was nominated for deletion. But I stand by what I said, in that this article really doesn't meet GNG. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 21:30, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Feels a tad bit pointy based on her creation of Tamzin being tagged for notability. ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 13:51, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It's not meant to be pointy, someone mentioned the AfD on the talk page for that article and I think they had a point about notability. I genuinely believe this article isn't notable. The depth of coverage here is even less than that article, which was deleted, so I think that argument holds even more weight. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 14:45, 31 January 2025 (UTC), edited 21:43, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, I 100% believe you're acting in good faith here. ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 14:08, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete On the whole I find the way redditors are covered compared to Wikipedians disappointing (I think they get more/better press). So I wish someone like Matetsky was notable for his immense contributions to Wikipedia. However, the coverage he has received does not pass notability. None of the sources really offers any indepth biographical coverage of Matetsky. Instead we get passing coverage of him talking about ArbCom, which any number of Wikipedians including myself have, some press coverage of some cases he's been a part of as a lawyer (all lacking WP:SIGCOV of Matetsky as a topic) and various "things on the internet he's done". If this were some 19th Century person I could maybe understand why we would stretch our policies and guidelines to include. But this is a BLP where we shouldn't be stretching things and I do not think he meets our standards for notability and so the right thing would be to delete. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 17:47, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
You say "things done on the internet" like it's a bad thing - welcome to the 21st century : )

Anyway, I think you left out book and magazine editor as well... - jc37 17:57, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
No the "journal" is "things done on the internet". This is not some major journal of note or notability and isn't widely indexed. And truthfully that's how I considered the Baker Street publication but if you want to call it a book that's fine. It's a self published one that also id not notable nor convey notability under WP:NBOOK (the SNG I personally work with the most) Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 20:16, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Mysterious Press is self-publishing? - jc37 21:41, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Not sure where you're getting Mysterious Press from, but both the Baker Street Almanac and the Greenbag Almanac are published by Greenbag.org, which may not necessarily be self-published, but is a minuscule press, and its publications are unlikely to come close to WP:NBOOK. Contributing to an almanac (or being on its editorial or advisory board) isn't usually considered notable unless the almanac itself is considered notable. Risker (talk) 23:58, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks jc37 and Risker. The danger of trying to get a comment out quickly rather than giving it the time it deserved. I should have written "It's published by a micro poss that is also not one that conveys notability under WP:NBOOK..." Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 02:03, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
My apologies, let me clarify: I "found" Mysterious Press by looking at the page's references. Here's the link to the company's page: [35]. Here's a link describing them by their current owner: [36] - Mysterious Press was founded in 1975, and was sold to Warner Books in 1989. And here the "about" page for the current parent company: [37]]. I hope this helps. Happy reading : ) - jc37 15:50, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Fair enough. I can't open any of the links to Mysterious Press, my security system says it's a corrupted website; and its current owner, Penzler Press, doesn't include the book in its catalogue (nor NYB as one of its authors, but as an editor he probably wouldn't be). Is editing a non-notable compilation a criterion for notability? Risker (talk) 20:36, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Barnes and Noble showing it for sale: [38]. (tried to add Amazon link, but it wouldn't save) - jc37 21:57, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Very nice. Is the book notable? Are there multiple reviews of it, by reputable sources? Risker (talk) 07:47, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete the article, keep Newyorkbrad. There are almost no circumstances in which I would consider a Wikipedia editor to be notable, unless they already met notability standards in whatever they do outside of Wikipedia; editing Wikipedia, receiving a Wikipedia/Wikimedia award, being on an Arbcom, or even being quoted in a journalistic article about Wikipedia/Wikimedia does not and should not cross the notability threshold. Risker (talk) 23:58, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'm going to expand here, because I do not see how we would consider Ira Brad Matetsky a notable author/editor; neither the works he has published/edited/written nor the journals/almanacs/books he has worked on meet our notability thresholds. I have absolutely no doubt that he is an excellent and highly professional lawyer; nonetheless, his work in this field would not meet our notability thresholds. And I think that it is actually a little bit insulting to the hundreds of thousands of Wikipedians, including many who have been more productive, and have produced more work that has been read by more people than all of the Arbcom pages put together, to suggest that Newyorkbrad is a lynchpin of the project. I say this as someone who has worked closely with NYB, knows him personally as Ira Brad and has enjoyed the pleasure of his company on several occasions, and holds him in the highest personal regard. He is a really good person, and he's done good work here. But none of this makes him notable, and we wouldn't even be having this discussion if he wasn't a popular and well-respected colleague of ours; that article would have been delete years ago. We really do need to stop this navel-gazing. Risker (talk) 07:47, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or merge to some kind of list or meta-article about Wikipedians/Arbcom. Andre🚐 00:37, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per jc37. Serial (speculates here) 15:23, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Changed from: "Keep per WP:CREATIVE because, due to his extensive ArbCom tenure covering the relatively early years of Wikipedia and extending into more mature years, which has received a fair amount of coverage, and he was the longest-serving member, and he participated in at least one notable case ("notable" meaning: a case about which there is an article—Church of Scientology editing on Wikipedia), and having played a significant role in a notable event on Wikipedia—the discovery of the Jar'Edo Wens hoax (he deleted the hoax), he has played a sufficiently significant role in co-creating the significant and well-known collective work which is Wikipedia (and Wikipedia has been the primary subject of multiple etcetera etcetera) for that role to be considered major and for this article to have some encyclopedic worth. To add: It's possible to write the article, and the article speaks for itself."—Alalch E. 22:59, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- After thinking a bit more about it, I'm switching to delete, as I no longer believe that it's possible to write a reasonable article. While there are corporate biographies, we can't rely on them to the degree needed to flesh out the legal career portion of the article, and mentioning just one case is unsatisfactory.—Alalch E. 09:12, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Do not disrupt Wikipedia to make a point. Carrite (talk) 23:20, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Please assume good faith... starship.paint (talk / cont) 08:34, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  - I was VERY polite. For you, this: this is a bad faith nomination in the wake of the Tamzin deletion, in my estimation. The end. Carrite (talk) 04:33, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @Carrite, this AfD started 17 hours before Tamzin's AfD started. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 04:41, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  - I'd like to give the benefit of the doubt to everyone here. I'll remind folks that the initiator of this AfD had a BLP written about her which she herself put up for AfD as she doesn't think she's notable enough for an article, so notability of individual Wikipedians is definitely something to which she has given some serious thought. People can disagree with her assessment, and that's entirely fair. At the same time, Carrite, at the previous AfD for this article, you voted to delete. Could you help us to understand in what way the article has been improved sufficient for you to decide it should be kept this time? I'm not trying to be pointy here, but I think you're only person who's participated in both AfDs, so understanding your change in position may be important for other participants. Risker (talk) 04:53, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I can't see how this article meets notability requirements. As per Risker, Delete the article, keep Newyorkbrad. Daniel Quinlan (talk) 07:19, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. As the article subject, I am neutral, but have posted some thoughts here. Newyorkbrad (talk) 19:09, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Just to summarize NYB's salient points here because they feel worth being considered when weighting consensus:
- He is, as he writes above, neutral about whether he should have an article
- He notes that he has an article because of his ArbCom work and notes the ways that the sources inadequately source the fact that he is the longest serving Arb and how it now only says this as of 2018 because that's what the WSJ said.
- The article gives little coverage to his work as a litigator and suggests his career can be summarized by having lost one case over a long career
- Notes issues with the 2016 "as of" description of involvement in a literary society
- Fails to include his newest Sherlock book (even while claiming it would bore many people)
- Concludes with knowledge that his article isn't likely to be vandalized but other similarly notable, or non-notable, BLP may not be so lucky.
I think I'm fairly summarizing what he wrote there and for me the top line statement that he is claiming to be neutral as an article subject gives rise to a lot of actual concerns as an article subject about the article, which maybe aren't collectively best addressed at an AfD, but do (I feel) deserve weight and consideration when assessing the consensus here. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 01:51, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:GNG: the sources either contain no significant coverage of the subject or are not independent of him. I join with the others above in saying that deletion would not be a reflection of Newyorkbrad as a member of our online community. arcticocean ■ 19:23, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per jc37 and Alalch E. --JackFromWisconsin (talk | contribs) 19:28, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I like Newyorkbrad, and think he has been an outstanding arb (if not the best) for his work ethic, logic, cogent writing, and perhaps most importantly, empathy. If having a BLP were a reward for being an outstanding Wikipedian, he would absolutely deserve it. But it’s kind of the opposite, isn’t it? Please, please, please read the thoughts he lays out at User:Newyorkbrad/Newyorkbradblog#Thoughts from an AfD subject to understand the problems with piecing together a biographical article about someone about whom no proper biography has been written in reliable sources. You get woefully incomplete and outdated scraps of information that do not cohere into a proper, comprehensive narrative about the man’s life and career. He deserves better than that. If and when there are reliable sources that are sufficient to form a better, more complete picture than is available now, then it would make sense to consider a BLP. But — going solely by the sources — we’re not there yet. 28bytes (talk) 04:01, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete for the excellent reasons NYB provided in his "blog". Marginally ~~notable~~ NOTEable people with very little actual public info available should not have articles. --Floquenbeam (talk) 16:57, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Walid Tawfik

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

No sign of passing WP:NACADEMIC. His citation numbers are very low. Being a IEEE member is not impressive (they haver over 400,000 members). This article was created by a WP:CITESPAMmer [39][40]. Badbluebus (talk) 22:10, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Academics and educators, Science, and Egypt. Badbluebus (talk) 22:10, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Provisional Delete. With large numbers of coauthors on publications I do not find sufficient evidence of the independent achievement needed to pass WP:Prof. Xxanthippe (talk) 23:58, 30 January 2025 (UTC).[reply]
Provisional/Currently Delete -- Like @Xxanthippe -- Looked through the WP article as it is and didn't see evidence of passing WP:PROF -- but editors who add material not currently in the article can change my mind. -- Michael Scott Asato Cuthbert (talk) 09:26, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - if we take out all the primary sources created by him in the references, and move them to the external sources, there would not be much left. Again, ping me if you find anything else: either secondary sources and/or independent sources. Bearian (talk) 10:26, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I see little sign of WP:NPROF, and WP:NAUTHOR would tend to require more than one book (in addition to requiring reviews, which appear unlikely at best). Russ Woodroofe (talk) 11:43, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Currently his publication record is not enough to pass WP:NPROF#C1. I will give him (or GS?) the benefit of the doubt that he has published under slightly different names. With this assumption, the strong upward trend of his citations is encouraging, but it is WP:TOOSOON; I suggest trying again in 2-3 years if the trend is maintained. Ldm1954 (talk) 12:42, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Too niche of an expert to meet encyclopedic notability WP:GNG --Saul McGill (talk) 01:51, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Rashid Mahmud

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

Devoid of coverage (even mention) in any WP:RS (also checked Urdu sources), the BLP clearly fails WP:GNG. Actually, the article as seen from the page history was created for a Malaysian footballer with some similar name but was changed (by a block evasion) to this personality possibly known for youtube channel in Pakistan. MŠLQr (talk) 17:51, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Islam, and Pakistan. MŠLQr (talk) 17:51, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I also tried searching for the subject in Urdu, Hindi, and English, but I couldn't find anything significant. While the subject has written some books, they clearly fail to meet WP:GNG. Baqi:) (talk) 18:08, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for searching into Hindi also. MŠLQr (talk) 18:10, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and protect against re-creation - neither the athlete nor the "personality" are notable. Changing the subject of an article and block evasion are technically independent reasons to delete. Salt to avoid repetition of this problem. Bearian (talk) 11:38, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Delete per nomination. Perhaps you can find better references in the times to come. Maybe we can find better references in time to come. Behappyyar (talk) 21:24, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Kai Enslin

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

No secondary sources that I could find to even consider WP:SIGCOV for WP:GNG. Has only played one EFL Trophy match and the only reference from RS is being in that starting lineup. Am also OK with incubating in draft space for the near future, as subject is likely to become notable sooner rather than later. CNC (talk) 16:45, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Football, and England. CNC (talk) 16:46, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 16:55, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Draftify – WP:TOOSOON. Svartner (talk) 00:48, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 09:27, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Drafify - not currently notable, but might be in future. Giant Snowman 09:33, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Israel Nuñez

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

Biography of a U.S. Air Force chief master sergeant fails WP:GNG, WP:NBIO. I found no coverage of this individual beyond articles on USAF sites ([41], [42]), which are not independent of the subject. As far as I can tell, being a Command Chief Master Sergeant is not an inherently notable rank. Dclemens1971 (talk) 16:34, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Military, and Puerto Rico. Dclemens1971 (talk) 16:34, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete fails WP:GNG, completely non-notable. Mztourist (talk) 02:57, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete fails WP:GNG. Zero RS coverage. Best, GPL93 (talk) 16:05, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tonye Rex Idaminabo

AfDs for this article:

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

The available sources are interviews, announcement containing trivial mentions, primary sources closely related to the subject and the two sources from Forbes are not reliable. Mekomo (talk) 16:26, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Businesspeople, and Nigeria. Mekomo (talk) 16:26, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Claude Russell

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

Few refs on the page, one that is present appears to amount to no more than two sentences. WP:NPOL provisions do not appear to have been met as the role of collector and/or District magistrate was not a state-wide position under the Raj and I don't think is even now in modern India. Certainly it dies not appear that people holding this role in modern times are considered notable. Only other claims to notability are inherited. Unless others can offer good reasons to the contrary, I don't think this person meets the notability criteria for inclusion. JMWt (talk) 14:52, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, India, and United Kingdom. JMWt (talk) 14:52, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Does not meet WP:GNG or WP:NPOL, with no inherent notability for being a district collector and/or district magistrate. The biographical detail here appears to be wrong - a search of the British Newspaper Archive and Google Books for "Claude Russell" + Indies results in death notices published in 1817: "At Benares, in the East Indies, Claude Russell, Esq. of the East India Company's service, son of Claude Russell, esq. of Warfield, Berks." There is also a death notice in September 1847 that may be for his widow: "On the 16th inst., at No. 13, Hamilton-place, St. John's-wood, Charlotte Russell, relict of Claude Russell, Esq., Civil service, Bengal." So all we have is his non-notable civil service roles. RebeccaGreen (talk) 09:40, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Akhtar Hussain Aleemi

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

Not a single reference from any reliable source. Fails WP:GNG. AndySailz (talk) 12:45, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and India. AndySailz (talk) 12:45, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@AndySailz: Why do you think these cited books are completely unreliable? Please justify your nomination instead of just AfD bombing. GrabUp - Talk 14:03, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Islam, and Uttar Pradesh. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:48, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@GrabUp The books are not reliable sources and self published. AndySailz (talk) 05:50, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:NOTINHERITED and WP:PROF. The movement of which he is part is clearly notable with millions of followers; there no evidence that he is notable. As a "scholar", he doesn't seem to have any evidence of passing the PROF test. I admit that the term "scholar" is confusing in this context, because I think he is more like an imam or ayatollah, but not exactly those kinds of clerics. If you can clarify this, or show that the sources are in fact reliable, please ping me. Bearian (talk) 11:56, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: The article failing WP:GNG and WP:ITSA. It lacks significant coverage in reliable, independent sources and cited books appear to be either self-published or fail to establish substantial academic or journalistic recognition, also the subject does not meet WP:PROF or WP:ANYBIO, as there is no evidence of influential scholarly contributions or widespread impact beyond his religious community. NXcrypto Message 03:12, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sultan Shahin

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

Fails WP:GNG. Sultan Shahin does not have significant coverage in Reliable sources. AndySailz (talk) 12:43, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Journalism, and India. AndySailz (talk) 12:43, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Islam, and Bihar. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:48, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'm confused. Is "Sultan" a title or name? (As in My Name is Earl?) Bearian (talk) 11:59, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Bearian: Hey Bearian, Thank you for your comment. In this article 'Sultan' is not a title. You can check here, here and here. Once again, Thank you:). Baqi:) (talk) 13:15, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: There is extensive, in-depth coverage on the subject in numerous reliable sources. Moreover, the subject is a seasoned journalist whose articles and columns have appeared in prominent publications such as Outlook Magazine, Sabrang India, The Sunday Guardian, DailyO, among several other reputable websites. For additional exclusive coverage on the subject, please refer to [43], [44], and [45], [46], [47] and [48]. Thank you. Baqi:) (talk) 12:54, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The references you mentioned are not reliable. On The Sunday Guardian the subject is himself an editor, so it is considered as self published. And others are not reliable. AndySailz (talk) 06:43, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Please avoid using arguments as outlined in WP:ATA—it's up to other editors to decide. Again, thank you! Baqi:) (talk) 11:15, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - article is supported by reliable sources.

— Cerium4B —Talk? • 14:07, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sohail Khan (athlete)

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

Fails WP:SPORTBASIC. The person does not have significant coverage in Reliable sources. AndySailz (talk) 12:39, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Sports, and India. AndySailz (talk) 12:39, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: The subject is an international Taekwondo player and has been covered by reliable sources such as Dainik Bhaskar, Rajasthan Patrika, The Print, and even 'ETV Bharat'—all with significant coverage (WP:SIGCOV). Even if we consider the minimum criteria under WP:THREE, the subject still meets the notability guidelines. Baqi:) (talk) 13:53, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

All three references including ETV Bharat are not reliable and fails WP:RS. AndySailz (talk) 05:53, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Martial arts, and Madhya Pradesh. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:49, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I looked at the articles in the sources mentioned by user Jannatulbaqi. Besides their questionable reliability is the fact that none of them constitute significant coverage as WP defines it. One article named three people from the city that were going to the Kudo World Cup, one was clearly a PR release naming four Kudo athletes that had been appointed as income tax officers, one mentioned Khan had attended a public school Kudo tournament as a guest, and one was entirely an interview. Several others I couldn't access. Most of his championships appear to be in youth divisions which don't show WP notability. I couldn't find info on his 2017 world championship (would again not have been as an adult). The Kudo International Federation (KIF) did not hold any world championships in 2017, though they did have a youth championship in 2018. No Indian athletes are listed [49] and no division appears to have had more than 2 entries. The 2023 world championships the article mentions do list the top 4 in each division, but there's no mention of any Indian athlete.[50] According to fightmatrix he has competed in MMA, where he has lost more fights than he's won and is currently ranked #341. I don't see anything that shows he meets WP:ANYBIO, WP:NSPORT, WP:GNG, WP:NMMA, or any other WP notability criteria. If additional relevant information is found, please let me know. Papaursa (talk) 01:08, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

J. J. Roy Burman

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

I am unable to find sufficient in-depth coverage from reliable independent sources to meet WP:GNG. AndySailz (talk) 12:23, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Authors, and India. AndySailz (talk) 12:23, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Draftify: When I created this article, I believed that the sources I used were entirely reliable. However, after the admin Significa Liberdade edited the article, they removed all unreliable sources, for which I sincerely appreciate their efforts. [51]The subject is an author, and to be honest, I also struggled to find completely reliable sources. Therefore, I have decided to draft the article so that I can take the time to find better sources. Baqi:) (talk) 17:59, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Maharashtra and West Bengal. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:49, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hemlata Mahishwar

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

I can not locate any references that meet WP:RS except BBC. Fails WP:GNG. AndySailz (talk) 12:18, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Women, and India. AndySailz (talk) 12:18, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: I am a member of the Women in Red project, and as part of that initiative, I actively work on creating more Wikipedia articles about notable women. Regarding the subject in question, they are also notable as an author. Moreover, reliable sources such as 'Newsclick', 'Sahapedia', 'BBC', and 'Forward Press' have covered them in-depth, clearly demonstrating that the subject meets WP:GNG. Best! Baqi:) (talk) 13:31, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Membership in the in Red project does not imply the ability to produce non-notable subjects. Aside from the BBC, Newsclick, Sahapedia, and Forward Press are unreliable sources that are deficient in credibility. WP:RS. AndySailz (talk) 06:04, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Authors, Chhattisgarh, Delhi, and Madhya Pradesh. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:50, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Baqi think the subject passes WP:GNG and there are Hindi languages sources as well as she writes in Hindi.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 21:01, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Pharaoh of the Wizards, On what ground the subject passes GNG. Let's discuss about the references. AndySailz (talk) 06:05, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per full professor at two notable universities (one established more than a century ago) and female academic in a place where professors are rare clear pass of the average professor test. (p.s. to AndySailz -- responding to every comment at AfD w/o supporters w/o specific rebuttals is rarely the way to make a winning argument) -- Michael Scott Asato Cuthbert (talk) 09:24, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Please make an argument on the basis of significant references. It is only WP:VAGUEWAVE, At policies it will not work. AndySailz (talk) 06:20, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete. I do not see anything that passes the average professor test here. Being a professor, even at well-established universities, is exactly the thing that does _not_ pass this test. Citations are low, and none of the other criteria seem to be passed. It looks more likely that the subject here passes WP:NAUTHOR, but this would generally require reviews of her books, which I did not find. Following in case better evidence of notability emerges. Russ Woodroofe (talk) 11:39, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Russ Woodroofe : Hey Russ, thank you for your comments. As an author, Hemlata has written several books, and you can check out their reviews by clicking on the following links: Link 1, Link 2, Link 3 Link 4 Link 5 and Link 6. These reviews are from reliable sources as well. I appreciate your time and interest. Thanks again:) Baqi:) (talk) 13:10, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. I agree with Russ Woodroofe — I don't see a WP:GNG pass, and I'm not convinced that she clearly passes any of the WP:NPROF criteria. Based on the sources so far my sense is that she surely must pass WP:NAUTHOR, but I don't think the sources that have been found are quite enough to actually demonstrate that yet. Of the six sources about her books above, (1) only has a paragraph about her book (which is not nothing, given that it's a retrospective on the best books of the year in what seems to be a reliable publication, but is not a full review), (2) only has a brief mention of her work, (3) and (5) are interviews, (4) is not really a review, and (6) is probably the closest but spends a lot of time just repeating her poems. My feeling is that based on everything implied by her career and by how she is described in the sources, there surely must be at least two full length reviews of her work out there (maybe in more academic or literary publications?). But I can't find any in English and searching in Hindi using Google Translate was proving to be beyond my abilities. So I would like to say keep, but I would like to see a full-length review of one of her published works first. MCE89 (talk) 13:31, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: The subject clearly meets WP:GNG. Additionally, reviews of their books are available in reliable sources, demonstrating that they also meet WP:NAUTHOR. Furthermore, as a female academic in a region where professors are rare, they clearly pass the average professor test. Taabii (talk) 17:11, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
No, it doesn't. WP:VAGUEWAVE at policies will not work. AndySailz (talk) 06:18, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@AndySailz: Please avoid using arguments as outlined in WP:ATA—it's up to other editors to decide. Again, thank you! Baqi:) (talk) 11:15, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

AndySailz, although I agree with you that the keep !votes are not necessarily very policy-based, I think your opinion is clear, and (per WP:BLUDGEON), it is time to stand back a little bit. Sometimes, something is wrong on the internet [52]. Russ Woodroofe (talk) 13:01, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Winnie Nantongo

AfDs for this article:

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

Editor recreated previously deleted article without any changes Equine-man (talk) 11:58, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Equine-man (talk) 11:58, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Journalism, and Uganda. Shellwood (talk) 12:58, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Sources do not establish notability. Procyon117 (talk) 14:45, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Poetry-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:51, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Swami Tattwamayananda

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

WP:BEFORE shows no coverage in reliable, independent sources. Fails GNG. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 08:14, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Spirituality, and California. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 08:14, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:TNT and WP:BLP. The formatting makes no sense to me, nor even the title. The sourcing is far below what we expect from a biographical article of a person living in North America. Bearian (talk) 12:10, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Bearian,

I’ve gone ahead and made the necessary changes as discussed. I’ve worked to address the concerns, and I hope everything aligns with your expectations now. Please take a look and let me know if any further adjustments are needed!

Please appove it.

Thanks,

Shashi. Shashi Boinapalli (talk) 00:22, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Jeraxmoira,

I’ve gone ahead and made the necessary changes as discussed. I’ve worked to address the concerns, and I hope everything aligns with your expectations now. Please take a look and let me know if any further adjustments are needed!

Please approve it.

Thanks,

Shashi. Shashi Boinapalli (talk) 00:23, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Kit Malone

AfDs for this article:

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

A person claiming to be the page's subject has requested deletion, citing safety concerns for her and her family (she's a trans rights activist). I think it's pretty reasonable – she's not non-notable, this wouldn't be my first choice for AfD normally, but she mostly appears in the news as an advocate, not as a person of interest herself. Most of the coverage comes from passing mentions in local news stories that are largely about trans rights or non-independent biographies from the ACLU and her own website. As is procedure for BLPREQUESTDELETE, leaving it up to the good folks at AfD :) theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 06:18, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Sexuality and gender, United States of America, and Indiana. theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 06:18, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Per WP: BLPREQUESTDELETE. If the page’s subject is concerned about her safety, I think it is only reasonable that we honour it. Best, Reading Beans, Duke of Rivia 07:25, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This is my own article, that I wrote and got into DYK, but I am willing to see it deleted if it has become a safety concern. Dominic·t 20:23, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I'm sorry that this happened to a good person. Unless the person is clearly a public figure, I'm an advocate of privacy. It's going to be a very long 3 years, 11 months, and 19 days of this nonsense that we will have to endure. Soft deletion is appropriate in such cases. Bearian (talk) 14:37, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Samreen Kaur

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

I couldn't find a strong reason why this subject meets the notability criteria outlined in WP:ENT. Garvitpandey1522 (talk) 15:45, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, Women, India, and Jammu and Kashmir. ZyphorianNexus ^Talk 16:08, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Keep I've added references to it. And I'm surprised that the editor who tagged it for deletion discussion without any research. And another thing article has been approved by the New Pages Reviewer. Behappyyar (talk) 17:53, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Behappyyar: Getting marked as reviewed after an article is nominated for deletion does not mean it is “approved” by NPR. This is a process where every article sent to AfD, as long as it has no copyright or other speedy deletion violations, should be marked as reviewed. When we NPRs send articles to AfD, we also automatically mark them as reviewed. GrabUp - Talk 18:58, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Okay👍🏻 I've added references. Now, Let's see what the result will come out. Behappyyar (talk) 19:15, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: As per the nomination. Taabii (talk) 15:04, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I hope you will change your decision. When the article was tagged for deletion, it lacked references to movies and related to the subject see here, but after that I added references to it, which you can see here. Now it has improved considerably. I hope so, that you will reconsider to change your vote. Behappyyar (talk) 21:05, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Monika Chauhan

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

The actress does not have significant coverage in Reliable sources and has not appeared in any notable films, hence fails WP:NACTOR. Taabii (talk) 14:52, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, Women, and India. Taabii (talk) 14:52, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Delhi-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:49, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sayyed Mohsen Fatemi

AfDs for this article:

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

A mid-career academic not yet reaching WP:NPROF. Scopus H-factor of 4 is well below what one might expect in the field, suggesting little impact; most of the arguments from the 2016 AfD (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sayyed Mohsen Fatemi) still apply. Klbrain (talk) 12:43, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 14:27, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 14:27, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 14:27, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. He still falls far short of WP:PROF#C1 in a high-citation field. The article is also a copyvio of his self-written Psych Today profile, or maybe more likely both of them were made as copies of each other by the same author (so we also have apparent undeclared COI/AUTOBIO in the mix). Because some claims from that source are dubious (specifically the claim to be a Harvard Fellow not backed up by the list of past members of the Society of Fellows [53]) we also have a problem with circularity and reliability of sourcing on a WP:BLP. —David Eppstein (talk) 18:06, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Few GS citations (C 100) in a very highly field fails WP:Prof as above. Xxanthippe (talk) 21:48, 29 January 2025 (UTC).[reply]
Comment I searched for peer reviews of his academic publications but didn’t find any notable results. Most of his books appear on marketing platforms, and there don’t seem to be any independent reviews available. 50.39.138.50 (talk) 05:52, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Klbrain Where did you find his H-Index? I found another person with almost the same name but related to AI research on Google Scholar who has H-index of 2. Here it is:
https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=reypPDkAAAAJ&hl=en

As to the publication of psychologist Sayyed Mohsen Fatemi, he has 43 publications but only 73 citations which doesn't speak in favor of his notability as an academic:

https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Sayyed-Mohsen-Fatemi

I'm just curious how you found his H-index50.39.138.50 (talk) 06:04, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It's a Scopus H-factor, linked on Wikidata. Klbrain (talk) 17:46, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It appears that the statistics on ResearchGate are more comprehensive than on Scopus. However, I still believe this person doesn’t have sufficient notability for a standalone Wikipedia page.50.39.138.50 (talk) 20:41, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Looks pretty run of the WP:MILL to me, I don't see how it would pass WP:NPROF or WP:NAUTHOR. -Kj cheetham (talk) 10:23, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Harry Josh

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

The subject does not pass WP:GNG and WP:NACTOR, while the creator made a list of the Filmography, but have not cited the WP:RS to support it. I searched about the subject on google but got nothing that can establish notability. Taabii (talk) 14:14, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, Lists of people, India, and Chhattisgarh. Taabii (talk) 14:14, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Pass WP:NACTOR as an Indian, I know that they have worked in many popular movies listed in the filmography pass.𝒮-𝒜𝓊𝓇𝒶 15:00, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@S-Aura 'as an Indian'? does every Indian pass WP:NACTOR? Can you pls cite some reliable sources in the article? Taabii (talk) 15:05, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
S-Aura obviously refers to him/herself being Indian. :D -Mushy Yank. 16:30, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I mean to say that I have personally seen him in many movies as an india viewpoint, but I am trying to find better sources. 𝒮-𝒜𝓊𝓇𝒶 18:04, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Pass WP:NACTOR because he has played a significant role in a popular movie’s but need more WP:RS. Garvitpandey1522 (talk) 08:53, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: More than half of the films in the subject's filmography do not list him in the cast section or place him far down in the cast hierarchy indicating that he would not have had a significant role, so he fails NACTOR. Fails GNG as there is no WP:SIGCOV about this BLP in reliable independent sources, ultimately leaving us with nothing to write about. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 12:59, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tadahiro Aizawa

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

Insignificant amateur stone tool collector, fails WP:NACADEMIC. Subject is also not referenced in any WP:RSs per my WP:BEFORE. --Eelipe (talk) 02:54, 29 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 29. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 03:07, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Archaeology, and Japan. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:52, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, perhaps speedily. This is a deeply flawed nomination of an author and archeologist of great fame. It is true that in 1946 after being demobilized he was an amateur when he made his first great discovery, however he later become the director of the Akagi Institute for Anthropological Studies. He received the Yoshikawa Eiji Prize. He has an official museum. There is a movie made about him. Oh, and he meets WP:ANYBIO(3) since he has entries in multiple biographical dictionaries as can be seen here, including: 20th Century Japanese Name Dictionary, Shogakukan Encyclopedia Nipponica, Yamakawa Japanese History Dictionary, Digital Japanese Name Dictionary. Fulmard (talk) 07:48, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Meets WP:ANYBIO, per his entries in biographic dictionaries, the museum, and award. Article should be improved based on the sources found by Fulmard. Netherzone (talk) 23:36, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Quite a few hits for him on Google Books in English, and a few things found via the Wikipedia Library. I agree, the subject of the article may qualify for speedy. Netherzone (talk) 00:13, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Because of dudes insane levels of notability. AfD’s of articles in a foreign language REALLY need to click on the other languages tab as the very first step in a WP:Before search. Even if nominators are not able to read the language necessary for a proper Before search, a hugely long article in a foreign language Wikipedia is a great way to avoid false negatives before even attempting a web search.

JakeFuture27

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

Don't think WP:SIGCOV is met. His follower/view counts are not indicative of someone inherently notable, and the sources used would on the whole not be considered reliable. I T B F 📢 02:58, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Video games, and Internet. I T B F 📢 02:58, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to List of YouTubers. I do think that he is notable and the article has potential, especially as his channel grows, but the sourcing could be improved, so a good alternative to deletion would be to redirect the article to preserve the history and allow for future expansion. Another good idea would be to draftify. DaniloDaysOfOurLives (talk) 03:21, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New Jersey-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:52, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
~~Redirect to List of YouTubers: for now as per above.~~ Anktjha (talk) 05:57, 29 January 2025 (UTC) Sock Girth Summit _(blether) 12:08, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Why would this page be redirected to a list of YouTubers where this person is never talked about? People looking for this information would receive zero content at the proposed target. Unless people want to have a line about him there? Generally that page is reserved for people who already have a page on Wikipedia... Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 06:51, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I disagree as there are several YouTubers on the list who do not have a Wiki page + there is short blurb for all of them there, which means that the information here can be condensed there for the time being DaniloDaysOfOurLives (talk) 21:20, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure what part you disagree with, the "people will receive no information" part or the "generally that page is reserved" part. Anyway, the article itself says in the second sentence: The following is a list of YouTubers for whom Wikipedia has articles either under their own name or their YouTube channel name. For any YouTuber without an article on that page, it is very likely their channel has an article instead. If neither are the case, it seems as if such person should be removed from the list, but I haven't been able to find any entries where that might be the case. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 18:59, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Draftify this; if people want an alternative to deletion, this would be the way for it, as the article here isn't even two weeks old. Did a spot check of incoming links, and there are zero redirects for individuals' names pointed to List of YouTubers. Which is impressive given the fact that the page has hundreds and hundreds of entries with only a handful of incoming redirects, and none are for people. No reason for this to be the only one. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 07:24, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Draftify. Some coverage out there, but none really that would warrant a separate article for now. Maybe in a few months, he'll be notable enough. Procyon117 (talk) 16:10, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Is Future his real surname? It otherwise feels strange to refer to them so formally. IgelRM (talk) 08:03, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: I've analyzed the sources at Wikipedia:Source assessment/JakeFuture27 (table below) and I personally believe this article should be deleted. None of the sources used in the article count towards the general notability guideline, and Google gives me junk.

Source assessment table
Source	Reliable?	Significant coverage?	Count source toward GNG?
"JakeFuture27". YouTube.	WP:SPS		✘ No
"What happened to Jake Future?". Distractify. Joseph Allen. 17 December 2024. Archived from the original on January 22, 2025. Retrieved January 21, 2025.	See WP:DISTRACTIFY	431 words of coverage	✘ No
"Who Is Jake Future? Kick Streamer's Career Explored". Deltias Gaming. Adhiraj Yadav. 27 December 2024. Archived from the original on January 22, 2025. Retrieved January 20, 2025.	Seems to be a blog/amateur passion project (about page), and the tone of the article is somewhat promotional	412 words of coverage	✘ No
"Streamer and His Mother Left Speechless, Eyes Filled with Tears After Adin Ross' Kind Gesture". EssentiallySports. Rituraj Halder. 17 June 2023. Archived from the original on January 22, 2025. Retrieved January 20, 2025.	Unreliable per this discussion: Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject Video games/Sources/Archive_29#EssentiallySports	111 words of coverage	✘ No
"What did an ex-Kick employee say about a streamer struggling with cancer?". Dot Esports. Hayley Andrews. 19 June 2024. Archived from the original on January 22, 2025. Retrieved January 20, 2025.	Quality is questionable for FAC (WP:VG/S) which means this should NOT be used for a BLP; such articles need the best sources available.	Passing mention	✘ No
"Everyone Drake Blessed During His 'Drizzmas Giveaway'". Complex. Tara Mahadevan. 28 December 2024. Retrieved January 21, 2025.	WP:A/S	No mention of the subject(s)	✘ No
"Sneako criticizes streamers for ignoring Jake Future's birthday invite: 'Not even a reply!'". The Express Tribune. 11 December 2024. Archived from the original on January 22, 2025. Retrieved January 20, 2025.	~ WP:NEWSORGINDIA	272 words of coverage	✘ No
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{source assess table}}.

💽 🌙Eclipse 💽 🌹 ⚧ (she/they) ^talk/edits 14:55, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Val Valentino

AfDs for this article:

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

Merge with Breaking the Magician's Code: Magic's Biggest Secrets Finally Revealed the article in it's current state does not appear to be notable enough for a separate article. A majority of the article about Valentino's role as the Masked Magician on the TV show. This issue was raised at a recent RM. Dr vulpes (Talk) 23:44, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Magic. Dr vulpes (Talk) 23:44, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Breaking the Magician's Code: Magic's Biggest Secrets Finally Revealed. 162 etc. (talk) 02:45, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, Brazil, California, and Nevada. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:57, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep – The subject was highly notable in Brazil at the end of the 90s/beginning of the 2000s, and to this day has had some repercussions in the mainstream media (especially on Rede Globo). [54], [55], [56], [57]. Svartner (talk) 14:56, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
These articles talk about his health problems (which are not encyclopedically notable) and his 90s TV show (which already has an article.) 162 etc. (talk) 18:18, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There are several other things about him, like this article from 1999 [58], or about the return of his show on pay TV channels. [59], [60]. Maybe he hasn't been as successful outside of Brazil, but there's definitely WP:SIGCOV here. Svartner (talk) 05:59, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How do we feel about merging this article with Breaking the Magician's Code: Magic's Biggest Secrets Finally Revealed? Dr vulpes (Talk) 06:14, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This article fits Wikipedia standard and should not be deleted and thus should be retained. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MartinVinosky2021 (talk • contribs) 02:28, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Cherinet Hariffo

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

Non-notable person, fails WP:GNG. There is also a history of promotion/COI [61], [62], [63]. Gheus (talk) 18:06, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Ethiopia. Shellwood (talk) 18:16, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Fails WP:GNG. Ibjaja055 (talk) 18:49, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Chris Brooks (guitarist)

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

No independent sources, books and albums all self-published, does not meet wp:gng or wp:musicbio. Been templated for improvements since 2016. Orange sticker (talk) 17:14, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

See also an AfD for one of his albums at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Master Plan (Chris Brooks album). ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 19:25, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Bands and musicians. Orange sticker (talk) 17:14, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:54, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - I hope he has made an honest living doing what he loves, but he simply has not earned significant and reliable coverage about his career. He has gotten some invitations to make guest appearances in other people's albums but has not progressed beyond basic listings in the credits. I cannot find reliable pro reviews for any of his albums; where the article says that the albums received "Press coverage" in various magazines, those were probably just release announcements. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 19:35, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - we've seen this sort of page before: interviews add to citations, but can't be used to assess significant coverage. Bearian (talk) 02:56, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Gianmarco Tocco

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

Notable media sources unavailable, article indicates that it's notable for a record Twitch viewers (which doesn't seem to be enough to demonstrate notability). WP:NBIO fails. Bexaendos (talk) 16:50, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Video games, and Italy. Bexaendos (talk) 16:50, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
He’s not merely a Twitch streamer, but also a well-regarded public figure throughout the Italian-speaking world, having set world records on Twitch. Additionally, he serves as the president of one of the teams in Gerard Piqué’s Kings League. Slancio2 (talk) 18:14, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Not notable. λ NegativeMP1 16:35, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gianmarco_Tocco is protected; if it wasn't notable there, it probably isn't here, delete. IgelRM (talk) 08:06, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Susan M. Campbell

AfDs for this article:

Articles for deletion/Susan M. Campbell (2nd nomination)

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

General notability guideline(/WP:BASIC) -- lack of secondary/independent sources + no significant coverage. Doesn't appear to meet notability guidelines for academics either. Comment(s) on talk page show that verification of any information is an ongoing issue. Tagged for peacock, advert, and tone since Feb 2010. I tried to fix the issues prior to filing this AfD. Puppies937 (talk) 15:45, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 16:01, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 16:01, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 16:02, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 16:02, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 16:03, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
~~Delete: no significant coverages and faiis WP:GNG.~~ Anktjha (talk) 18:22, 28 January 2025 (UTC) sock Girth Summit _(blether) 12:27, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Fails WP:GNG. A search brings up no significant coverage in independent reliable sources. All the sources cited in the article are closely related to the subject. ZyphorianNexus ^Talk 21:08, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. I added several reviews of her books to the article, including in academic journals. I think there's a good chance she meets WP:AUTHOR. pburka (talk) 00:54, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Drew Talbert

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

Fails WP:NBIO and is an example of WP:NOTNEWS. Do not see any significant coverage apart from one viral news event. (please ping on reply) ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 13:28, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Tennessee. Shellwood (talk) 15:38, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Food and drink, Entertainment, Internet, and California. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:52, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Per nominator. No significant coverage on the subject. News articles are basically in passing mention. Jamiebuba (talk) 15:27, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Arlyson Lanoa

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

All sources are unreliable or don't demonstrate notability. GNG is not met. Skyshiftertalk 14:00, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Brazil. Shellwood (talk) 15:38, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Arts, and Journalism. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:50, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Per nom. Svartner (talk) 15:02, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Doesn't meet GNG . Monhiroe (talk) 08:02, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Vinod Adani

AfDs for this article:

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

The non-notable businessman does not become notable simply because his brother is notable (WP:GNG). In the last AFD, the article was deleted, but it was later recreated. You can check the old AFD as well. (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Vinod_Adani_ Baqi:) (talk) 11:20, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Businesspeople, and India. Baqi:) (talk) 11:20, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: United Arab Emirates, Gujarat, and Cyprus. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:50, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: As per nomination, Wikipedia:Notability is not inherited, wp:NINI . Zuck28 (talk) 13:31, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep easily meets WP:GNG. He has been investigated and covered in-depth by all major international publications: Bloomberg ([64], [65]), Financial Times ([66], [67]), Forbes ([68]), Sydney Morning Herald ([69]), and Wall Street Journal ([70]). Then, there is in-depth coverage in Indian publications: Scroll.in ([71]), paywalled Morning Context ([72]), and much more. It is pointless to nominate it again when the consensus was so clear in the last AfD Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Vinod Adani (2nd nomination). Anyways, I have expanded the article. Gheus (talk) 18:42, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I found various articles that satisfy WP:SIGCOV. [73], [74], [75], [76], [77]. Please See: WP:WSJ, WP:FORBES, BLOOMBERG. Easily Passes WP:GNG. Bakhtar40 (talk) 10:20, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Withdraw: I’m quite pleased with the improvements made by User:Gheus (as per WP:HEYMAN) to the article. Therefore, I am withdrawing this nomination. Additionally, I was unaware that this article was created by an admin, and I firmly believe that an admin would not create a non-notable article. Thank you! Baqi:) (talk) 14:29, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per WP:HEYMAN.Now meets WP:GNG.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 15:43, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Per WP:HEYMAN, I'm also much impressed by the improvements done by User:Gheus. Taabii (talk) 16:06, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: The subject is not relevant whatsoever. The only relevance the subject has is that his name appeared in Hindenburg Research in connection with business fraud.-25 CENTS VICTORIOUS ^🍁 11:52, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Kuldeep Sandhu

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

Does not pass WP:MUSICBIO, also see Kulldeep Sandhu and Draft:Kulldeep Sandhu. Found no in-depth coverage in any cited source. Taabii (talk) 09:41, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Bands and musicians, India, and Uttar Pradesh. Taabii (talk) 09:41, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete No Mention why Kuldeep Sandhu is notable.There is no reliable sources available about him maybe there are some chances of WP:COI because maximum references are used in this page are of different person that i already removed earlier. --Garvitpandey1522 (talk) 19:23, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete– Fails WP:GNG and WP:MUSICBIO; lacks significant coverage in reliable, independent sources. EmilyR34 (talk) 04:51, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Lacks WP:SIGCOV. Zuck28 (talk) 13:26, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - doesn't have enough reliable sources or they are just mentions.Darkm777 (talk) 03:26, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, no WP:SIGCOV and fails WP:SINGER. jolielover♥talk 11:28, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Raman Raheja

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

A promotional biography of a businessman fails WP:GNG and WP:NBIO. None of the sources constitute WP:SIGCOV. Majorly citations are WP:NEWSORGINDIA, WP:ROUTINE, and WP:TRIVIALMENTIONS. There have been several attempts in the past to create a page for this person, with a high chance of WP:UPE involvement. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 08:56, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Businesspeople, and India. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 08:56, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2024_April_10#Raman_Raheja_(entrepreneur) TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 08:58, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Delhi-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:52, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Congratulations RfD !voters for allowing an obvious bad-faith title circumvention to escape proper review. Now its time for it to meet its fate * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 16:12, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Riyan Al Jidani

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

Reviewed all sources cited but none is reliable to meet WP:GNG or other criteria. Described as a writer, there is no good review of his book(s) other than a single review by the newspaper where he is a reporter. Mekomo (talk) 07:51, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Authors, Journalism, Sports, and Saudi Arabia. Mekomo (talk) 07:51, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Notability Overview: Riyan Al-Jidani
Criterion	Supporting Evidence
Notability Through Reliable Sources	Featured in Arab News. Source Featued in Saudi Sports Company, Source
	Participated in interviews and podcasts Podtail.com Source Al Arabiya Source
	Conclusion The subject has been featured in multiple media sources. While these sources indicate some level of recognition, the depth and independence of the coverage vary. Arab News provides independent coverage of his contributions to women's football, while sources like the SSC's social post and the Al Arabiya video do not constitute in-depth independent coverage under Wikipedia's WP:GNG guidelines N No or few suitable sources that could be cited.
Authorship of Notable Works	Authored 4 books, Japanese Football, Asia's Arabs, The Pink Field and Women's Football.
	only 9 ratings for his three works on googlereads Source
	Conclusion While the subject has authored multiple books, the limited number of ratings and reviews on platforms like Goodreads indicates insufficient recognition or critical reception. These works do not meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines without broader independent reviews or recognition. N Likely not notable
Professional Roles and Contributions	An editor at Kooora.com (i.e. Article).
	Women's Football expert in Saudi Arabia. Source
	Conclusion The subject has held significant roles, including editor at Kooora.com and a women’s football expert in Saudi Arabia. However, these roles alone may not establish notability without broader independent recognition. N Likely not notable
General Conclusion	The subject has received some media attention and held notable professional roles, but the lack of independent, in-depth coverage and critical reviews suggests that they do not meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines.

Lunar Spectrum96 (talk) 19:10, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ali Abbas Naqvi

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

Reviewed all sources cited but none is an RS because they are the subject's own writing as a journalist. The one source [78] that seem to be a significant coverage turned out to be a promotional piece. Mekomo (talk) 07:20, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Journalism, and India. Mekomo (talk) 07:20, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Delhi-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:53, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: The subject entirely fails to meet the WP:GNG criteria. Moreover, as a journalist, they have not received any notable awards or recognition that would qualify them under WP:ANYBIO. Baqi:) (talk) 11:10, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, I've removed the 'hello' reference - that's just a promotional / press release site run by Primex (a PR/SEO firm). Nothing else of notes. Sam Kuru (talk) 15:23, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Fails WP:NJOURNALIST. Taabii (talk) 16:08, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Luis J. Landin

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

Fails WP:GNG as he lacks SIGCOV. The Silver Star does not meet WP:ANYBIO # 1 and there is no WP:RS confirming that he was even awarded it. No lasting notability. Page created by an SPA. Mztourist (talk) 03:10, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. Mztourist (talk) 03:11, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Texas. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:27, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
~~Delete: lacks significant coverages.~~ Anktjha (talk) 07:00, 28 January 2025 (UTC) sock Girth Summit _(blether) 12:32, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete In addition to failing WP:GNG and WP:ANYBIO, the claim that Landin is "known as Laredo's most decorated war hero" is simply untrue given at least one Medal of Honor recipient, David B. Barkley, is from Laredo. Best, GPL93 (talk) 18:21, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - he was a good soldier, but I don't see any allegations of notability that can be verified. The only sources are an advocacy organization and a paid obituary. If you find anything else, please ping me. Bearian (talk) 03:44, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Simply not notable. Total lack of RS is also troubling. Intothat darkness 12:44, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Gaetano Giuseppe Vinci

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

Fails WP:GNG. The article was recently created (not through AfC) by a new editor whose userpage says they know the subject. Vinci's "career" consists of material about one case that is more about the defendant than about Vinci, his lawyer. The sources supporting the material, including a blog (unreliable), have no significant coverage of Vinci. Bbb23 (talk) 16:58, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Italy. Shellwood (talk) 17:58, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:03, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The "blog" source was removed. Yuriupdates (talk) 18:26, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A new source was added proving the international relevance of the "Marijuana Express" operation. Yuriupdates (talk) 18:49, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - even assuming everything is true, the one criminal case that got into the news seems like a classic case of WP:BLP1E. Many years ago, I represented the Shrimp Lady – the case got widespread coverage and now it's not even on Google News. Every lawyer gets at least one case that gets brief media attention. Bearian (talk) 09:56, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
What I kindly ask is—why cut short the biographical profile of a lawyer who, at such a young age, has already been involved in nationally significant trials, working tirelessly and entirely on his own? He became a lawyer in the minimum time required by law in Italy. Now, imagine for a moment that this was you, many years ago, as a young, ambitious lawyer.

I say—at this point, the page exists. Trust the process and allow a little time. If things don’t turn out as you wish, then let it be removed. But for now, let’s give it a fair chance, with a bit of common sense.

Thank you. Yuriupdates (talk) 19:36, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Bbb23, I saw the recent edit in the bio—so, besides the page itself, why are we questioning whether he's even Italian now? Yuriupdates (talk) 19:14, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No, the nationality parameter in the infobox is only needed if it is different from the subject's birthplace.--Bbb23 (talk) 19:18, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I apologize. In any case, this news is spreading rapidly in Italy right now. Several interviews will be released by the lawyer, both about this high-profile case (in Italy) and others. The process is taking longer because, in Italy, there are mandatory waiting periods for the reasoning behind court rulings, which restrict lawyers' ability to give interviews. If the page remains, I will personally ensure it is updated accurately, day by day. Yuriupdates (talk) 19:26, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Good evening (to be precise, it's evening in Italy). I have added new details to the lawyer's career regarding an operation involving the Direzione Investigativa Antimafia. Yuriupdates (talk) 19:59, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I believe that the article meets the notability criteria because the subject has received significant coverage from independent and reliable sources, such as La Gazzetta del Mezzogiorno and Il Quotidiano del Sud. Furthermore, the subject has had a recognized impact in the legal sector, as demonstrated by specific achievements. Additionally, there are numerous other high-impact legal cases still ongoing, which will be published as soon as it becomes legally possible to do so. The notability of the subject lie precisely in the fact that it is extremely rare in Italy for such results to be achieved at such a young age. Given these factors, I believe the article should be retained. Yuriupdates (talk) 21:16, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Beeblebrox ^Beebletalks 23:20, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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

The result was delete‎. Owen× ☎ 19:29, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Devendra Kumar Tiwari

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

Being a chief secretary of a state doesn’t inherit notability, on WP:BEFORE search i found some sources which are on his appointment news. Also lack of sig cov. In secondary sources, fails WP:GNG TheSlumPanda (talk) 17:49, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, India, Jharkhand, and Uttar Pradesh. TheSlumPanda (talk) 17:49, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete The entire news is about his appointment as Chief Secretary of Jharkhand, which is not enough to meet his general notability criteria. Bakhtar40 (talk) 10:26, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - the office is not automatically notable by itself, nor is there significant coverage. Bearian (talk) 23:46, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete– Fails WP:GNG. EmilyR34 (talk) 05:12, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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

Binay Shah

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

Sources are not neutral, insufficient coverage, promotional tone. Rahmatula786 (talk) 12:37, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Nepal. Shellwood (talk) 16:34, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep – The user initially tagged this article with G11, citing the following reasons: "Bone marrow Transplant centre in Nepal was established in a government hospital (CIVIL) by the Government of Nepal. The editor is trying to promote the individual with misinformation that is not supported by neutral sources. Contributions and career sections are filled with such information." After the G11 tag was rejected, the user immediately took the article to AFD, claiming: "Sources are not neutral, insufficient coverage, promotional tone." These two actions reflect inconsistent reasoning and suggest an attempt to misuse Wikipedia's tools.

Supportive evidence:

The statement about the Bone Marrow Transplant center does not claim it was established by Dr. Binaya Shah. The original sentence in the article states: "Dr. Shah played a pivotal role in establishing Nepal's first Bone Marrow Transplant (BMT) center, which was set up at the Civil Service Hospital................" This is not original research and is clearly supported by the provided reference (reference link which is already given in article - https://www.khasokhas.com/2683#gsc.tab=0).
The user's actions show immediate and differing approaches without valid reasoning. This behavior strongly indicates targeted action rather than random article review. Random reviews rarely involve the same contributor repeatedly targeting the same article and same contributor different article multiple times within a short duration (minutes or hours), further highlighting this as a deliberate search-and-target action.

The article does not violate WP:GNG or WP:BLP guidelines. It meets notability requirements with adequate sourcing, and the content adheres to Wikipedia’s policies. The user should ensure proper evaluation of sources and policies before taking further actions.Endrabcwizart (talk) 09:35, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 13:07, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

B1t

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

Fails WP:NBIO and WP:GNG. Only sources in article are Navi.gg, ESL, (both of which are not independent of the subject), and HLTV (unreliable per WP:VGRS). A WP:BEFORE search does not find anything of substance either. – Pbrks ^(t·c) 14:29, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Video games, and Ukraine. – Pbrks ^(t·c) 14:29, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Did you search Ukrainian language sources? The player is Ukrainian, Counter-strike is pretty big there, so I'd be surprised if there's wasn't some level of coverage since he's been on the roster of two-major winning rosters. ---- Patar knight - ^chat/_{contributions} 02:18, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- I've not found any. None of the ones over at the uk-wiki appear that they would hold up to our standards for reliability either. – Pbrks ^(t·c) 15:01, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:49, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I found some sources from isport.ua and ua.tribuna.com, but I am unsure if those count for notability. IgelRM (talk) 08:12, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Neither of the sources seem to have a staff page nor an editorial policy. – Pbrks ^(t·c) 15:01, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Lucia Laura Sangenito

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

Not every supercentenarian needs an article. Wikipedia is not the "Guinness Book of World Records." Suggest deleting or redirecting to List of Italian supercentenarians. Junbeesh (talk) 11:03, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Italy. Junbeesh (talk) 11:03, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect per above. Anktjha (talk) 12:47, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect per above, sole claims to notability is her age. Wikishovel (talk) 15:10, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Notability whicu has been firmly established by the sources me and the other keep editor have added Wwew345t (talk) 14:12, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - I have added a couple of short news items as sources, which should go some way to establish her notability with respect to Wikipedia, and I've moved the grg-supercentenarians.org links - which I would put more in the class of database / stats sites, like Soccerway is to football - to be external links. On the wider, non-Wikipedia, meaning of "notability" I'd say, actually, that to be the oldest living person in a country is not a far-fetched claim to notability. I might do a more focused search against Italian sources to see if there are additional ones that might flesh out the biographical stub a little more. Cheers, SunloungerFrog (talk) 16:09, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I found a couple of english that help out as well Wwew345t (talk) 14:06, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep there is almost nothing in this article however the article was deleted immediately after it was created then put unto afd ID say give the creator some time to build the article up before we rush it into afd. after I added a couple sources I believe the subject now passes GNG. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wwew345t (talk • contribs) 13:32, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that not every supercentenarian is notable enough to have an article but as this one is the oldest living person in Italy i feel like we should give people some time to flesh out the article with more sources before suggesting there arent enough to establish notability Wwew345t (talk) 13:38, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It seems a ip user has been deleting content in the page most likley to make easier to delete it Wwew345t (talk) 13:35, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I have now added another source that makes the article better https://longeviquest.com/2024/06/visiting-italys-second-oldest-resident-113-year-old-lucia-laura-sangenito/ it goes into her life story in great detail so it should help flesh out the article Wwew345t (talk) 13:56, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CR (talk) 14:22, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect as suggested. Of course a 'supercentarian' will genereate a certain amount of passing press coverage. This is not the kind of lasting covererage necessary to establish notability.TheLongTone (talk) 15:35, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Its not just "passing coverage" she has bios on both the gerntolgy research group and Longeviquest the two biggest sources when it comes to supercentenarians the sources establish notability Wwew345t (talk) 16:14, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I suggest doing a WP:BEFORE and count the amount of sources that have covered her Wwew345t (talk) 16:17, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Moeed Pirzada

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

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

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

AfDs for this article:

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

WP:BLP1E. He was one of the journalists who were targeted by the Pakistani government in 2023 under some controversial charges. Most of the sources that discuss those arrests don't talk about Pirzada in any significant depth, which is why most of his career is sourced to primary sources in this article. Since this article has been repeatedly created by sock/meatpuppets, I would recommend salting it as well. Badbluebus (talk) 00:58, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Journalism, Television, and Pakistan. Badbluebus (talk) 00:58, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Pirzada appears to be a notable TV host, and his legal troubles go beyond WP:BLP1E. He was arrested in 2015; news coverage of that arrest described him as a "renowned TV anchorperson". A former Indian Supreme Court judge Markandey Katju called him an "eminent Pakistani journalist" while responding to a speech of Pirzada's. His departure from Pakistan seems to have been widely covered. [79] [80] [81]. There are a number of other news stories on Google News about him. And these are just the English language results -- no doubt there is more coverage in Urdu. Jfire (talk) 02:57, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
exactly 101.53.234.144 (talk) 19:42, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Not just the Pakistani government, but also the Pakistani military establishment has targeted him. He remains a prominent journalist in Pakistan, with millions of people relying on his political analytical abilities to foresee what is likely to happen in the near future in Pakistan as well as around the globe. This is evident from his YouTube channel, which garners significant viewership from various countries, not just Pakistan. His page may require some, or even a lot of, improvements, but these improvements can only happen if the page is allowed to exist and remain open for public contributions. Deleting his page would be unfair. Aqsa Qambrani (talk) 20:13, 28 January 2025 (UTC)— Aqsa Qambrani (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

Keep. Not just the Pakistani government, but also the Pakistani military establishment has targeted him. He remains a prominent journalist in Pakistan, with millions of people relying on his political analytical abilities to foresee what is likely to happen in the near future in Pakistan as well as around the globe. This is evident from his YouTube channel, which garners significant viewership from various countries, not just Pakistan. His page may require some, or even a lot of, improvements, but these improvements can only happen if the page is allowed to exist and remain open for public contributions. Deleting his page would be unfair Aqsa Qambrani (talk) 20:15, 28 January 2025 (UTC)— Duplicate !vote: Aqsa Qambrani (talk • contribs) has already cast a !vote above.[reply]

thank you so much Isaqibrana (talk) 21:05, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Moeed Pirzada is a prominent politics investigative journalist from Pakistan and has been in the media industry as senior anchor & columnist for over 16 years. He already had wikipedia page for years on wikipedia but recently the page was deleted after years being on wikipedia, deleted specially after he became a victim of Pakistan Regime 2022 with several other Pakistani journalists. The previous wikipedia page deletion shows how current administration does not want him to be a public figure, I believe even the previous deletion of his page was against freedom of information. He is being targeted by current administration in Pakistan. After being banned from entering Pakistan and banned on mainstream media, he choose to spread his voice using social media and currently have over 3 million people follow him with over 30 million active views. He also conducted interview with former British Prime Minister. QuantumThread (talk) 23:58, 29 January 2025 (UTC)— QuantumThread (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
Delete and salt. There are shenanigans going on with this page (see the creator of Draft:Moeed Pirzada removing the G4 deletion template and copy-paste-moving the draft page's content into this page simultaneously). But even without the shenanigans, this subject does not clear WP:GNG or WP:NBIO for a standalone page. Almost all of these sources are to Pirzada's own writings or to other non-independent sources. The couple of sources that are both independent and reliable are not WP:SIGCOV of Pirzada. Dclemens1971 (talk) 04:03, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
millions of people are relying on his political analytical abilities to foresee what is likely to happen in the near future in Pakistan as well as around the globe Isaqibrana (talk) 21:08, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Mr. Pirzada qualifies to be on Wikipedia and definitely meets the criteria for WP:GNG or WP:NBIO.He is a credible and well-informed journalist in Pakistan. While I acknowledge that there is room for improvement, this can be achieved by allowing open contributions and ensuring that citations come from independent sources rather than his own blog. for your reference please have a look https://www.economy.pk/top-10-news-anchor-in-pakistan/. Pirzada is one of the top journalists of Pakistan. Aqsa Qambrani (talk) 21:21, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Mr. Pirzada qualifies to be on Wikipedia and definitely meets the criteria for WP:GNG or WP:NBIO.He is a credible and well-informed journalist in Pakistan. While I acknowledge that there is room for improvement, this can be achieved by allowing open contributions and ensuring that citations come from independent sources rather than his own blog. for your reference please have a look https://www.economy.pk/top-10-news-anchor-in-pakistan/. Pirzada is one of the top journalists of Pakistan 101.53.234.144 (talk) 19:44, 1 February 2025 (UTC) — 101.53.234.144 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

Mr Moeed Pirzada is very well known and respected world renowned Political Analyst, Journalist,TV anchor / Host, and an author. His name should not be deleted from wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Neunad (talk • contribs) 05:26, 30 January 2025 (UTC) — Neunad (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

Keep: as per Jfire (talk). He's done much better explanation above. Behappyyar (talk) 21:34, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and salt per Dclemens1971. Nothing has changed since previous AfD. They have also published a lot of spam via globalvillagespace.com on Wikipedia. Too much waste of volunteers time. Gheus (talk) 00:07, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. We have very divided opinion here right now and much of it is just opinion. Can we get a source review?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:33, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Julie Szego

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

This is a case of WP:BLP1E, the subject is only notable for their sacking from The Age. The rest of the sourcing that I've found, both in the article and through searches, is either not independent or not in-depth. I've considered the possibility that they might pass WP:NAUTHOR or WP:ACADEMIC and I don't see that either is the case. TarnishedPath^talk 11:30, 25 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Academics and educators, Authors, Women, Journalism, Sexuality and gender, Israel, Palestine, and Australia. TarnishedPath^talk 11:30, 25 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Eelipe (talk) 16:36, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. As per WP:BLP1E the 'subjects notable for one event' policy must meet each of three criteria listed for the subject to be unsuitable for a page. They are: reliable sources only cover one event; the individual is otherwise low profile; and the individual's role in the event was not significant. I suggest Szego's career as an author and journalist elevates her above “low-profile individual”; and her role in the event clearly was not “not significant”. Spinifex&Sand (talk) 22:50, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
A reading of WP:LOWPROFILE would suggest that they are indeed a low profile individual. Being a author or a journalist alone does not make someone not low-profile. In fact if they did have a high profile as consequence of those activities they would almost certainly pass WP:NJOURNALIST or WP:NAUTHOR (the same policy), which they appear not to. TarnishedPath^talk 23:39, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Don't agree with the contention that she is WP:BLP1E nor do I agree with the issue around the other sources. At the very least there is:

https://www.wilddingopress.com.au/julie-szego

https://www.booksandpublishing.com.au/articles/2015/04/24/32926/nsw-premiers-literary-awards-2015-shortlists-announced/

https://www.theage.com.au/by/julie-szego-hvf9s

https://thejewishindependent.com.au/podcast-ashley-talks-to-journalist-julie-szego

https://www.theguardian.com/profile/julie-szego

MaskedSinger (talk) 06:41, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wild Dingo Press, sells her book (see https://www.wilddingopress.com.au/shop/p/9780987381149). It's unsurprising that a book seller would have a profile page for an author that they sell the books of. It's not independent. It would also be a stretch to call two paragraphs significant coverage.
bookpublishing.com.au only mentions her in passing. It does not have significant coverage of her. Notably there is no claim that she won that award so I don't see a pass with WP:NAUTHOR.
The Age link you provide is her employee profile page, detailing articles that she wrote as a journalist for The Age. Firstly that's not independent coverage of her as an individual and secondly that doesn't go towards showing a pass of WP:NJOURNALIST. The Age were her employer, so it's unsurprising that they'd have a profile page on her.
thejewishindependent is a podcast in which she is interviewed. This is not independent from Szego and more importantly counts as a primary source. This does not contribute towards establishing Szego's notability. Those issues aside it appears to be dominated by her sacking from The Age, going towards my argument of BLP1E.
The Guardian link is of the same nature as The Age link. Again not independent as they are/were her employer and again it's it's unsurprising that they'd have a profile page on her which details the stories that she's written for them.

None of the sources you have provided above contribute to Szego's passing our general notability guidelines. In order to establish notability we would need multiple reliable secondary sources which are independent from Szego and which cover her in-depth. If WP:BLP1E wasn't a thing then she should pass on the coverage of her sacking alone, however WP:BLP1E is a thing and therefore she doesn't meet our general notability guidelines. TarnishedPath^talk 12:26, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Per TarnishedPath nomination and extensive explanation. Easy call. Go4thProsper (talk) 02:14, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Vanderwaalforces (talk) 13:25, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom, above discussion and online research that rendered 2 books (no reviews), a sacking, and a couple articles about George Szego. Nothing significant for a career spanning decades. Maineartists (talk) 23:17, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I've seen editors cite multiple reviews in the past as sufficient reason for a keep (not that I'm accusing you of doing that here as you've obviously stated there are no reviews). I'm not sure that multiple book reviews, by itself, is a WP:NAUTHOR pass. I presume the editors are basing their keep vote based on criterion 3 which states The person has created or played a major role in co-creating a significant or well-known work or collective body of work. In addition, such work must have been the primary subject of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews, or of an independent and notable work (for example, a book, film, or television series, but usually not a single episode of a television series), but to me it would appear that when they are doing so that they are disregarding the first sentence of that criterion. TarnishedPath^talk 00:47, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - I found hundreds of search results for her in The Wikipedia Library, but the overwhelming majority of them were her bylines on articles she has written, and yes, there was SIGCOV about her, but it was not independent, because her byline was on those articles as well. Just because she was fired from her job doesn't automatically bestow notability on her, because that news cycle about her getting sacked has already come and gone. Maybe in the future, she might pass GNG for a BLP, but right now she does not, she's a BLP1E. Isaidnoway (talk) 06:20, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Tony Lupton#Personal life per ATD and CHEAP. The reasoning of the delete-supporters is sound; the conclusion differs. gidonb (talk) 02:33, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I have no objection to the suggested redirect. TarnishedPath^talk 04:17, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Michéal Castaldo

AfDs for this article:

Articles for deletion/Michéal Castaldo (2nd nomination)

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

Refbombed promotion for non notable singer. Lack independent coverage in reliable sources, see talk page for an earlier discussion adding that 4meter4's three sources were in order a dead what's on announcement, a PR reproduction for an album release and a short feel good fluff. Nothing good for GNG. Claimed charting is not for him and not on the countries main chart. duffbeerforme (talk) 13:20, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Music, Italy, Canada, and United States of America. ZyphorianNexus ^Talk 13:38, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:44, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Previously at AFD, ineligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 13:41, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: this subject clearly passes WP:GNG after playing professionally *checks notes* for over 3 decades. I updated the article with a recent news story/concert they did in 2023. The subject also clearly passes WP:SINGER. m a MANÍ^{1990(talk | contribs)} 23:55, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Moinuddin Hadi Naqshband

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

The article does not meet the general notability guideline due to the fact that the article subject lacks coverage in reliable, independent sources. The article's content is not verified by reliable, independent sources, and instead the article relies upon primary sources of dubious authenticity that seem to be produced by the article subject’s own organization. Even if the sources were authentic, we have no way of accessing them, and therefore there is no way of knowing whether or not they even verify what is contained in the article. HyperShark244 (talk) 05:52, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Islam, and Jammu and Kashmir. HyperShark244 (talk) 05:52, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: A Historical figure of cultural significance. And there are multiple reliable sources mentioned as citations. Maybe this article needs to be improved. But before nominating for deletion, you should always consider Wp:BEFORE. Zuck28 (talk) 10:32, 25 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Cultural significance can be mirrored in the high amount of prilgrims seeking blessings by the figure as a saint until today (WP:RECENTISM) (WP:NOTE) (WP:GNG). Sources are independant and confirm the notability in a verifiable and traceable manner (WP:RS) (WP:V). Hence this topic has no self-promotion inherent and meets encyclopedic standards (WP:NOT) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mayonnaise.sandiwch.123 (talk • contribs) 21:47, 27 January 2025 (UTC) sock Girth Summit _(blether) 12:54, 30 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!} 05:41, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: while the article has undergone an expansion and more citations have been added to it, multiple references within the article do not look reliable. For example, Tazkare Khwanadane Hazrat Eshan published by a company that is part of the organization which the article subject is a member of- the Naqshbandi order or Naqshbandiyya, and E. J. W. Gibb Memorial by Nicholson, Reynold. The other sources need to be evaluated- they need to be reliable, independent and non-primary sources. Then, the article should be cleaned up, and any content attributed to unreliable or otherwise inappropriate sources should be removed. Then, what remains should be considered and the discussion on whether or not the article should be kept can continue. HyperShark244 (talk) 06:31, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Request: cleanup the article Moinuddin Hadi Naqshband and remove all content that is not verified through reliable, independent and non-primary sources from the article. Pinging @Onel5969: @HistoryofIran: @UrielAcosta: HyperShark244 (talk) 06:48, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Cleanup complete, all content not attributed to reliable, independent and non-primary sources removed. Thank you HistoryofIran and UrielAcosta! HyperShark244 (talk) 03:18, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Khaled al-Ayoubi

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

Article lacks notability. Only citation is a passing mention; found no WP:SIGCOV in reliable sources. Was prod July 30, 2012, two days after created. Fails WP:GNG. Per WP:POLOUTCOMES, Ambassadors are not considered presumptively notable. The article has only one reference, and (WP:NEXIST!) I can't find any coverage in reliable sources focusing on the individual himself; only WP:TRIVIALMENTIONS that verify he was, indeed, an ambassador. No significant coverage of his involvement in any major diplomatic event, either, nor his involvement in crafting any important treaty or bilateral agreement — two criteria which WP:DIPLOMAT says may suggest notability. A minor, non-notable figure who doesn't merit an article. --AgusTates (talk) 01:57, 24 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 24. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 02:07, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Politicians, Syria, and England. ZyphorianNexus ^Talk 02:11, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I offer no opinion on the merits of the article itself, but I did want to note that despite the nominator's claim, I didn't notice anything in the article history to indicate this was ever tagged for PROD at any point (and the date claimed for that, supposedly two days after created, was in fact the creation date of the article). WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:57, 25 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment He may meet WP:GNG or WP:BASIC - as well as the 2019 source which is in the article as an External Reference, a quick search of Newspapers.com shows international coverage of his defection in 2012 (which is what he did - not mentioned in the article), and an article in 2013. I'll add some sources and info and come back. RebeccaGreen (talk) 12:24, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per WP:BEFORE. He received lots of news coverage from 2012 through 2021, easily meeting WP:SIGCOV and preemptively disproving WP:BLP1E. He's notable as a defector, not as a diplomat. Bearian (talk) 03:14, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as a WP:BLP1E - I don't know how that's been disproved here. The "lots of news coverage" link does not work for me, and my own BEFORE search only brings up a small number of hits, all around the time of the event he's known for, except for the Barnsley retrospective, which really isn't enough for a BLP. We could redirect to "list of Syrian defectors." SportingFlyer T·C 04:08, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: No consensus. Just noting that the nominator is a brand new account whose first edits were sending articles to AFD.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:41, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete WP:SIGCOV requires high quality references with proper bylines. 190.219.102.29 (talk) 03:34, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep WP:SIGCOV says nothing about "proper bylines", but nevertheless, I have added references from reliable sources with bylines. I don't believe that he is covered by WP:BLP1E - WP:NOTBLP1E says that "We generally should avoid having an article on a person when each of the three criteria is met ". Criterion 3 is: "If the event is not significant or the individual's role was either not substantial or not well documented." The significance of al-Ayoubi resigning and speaking out against the Assad regime is shown not just by the coverage at the time (very well documented), but its inclusion in a 2019 book as a critical point when a member of the regime spoke out against it. I have added sources and information, including biographical info. I believe he meets WP:GNG. (I'd also note that the previous !vote is from an IP address with only two edits, both Delete !votes on articles about Syrian diplomats.) RebeccaGreen (talk)

Ali Abdul Karim

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

Ambassadors are not inherently notable. Wikipedia:Notability (politics) proposes that diplomatic notability should be a person who has "received significant coverage in crafting an international agreement or related to a notable diplomatic event. That doesn't appear to be the case here. AgusTates (talk) 01:36, 24 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 24. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 01:49, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Politicians, Kuwait, Lebanon, and Syria. ZyphorianNexus ^Talk 02:06, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. I'd assume being the general manager of the Syrian Arab News Agency and the national Syrian television channel would be relevant factors here too. /Julle (talk) 23:07, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep - if he's important enough for the United States government to sanction him, then it's likely that he's notable. I'm not a fan ofAl-Jazeera, but the consensus of editors is that the English language edition is a reliable source; see Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Perennial_sources. See also my comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mohammad Bassam Imadi. Bearian (talk) 03:35, 28 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!} 04:38, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Source analysis in previous significant coverage specifically about him in multiple published secondary sources and therefore fails WP:BASIC. 190.219.102.29 (talk) 03:41, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I have added the source found by Bearian. Even searching English-language sources, there seems to be a lot of coverage about him in Lebanese news - he was accused of interfering in local Lebanese issues [82]; there were calls for his expulsion [83]; and he was farewelled by Hassan Nasrallah in 2022 [84]. He is also quoted (as the Syrian ambassador to Lebanon) in The Guardian [85] as commenting on an Israeli strike on a research centre near Damascus in Syria in 2013. He does appear to have been a senior figure in the Assad regime, and I think there is probably a lot more about him in Arabic language sources (which I have not attempted to search), and in other languages too. RebeccaGreen (talk) 12:54, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! I'm now more of a stronger keep. Bearian (talk) 17:29, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Jean-Marc Rives

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

Doesn't appear to satisfy WP:BIO and WP:CREATIVE. The sourcing is very weak, and I haven't been able to find anything better. The great majority of the edits have been made by the WP:SPA User:RJMarco, which from the name seems to be the guy himself. Clarityfiend (talk) 00:58, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, Artists, Authors, Arts, Morocco, and France. ZyphorianNexus ^Talk 01:27, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - I agree with nominator's reasoning, the lack of WP:RS is especially concerning as it is also a BLP. Sophisticatedevening ^(talk) 01:40, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Draft I think it should be drafted. He has won a lot of awards including the order of merit - Ordre des Palmes académiques which is major civilian award which likely makes him notable. The art as well, if they can be proved to be a museum or permanent collection would pass WP:NARTIST. There is lot potentially if it could be proven. There is lots more. The article itself is a mess and needs a significant copyedit and it also needs sourced. Some time in draft would give that space. If there is not enough coverage I could stubify it. scope_creep^Talk 09:11, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Being a recipient of the Palmes académiques is not likely at all to make someone notable. More than 6,000 people receive this medal each year, and it used to be almost two times more until a few years ago. BilletsMauves^€500 13:17, 25 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
(weak) Keep: significant coverage in a reliable and independent media outlet, addressing the subject in depth and directly (3 articles) https://actu.fr/normandie/bernay_27056/jean-marc-rives-expose-a-leveil-normand_54969366.html https://actu.fr/normandie/bernay_27056/sur-murs-leveil-paysages-jean-marc-rives_9291390.html https://actu.fr/normandie/ferrieres-saint-hilaire_27239/eure-ce-peintre-international-sort-un-livre-pour-apprendre-a-dessiner_60960106.html + (not really independent nor in depth) https://www.paris-normandie.fr/id521597/article/2024-05-11/dedicace-de-jean-marc-rives-la-fabrique-de-la-risle-de-beaumont-le-roger A drastic cleanup is due, though. -Mushy Yank. 09:35, 24 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!} 04:38, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

The changes made are minimal on links or inaccurate statements and I did not create the article. I do not know who created it. This article should be checked and formatted before thinking about deleting it in my opinion.

Kind regards RJMarco (talk) 08:32, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

The changes made are minimal on links or inaccurate statements and I did not create the article. I do not know who created it. This article should be checked and formatted before thinking about deleting it in my opinion.

Kind regards

RJMarco (talk) 21:58, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Jeremy Collins

AfDs for this article:

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

This person may or may not have significant coverage verified by reliable sources. Nonetheless, being eliminated early in The Traitors (American TV series) season 3 and appearing in Survivor a few times doesn't make him more than known for just winning Survivor once. (I don't think his Price Is Right appearance improves much, does it?) Per WP:GNG, primary sources don't count as verification of this person's notabillity. This EW interview and Men's Journal interview (posing as an article in prose format) or this "article" featuring full quotes by the article subject are primary sources. So is this NBC article. This CBS article briefly mentions him as winner of Cambodia season.

When I nominated this article for the first time, I proposed numerous suggestions, which may have led to "no consensus" result. This time, I would definitely like this article to be redirected to Survivor: Cambodia. The alternative targets List of Survivor (American TV series) contestants and Survivor: San Juan Del Sur (his debut season) are nice, but his status as the Cambodia winner is IMO stronger than his other TV appearances. Even an article about a returnee was redirected to Survivor: Blood vs. Water per another AFD discussion.

If WP:BLP1E doesn't apply, then how about WP:BIO1E, WP:PAGEDECIDE, WP:NBASIC, and/or WP:BIOSPECIAL? (Failing NBASIC but meeting WP:NACTOR still doesn't make him an exception, IMO.) George Ho (talk) 00:29, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Television, American football, and Massachusetts. George Ho (talk) 00:29, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The article needs to match all 3 critiera of WP:BLP1E for it to apply he does not even meet the first 2 so you can't really apply that further more the "article that got redirected" while it did happen it was the result of a afd that wasn't attended by a single editor so it's a poor comparison yes his Survivor tenure is the most notable part but he is know for being in 2 seasons furthmore until very recently every Survivor winner had a page so this goes against precedence as well. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wwew345t (talk • contribs) 15:43, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Plus he won once but the show he won and was Fetruared on multiple times is also one of the most watched shows in the world has lasted more then 40 seasons and has spawned multiple spin offs across the globe im not sure how that cant possibly NOT make him notable it seems like the nominater while good intentiond has severley ignored the impact and popularity of the show Wwew345t (talk) 15:46, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The nominaters argument seems to be =wining Survivor =not notable while simultaneously ignoring that survivor is one of the most watched shows in the world the sources cover the article plenty Wwew345t (talk) 16:20, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The only thing the article needs is extra sources Wwew345t (talk) 16:25, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

https://decider.com/2025/01/19/jeremy-collins-the-traitors/ shows that his Traitors appearance also got coverage Wwew345t (talk) 16:31, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Why are you basing his notability on the show's own popularity? WP:INHERENT (essay) suggests we avoid one's notability based on another's. Decider.com is part of New York Post, which is considered "generally unreliable" per WP:NYPOST. WP:DECIDER somehow considers Decider.com marginally reliable but cautions using it.

Reading it, the "article" in disguise is just an interview, meaning I have to treat the source as a primary source, which still doesn't verify his notability.

What about other rules I provided if you still think BLP1E doesn't apply? George Ho (talk) 18:38, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your argument of WP:INHERENT would be more effective if he was some random contestant who got out early but he wasnt he pplayed 3 times all 3 times he made it to rhe merge section of the game this qualifes him for [[WP:NACTOR]] that was why I brought up the show Wwew345t (talk) 18:56, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

https://entertainmentnow.com/news/jeremy-collins-survivor/ is a source and https://www.usmagazine.com/entertainment/pictures/survivor-winners-through-the-years-where-are-they-now/ mentions not only his Survivor appearances but also his traitors appearance this https://thedirect.com/article/the-traitors-season-3-us-cast-contestants-peacock-photos-bios mentions his appearance on the traitors while also going a little bit in detail of what he did in his 3rd Survivor season I'll post some more links later but there's clearly substantial coverage establishing notabillity Wwew345t (talk) 19:12, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

https://www.monstersandcritics.com/tv/reality-tv/who-is-jeremy-collins-from-the-traitors-us-3-cast/ also describes his appearances on survivor and even brings up the fact that he was notable enough to be voted into the season he eventually won https://www.wickedlocal.com/story/entertainment/2025/01/09/traitors-season-3-will-jeremy-collins-be-a-traitor/77572114007/ while I admittedly am not sure if this counts as primary or secondary since it mentions a old interview he did this also covers his traitors appearance and why he was casted .Wwew345t (talk) 19:36, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thats 4 non primary sources and i could probably find more sufficient to say this article like many othet winner articles that shouldnt have been deleted passes BASIC and GNG Wwew345t (talk) 19:40, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Entertainment Now website belongs to Heavy Inc., which aggregates news from other sources, like social media ones. This source takes info from Twitter (now called "X.com") and Instagram and interviews disguised as "articles". I'd caution using the source per WP:HEAVY.COM if I were you. Same for Us Weekly (WP:RSP#Us Weekly).

The Direct article was just previewing cast (including him) and the third season. Unconvinced that it's the indicator of this person's notability, despite brief description of his Survivor gameplay. Also unconvinced that Monsters and Critics is highly reputable (past RSN discussion). Wicked Local source republishes a USA Today "article" that primarily advertises (or hypes up) Collins's Traitor appearance, despite detailing his profile. George Ho (talk) 21:53, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The monters and critcs discussion is severely outdated it was almost 13 years ago Wwew345t (talk) 00:05, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

And your dismissing the wicked article for "hyping up his traitors appearance" despite you making a claim that there were no sources that covered it Wwew345t (talk) 00:06, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wasnt the whole point of the afd because you only thought that the soucres only covered his cambodia win? The wicked local article is a secondary source and is primarily about the tratiors apprerance Wwew345t (talk) 00:11, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The USA Today article doesn't mention his elimination from The Traitors. This "article" resembles a pre-premiere press release, IMO.

Wasnt the whole point of the afd because you only thought that the soucres only covered his cambodia win? How about "primarily" instead? Also, I don't mind other reliable sources verifying his notability, but we still have to be cautious about how sources cover him. George Ho (talk) 00:31, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Obviously the sources willb primarily cover the win as that is his most notable accivemnt however he wouldn't have been casted in said season at all if his first appearance wasnt notable at all i mean the season was "second chance" then his win had to have been notable ennoigh to have him invited again to another season they dont iust let anyone come back and then he would have had to have been a notable enough survivor player to have been invited to the traitors youll note that most other survivor players who have shown up for the traitors also have pages even if they didnt win a season of survivor (like cirie fields) basically what i mean is you dont come back multiple times including in a all winners season if you werent already a notable player Wwew345t (talk) 13:34, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

He wasnt just some guy who showd up in one season got out and thats it he played 3 times never finishing below 10th Wwew345t (talk) 13:39, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. I seem to recall, over dozens of AfDs about reality shows, that winners of major reality shows are presumed to be notable. Then the burden shifts to the side to prove that significant coverage doesn't exist. I also recall that the burden is on those who claim BLP1E. With all the sources and appearances in three seasons of the prototype of reality shows, I think the burdens of proof that he's not notable hasn't been met. Bearian (talk) 01:57, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I think the burdens of proof that he's not notable hasn't been met. I thought I sufficiently proved he's notable only for winning just Cambodia, despite appearing in other Survivor seasons and The Traitors. (Compare him to another [non-notable?] returnee who appeared in just [four seasons of] Survivor, only one of which he won there.) If disqualifying interviews, like the one summarizing an interview video, if insufficient to prove his lack of notability, then how else shall I prove that he fails GNG and NBASIC? George Ho (talk) 02:34, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
the problem is his notability comes from tv not news articles and that is rhe main issue with people assuming reality TV people aren't notable that's just not the case the coverage is there the sources are there Wwew345t (talk) 22:36, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There is significant Coverage confirming his notability Wwew345t (talk) 00:09, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If not just news articles, then how about books and scholarly journals? This book is quoting the article subject; not an indicator of notability, IMO. This almanac is merely listing him as a Survivor winner. This novel refers to some fictional character of the same name, so it doesn't count. Couldn't find magazines significantly covering him without interviewing him besides People, which barely, if not never, covers his Winners at War appearance or his debut season. Couldn't find scholarly journals significantly about him either. News articles are primarily what we got.

the problem is his notability comes from tv not news articles What you said may contradict WP:GNG, like "independent of the subject" criterion, and possibly WP:NBASIC. "TV" is associated with this person who appeared on TV. The TV shows themselves that he appeared in cannot be used to verify his notability if we're gonna apply GNG and NBASIC here. Reliable secondary sources, like news articles from reputable sources, are the ones we can use instead. George Ho (talk) 00:18, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Independence of the subject applies to personal websites and advertisements is jermey collins a survivor producer writor or director? Wwew345t (talk) 00:26, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Your argument contradicts NACTOR as well as it states that "a character that has a significant role in multipe shows and/or movies are considered notable" he played a major part in 3 different seasons of Survivor and made it far all 3 times Survivor seasons are the same show but with a different cast each season its differnt enough to be considered unique you say he is only notable for his cambodia win but he wouldnt have been on there to begin with had his San juan del sur game not have been notable enough to make him return on top of that he returned a 3rd time this time to a all winners season and on top of that he was invited to play on the traitors which usally tries to cast NOTABLE realty show competitors. Notability is firmly established in these appearances and the sources used in the article Wwew345t (talk) 00:34, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
On a side note (and this has nothing to do with my argument above) i struggle to see how you could say a multi time returnee and a winner who has been on other reality shows because of his notability from said show cant be notable when you created Helen Glover (Survivor contestant) a non notable contest who played once on a season generally regarded as one of the worst ever? Wwew345t (talk) 00:36, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
He doesn't meet the BLP1E standerds he passes NACTOR and he has sig cov from high profile news sources moerver you dont seem to grasp the concept that has been reiterated by me and any keep voters in any afd you make he's a winner of a major reailty show and your questioning how that can be notable based on your opinion and a couple technicalities we shouldnt be re directing pages on notable subjects because of technicalities Wwew345t (talk) 01:25, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"Independent of the subject" means disqualifying the person himself, his wife, people associated with Survivor (I hope), CBS (yes, CBS), and others associated with him. WP:NBASIC also mentions "independent of the subject".

Helen Glover (Survivor contestant) a non notable contest who played once on a season generally regarded as one of the worst ever She is considered notable for other things besides appearing in that season. The article was approved into mainspace via WP:AfC process. If you disagree, how about (instructions from) WP:AFD or enabling WP:Twinkle? George Ho (talk) 02:27, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Collins can't just appear in those shows. His roles must be "significant" in order to meet WP:NACTOR. So far, I've yet to see him contribute "significant[ly]" to either Winners at War or his debut season... or The Traitors, and being eliminated from both of them seasons and the other show to me may not be sufficiently "significant" without (to me) proof from reliable secondary sources. Unsure about his The Price Is Right appearance, but even winning prizes at a game show (to me) is neither "unique" nor "prolific" nor "innovative" to the entertainment field. George Ho (talk) 03:59, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
He made it to the merge phase in all 3 of his seasons and contributed to the overall strategy of all 3 that's significant mauve not to you but it is to alot of people Wwew345t (talk) 11:21, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I dont think youve really seen the show at all or youd know his contributions to it are prolific i suggest watching the show before you put another survivor winner page before you put it into afd with the assumption that people' wont identify just how opinionated your argument is Wwew345t (talk) 11:57, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
i suggest watching the show before you put another survivor winner page before you put it into afd with the assumption that people' wont identify just how opinionated your argument is. You know what? We're going back and forth without compromises. I was gonna comment about general readers unable to afford access to the series, but that won't change your mind much, would it, despite trying to get into their shoes? Let's await more of others then, shan't we? George Ho (talk) 02:03, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Vanderwaalforces (talk) 10:17, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. The article could definitely benefit from more citation, but there is no shortage of published articles about him to source because he is notable. 00:24, 31 January 2025 (UTC)

Altaf Tadavi

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

No other reason of notability except winning a season of Big Boss, a notable reality show. The subject fails WP:ENT and WP:MUSICBIO. Also see MC Stan, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/MC Stan, this and this Taabii (talk) 11:14, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Bands and musicians, India, and Maharashtra. Taabii (talk) 11:14, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Per nom. Media Mender 📬✍🏻 12:02, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete— No GNG-worthy coverage. Mostly covered for wearing expensive jewelry and winning Big Boss.EmilyR34 (talk) 05:45, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Per nom., mainly news sources are due to winning Bigboss (which dosent inherit notability) and fails WP:NACTOR as he didnt have sig. roles in multiple notable films. TheSlumPanda (talk) 09:47, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as has substantial coverage of his music career in three Rolling Stone India articles already referenced in the article. Also news coverage of his winning Big Boss certainly contributes to his notability and is a claim to winning a major competition as per WP:ANYBIO, also passes WP:GNG imv Atlantic306 (talk) 22:47, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Per nom. RangersRus (talk) 16:53, 25 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I'm going to be contrarian here for a reason. I recall that we generally keep articles about the winners of 'major' reality shows. Am I wrong? Bearian (talk) 21:57, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Isn't there WP:1E. Guide if I'm wrong. Taabii (talk) 06:12, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: The subject is not only a winner of the Bigg Boss event but also an established rapper. When considering WP:ANYBIO, the subject meets the criteria due to their notable achievement of winning the Bigg Boss event. Furthermore, even before their participation in Bigg Boss, they had a career as a rapper, which aligns with the WP:ENT criteria for entertainers. Additionally, the subject has received significant media coverage, including in-depth features by BBC and several Urdu newspapers, which further solidifies their notability. Baqi:) (talk) 09:41, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Vanderwaalforces (talk) 11:48, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Bigg Boss (Hindi TV series) season 16. The sources for this article are not great to begin with, since many of them fall under WP:NEWSORGINDIA. Still, according to WP:MUSICBIO #10, a redirect is appropriate in this instance.--DesiMoore (talk) 16:21, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Rolling Stone India articles are about his music career and don't fall under NEWSORGINDIA, imv Atlantic306 (talk) 23:04, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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

The result was delete‎. ✗plicit 00:07, 4 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Christopher Wolf

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

Non-notable attorney. In my WP:BEFORE, I found mentions like this and this but they are not enough to pass WP:SIGCOV requirement. Gheus (talk) 17:51, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Law, and Washington, D.C.. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:23, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - as per above and WP:TNT. His work with PLI could be notable, but the formatting and peacock language makes rescuing this page into an article beyond my patience. Bearian (talk) 07:11, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Please note that the absence of one's patience or motivation to rewrite a poorly written article about a notable subject is not, in and by itself, a valid deletion criterion, regardless of the popularity of the WP:TNT essay. Cropping a promotionally-written page down to a stub requires very little effort, and no administrative tools. Please focus on the notability of the topic here.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 18:17, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete – Fails in WP:GNG. Svartner (talk) 22:51, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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

Yehoshua Elitzur

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

WP:BLP1E - this person is not notable except for their conviction. WP:CRIMINAL applies. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 15:57, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Crime, Israel, and Germany. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:20, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and improve article. WP:CRIMINAL states that criminals need not have separate WP pages *except* for when "[t]he motivation for the crime or the execution of the crime is unusual—or has otherwise been considered noteworthy—such that it is a well-documented historic event. Generally, historic significance is indicated by sustained coverage of the event in reliable secondary sources which persists beyond contemporaneous news coverage and devotes significant attention to the individual's role." This subject appears to fit into the above exception; Elitzur is mentioned in Times of Israel, Haaretz, Jerusalem Post, JTA, Middle East Monitor and Yedioth Ahronoth (Israel's largest newspaper). A film has also been made about the subject. Hence, no reason for deletion. Eelipe (talk) 00:18, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep or rename to Killing of Sael Jabara a-Shatiya (he was convicted for manslaughter not murder). There is a lot of coverage of the event, passing WP:NEVENT, but with the way is covered it might make sense to keep it on the perp. It is a poor stub and should not have been made in this state but from a search it is notable. PARAKANYAA (talk) 22:57, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nominator. Additionally, the page lacks context, making it unhelpful to users. gidonb (talk) 02:49, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 17:51, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:RUBBISH. Article being poorly written is not an AfD reason. Eelipe (talk) 03:05, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Eelipe, could you point to one specific opinion to which this might be relevant? Both users who consider the article poor want to keep it, while both users advocating for deletion cite entirely different reasons! gidonb (talk) 02:08, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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

The result was delete‎. Beeblebrox ^Beebletalks 22:58, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

William James Carson

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

IRA member who was killed in a shocking and sad way in 1979. I can see why someone felt this deserved an article but I'm not seeing many reliable sources. Prezbo (talk) 20:08, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ireland-related deletion discussions. Prezbo (talk) 20:08, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - does not appear to meet WP:BLP1E or WP:NVICTIM. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 22:36, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Crime, and Northern Ireland. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:25, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep. He has an entry in Lost Lives (p. 783), and I would hazard a guess that there are offline sources. If not kept, merge to List of people killed during The Troubles (1969–1998) as WP:ATD. Jfire (talk) 02:47, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I don’t think Wikipedia should try to have an article on every individual listed in Lost Lives, that feels off to me. Prezbo (talk) 03:05, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It's debatable. WP:5P1 says Wikipedia combines many features of general and specialized encyclopedias. Lost Lives is such a specialized encyclopedia, so content with its features is arguably in scope for Wikipedia, providing it meets other guidelines and policies. Jfire (talk) 03:20, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Vanderwaalforces (talk) 21:51, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: doesn't seem relevant. AgusTates (talk) 01:31, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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

Princess Isabelle of Salm-Salm

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

Nominated on behalf of 46.132.74.112 (talk · contribs · WHOIS). I contested this editor's WP:PROD nomination, and they then asked on my talk page how, as an unregistered user, they could start an AfD nomination. Their PROD rationale was The article was already deleted once over concerns of notability, and although this version is longer, it is still mostly unsourced and includes nothing that would make the topic obviously notable. I will give my own opinion separately. Jfire (talk) 18:25, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Royalty and nobility, and Germany. Jfire (talk) 18:25, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. This article appears to be a translation of de:Isabelle Gräfin von Loë. The best sources I have located appear to be:

Gies, Gabi (2009-01-14). "Ein bewegtes Leben". Neue Ruhr Zeitung (in German). Retrieved 2025-01-20.
"Gräfin Isabelle von Loe - Schloss Wissen". Blattus Martini - Kevelaerer Enzyclopädie. Retrieved 2025-01-20.

The first is a biography in a regional newspaper. The second appears to be a reprint from a biographical dictionary (Kevelaerer Persönlichkeiten by Evers and Willing). This is somewhat suggestive that a more thorough search could locate enough RS coverage to meet WP:GNG/WP:BASIC, although I'm not sure it's enough on its own. I mainly contested the PROD because the tag had previously been removed by another user, and because the article had been recreated after a prior PROD deletion. Jfire (talk) 18:35, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:46, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. I can see why someone might think Wikipedia should have an article on this person, since she lived a pretty impressive life. However, I can't find any sources (aside from a few passing mentions) other than the two Jfire has already identified, and I would say they are definitely not sufficient to establish notability. Tserton (talk) 19:18, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. It seems that this article just needs to be improved by including more sources, she certainly did enough to warrant notability as another user mentioned. I do think that the wording and flow needs to be improved, but that's another topic. Perhaps just add the relevant banners instead of requesting deletion. Just the fact that "she was the longest lived royal European centenarian to have ever lived" makes me think that some more effort should be put in to save it. If there's a source for that, I don't see how it wouldn't meet the relevant standards. Laurelius (talk) 21:12, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - it certainly needs work, but based on what is in there and sourced, and her extremely long life, she's easily notable. Bearian (talk) 03:43, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I cut out some fluffy language and added some royal connections like Marie Antoinette, the headless queen who was her distant-great-aunt. Bearian (talk) 04:15, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I am very uncertain about this one. I think she would need to meet WP:GNG or WP:BASIC, as she doesn't meet any WP:SNG. So, has there been significant coverage about her in reliable, secondary sources? The first source in this article apparently "describes in passing" some activities the author of that source undertook with her. That doesn't sound like significant coverage. The two sources that Jfire found are as much about her family and the castle as about her, and don't go into detail about her wartime activities, and they are also both very local. In the past, when articles about centenarians were brought to AfD, they were usually deleted unless there was significant, non-local coverage (so not just the local newspaper covering their 90th, 100th and 110th birthdays, for example), or if they met WP:ANYBIO. Examples of AfDs where the result was Keep are Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Edna Parker (2nd nomination) and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jack Lockett. I haven't found much here, although there was a paragraph about her in The Tatler [86] (included in the article Salm-Salm). I have found a source about her donating land to the German War Graves Commission [87], but that isn't significant coverage, it just confirms content in the article. I have tried to search in digitised German newspapers, and found only a notice of her husband's death and some social notes. I tend to think there is not enough to keep this in English Wikipedia. RebeccaGreen (talk) 12:46, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I had a feeling someone would bring up the Tatler article. To spare people a click, it's a listicle that might well have been sourced from Wikipedia. 46.132.74.112 (talk) 13:14, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep as female figure. To the listed pages noting her passing there is also coverage: Für viele war sie eine zweite Mutter (German) in local journal Kevelaerer Blatt. Axisstroke (talk) 14:04, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah but...that article is one of precisely two sources in existence that aren't passing mentions. Tserton (talk) 18:31, 25 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Vanderwaalforces (talk) 21:42, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

JeriQ

AfDs for this article:

Articles for deletion/Jeriq

Articles for deletion/JeriQ

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

Fails all ramifications of WP:COMPOSER or WP:NMUSICIAN. The nominations are not exclusive and so do not inherently confer both guidelines I just mentioned.

Citation 1 from marginally reliable Vanguard with no substantial coverage.

Citation 2 from the same marginally reliable source is utterly unreliable as it lacks a byline and does not provide any useful information.

Citation 3 lacks a byline and is only 104 words, no substantial coverage.

Citation 4 does not only lack a byline, it is definitely a sponsored piece.

Citations 5, 6, and 14 are the usual nomination lists.

Citations 7 and 8 has nothing to offer to this subject's passing of WP:GNG.

Citations 9, 10, 11, 12, and 13 provide no substantial coverage about this subject. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 16:01, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Bands and musicians, and Nigeria. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 16:01, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I do not agree that this article fails all ramifications of WP:NMUSICIAN, as subject has:
1. "Has had a single or album on any country's national music chart". | "the highest new entry this week on Top Albums at #4. BILLION DOLLAR DREAM by Jeriq is the biggest winner, moving up by 57 slots to #21."[88][89]
The Subject's notoriety can be supported by [90], from a notable magazine with a byline, and is named in some Wikipedia articles including Igbo music where he is referenced as one of the "Notable Igbo musicians."
2. "Has won or been nominated for a major music award". The Headies being a major music award in Nigeria and Africa has nominated the subject twice, as the links to the nominations has tried to prove. These nominations are seen in The Headies 2023 and the award's website [91] Chukwukadibia1 (talk) 19:16, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep
Chukwukadibia1 (talk) 21:26, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I find I cannot agree with this nomination; subject appears to meet WP:MUSICBIO. Further to the verified notable award nominations (it is not clear from the nom why they do not count), and the several above citations (which include a secondary analysis in a reliable source the subject "has been making waves in the Nigerian music scene with his hit singles and collaborations" [92]), there is further coverage including Billboard charting, Billboard critical coverage, concert review in an WP:RSNG source, and the subject had a cover feature on the WP:RSNG TurnTableCharts magazine with a sigcov bylined intro. ResonantDis_tortion 17:14, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment- some of the above sourcing has been added to the article now, including the charting citation, and also a critics end of year "best of" list for Rolling Stone magazine. Some copyediting and tidying up done too. ResonantDis_tortion 20:01, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: This was nominated in November 2024: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jeriq. Best, Reading Beans, Duke of Rivia 08:57, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note to closer. During this AfD the article has been moved from JeriQ to Jeriq. ResonantDis_tortion 19:57, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Pinging the participants of the November 2024 discussion to see if anything has changed... @Versace1608, @Bearian, @Ibjaja055. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 15:22, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You did a good job, ResonantDistortion, but sorry, it doesn't add a pinch of salt of WP:GNG for the subject. Firstly, for the charting, NMUSICIAN says that "Has had a single or album on any country's national music chart" (emphasis mine). Not only is the Billboard chart entry being not a single, ("Oganigwe" by Zlatan featuring Odumodublvck and Jeriq), Billboard is not Nigerian's national music chart. Plus, if the song charted No. 47 on the Billboard U.S. Afrobeats Songs, it didn't really chart to confer notability on who was featured, nope, it didn't. This Afrobeats Fresh Picks also has the same issue, provides nothing to establish the mentioned notability on Jeriq.

I also cannot comprehend why you do not find the way this article was created deceptively concerning, This, then how it was moved to the supposedly correct title.

Again, "Nyem Ego" is another feature. Below is my analysis of the sources you added so far. This, coupled with my above analysis makes it evident that Jeriq is not yet a notable musician.

Source assessment table
Source	Independent?	Reliable?	Significant coverage?	Count source toward GNG?
https://guardian.ng/saturday-magazine/weekend-beats/jeriqhood-concert-rapper-sells-out-nnamdi-azikwe-stadium-enugu/	~ The ridiculously promotional nature of this piece is a clear sign	~ Ditto	Provide literally no substantial coverage about the subject.	✘ No
https://punchng.com/jeriq-highlights-rags-to-riches-story-at-concert-jeriq/	Reflecting on the concert’s significance, JeriQ told Saturday Beats,..., clearly not.	~ Ditto	Provide literally no substantial coverage about the subject.	✘ No
https://www.turntablecharts.com/magazine/Industry_Digest_July_August_2023/82	An interview...	...while not entirely prohibited, cannot be the base on a subject's notability.	Ditto	✘ No
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{source assess table}}.

--Vanderwaalforces (talk) 15:20, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That it's not a Nigerian chart is not relevant, and neither is the fact it's a collaboration. Jeriq, evidently a major contributor to the piece of music, still has featured in the top 50 of a reliable chart aggregator, contributing to WP:MUSICBIO#2. He has been nominated, as a solo artist, twice for a notable national award which is WP:VERIFIED, and contributes to WP:MUSICBIO#8. At least two collaborative works with different artists have achieved non-trivial critical "best of" selections in independent sources, contributing to WP:MUSICBIO#1. The article in TurnTableCharts magazine (a website listed as a WP-reliable Nigerian source) is not only a curated interview but includes notability-supporting journalistic bylined non-trivial biographical information contributing to WP:MUSICBIO#1 (per WP:INTERVIEW). The nature of the page creation is irrelevant to the notability of the subject; for the record I have updated the article to try and improve it. Overall, the evidence points to the subject meeting the relevant notability guideline, and therefore I maintain my position to keep. ResonantDis_tortion 16:56, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep. The subject's debut album, Billion Dollar Dream, was critically reviewed by Afrocritik and The Native. He has received two nominations at The Headies. As previously pointed out, he charted on a Billboard chart as a guest act. These three reasons should be good enough for a weak keep. When I previously nominated the article, I didn't see reviews of his debut album in reliable sources. I also didn't see his nominations at The Headies. Perhaps I could have done a more in-depth search but preliminary search results didn't show reliable coverage at the time. The article contains a few promotional wording and definitely needs to be cleaned up. Versace1608 ^{Wanna Talk?} 17:39, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 02:58, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Thank you to Versace1608 for identifying further sigcov sourcing - album reviews [93] and [94]. I have added these citations to the article. ResonantDis_tortion 09:10, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Per ResonantDistortion, Jeriq has received two nominations for The Headies, which is like the biggest award event in nigeria satisfying WP:MUSICBIO#8. Additionally, the coverage presented by ResonantDistortion is sufficient to meet WP:GNG.Afro 📢Talk! 16:27, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yossi Feldman

AfDs for this article:

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

Doesn't meet WP notability. Subject is a former local congregational rabbi (12 years) with no major organisational titles other than a term as president in a local rabbi group. Per existing sources, subject only appear notable due to his fumbled testimony in a royal Commission, this incident led to his synagogue firing him. (Possibly this is notable due to his lawsuit against media coverage?). Other sources relate to family squabbles or local gossip about donors withdrawing support. Overall, there's not enough here. I also note that a 2007 prod result was to delete the page. דברי.הימים (talk) 06:35, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Judaism, and Australia. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 07:19, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

oppose the mendy wax case is notable enough to warrant the article. 212.199.168.193 (talk) 20:32, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 12:32, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Benison (Beni · talk) 12:56, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Adedayo Olawuyi

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

The sources fail Wikipedia notability guidelines and a WP:BEFORE did not show that the subject is notable. Ibjaja055 (talk) 16:19, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Businesspeople, Nigeria, and Uganda. Ibjaja055 (talk) 16:19, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
A CCO or COO of a company can be notable, but they are not automatically considered notable without significant coverage. Bearian (talk) 02:09, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There is significant media coverage of Adedayo Olawuyi - the article should be expanded more rather than deleted. If you look at the other managers of the same company (including some junior to him and arguably less notable) there is a good precedent and template set to build the articles to properly capture the notability. SM105 (talk) 20:29, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I have now expanded the article somewhat and added a number of additional independant secondary sources. I think the article now more than adequately satisfies notability requirements. SM105 (talk) 21:14, 25 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting to allow consideration of improvements made in the last week.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Beeblebrox ^Beebletalks 22:03, 25 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: AirSpace Africa appears to be the only item directly about this person in a RS. Sources 7 and 8 are non-RS per Source Highlighter. I can't find anything extra we can use that talk about the person, mostly they are about the airline. Oaktree b (talk) 23:28, 25 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep. Three of the five new sources are unreliable: bellanaija.com, businessfocus.co.ug, and traveltrendstoday.in (Indian media used to be good, but not anymore). I'm going assume good faith that the other two are reliable, leaving the article still borderline. Bearian (talk) 01:01, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep while we look for more references. He has done a lot for this airline. SiniyaEdita (talk) 18:54, 1 February 2025 (UTC) Incidentally who decides if a source is unreliable? Is it a personal opinion? SiniyaEdita (talk) 19:50, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There is an established consensus about such sources: WP:NEWSORGNIGERIA. Gheus (talk) 23:14, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Gheus, what exactly is the established consensus on NEWSORGNIGERIA? Reading Beans, Duke of Rivia 07:09, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom or redirect to Uganda Airlines as WP:ATD. After removing WP:NEWSORGINDIA and WP:NEWSORGNIGERIA type of sources, there is not much left. Per WP:PAGEDECIDE, it is better to cover such information on Uganda Airlines' article because keeping it standalone would violate WP:BLP with such low-quality references. Gheus (talk) 23:13, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, L Faraone 06:18, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete – Fails in WP:GNG. Svartner (talk) 22:53, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

James J. Smith

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

Fails WP:BLP1E. Not clear that the incident itself has longterm significance.4meter4 (talk) 18:09, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Crime, and California. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:07, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge into Katrina Leung, for now. Honestly, we should probably cover them all in one scandal article, but he is notable for being her handler and for the fallout. The event is very notable [95] [96] [97] PARAKANYAA (talk) 22:30, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

PARAKANYAA I think that is a good idea on all points. Just a note, this page will need to be turned into a disambiguation page and not just a redirect because of the Murder of James J. Smith article. We will need to have a page pointing to Katrina Leung and Murder of James J. Smith if we go with this WP:ATD.4meter4 (talk) 01:18, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Benison (Beni · talk) 04:14, 24 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!} 04:54, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Kaavya Sha

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

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

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

Keep as per references from The New Indian Express, The News Minute, The Times of India [98], [99] and her work in many notable movies as mentioned in the article. Behappyyar (talk) 20:25, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I've added more references to it. And Despite this, it is incomprehensible to tag for AfD after a senior editor has already reviewed it. Behappyyar (talk) 06:40, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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

Keep According to WP:GNG, significant coverage from reliable for establishing the notability of a topic. 𝒮-𝒜𝓊𝓇𝒶 08:30, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Ipigott and S-Aura, would you mind mentioning the WP:THREE best sources or the sources you think help the subject pass GNG or NACTOR? It would be great to see a source analysis, as all I could find is routine coverage and nothing independent of the subject. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 09:46, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Loudspeaker (2018 film). Clearly the only named member of the cast and her only lead role [100]. DareshMohan (talk) 04:54, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect: To Loudspeaker (2018 film), the better option. Claims notability in someway but lacks sufficient reliable sources to fully support this claim.--— MimsMENTOR ^talk 08:10, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Meets WP:SIGCOV easily. Here are a few more mentions [101], [102], [103] Tau Corvi (talk) 20:38, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Tau Corvi, Indiaglitz is unreliable and the other two sources are not independent. There seems to be no coverage of the Paisa movie mentioned in the TOI source or about its director. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 21:09, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Jeraxmoira🐉, please explain why Indiatimes is not independent, I don't get it Tau Corvi (talk) 15:36, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Those are interviews and interviews are primary sources. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 16:10, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I wouldn't say that this can be classified as an interview [104]. And this is even more so [105]. Anyway, you call these sources not independent, and I still don't understand why. In my opinion, the links I provided demonstrate how a major Indian media covers the life of an actress (her wedding and debut in cinema) Tau Corvi (talk) 17:21, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
What makes you think they are independent sources? Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 19:03, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see any indication that IndiaTimes is affiliated with Kaavya Sha. If there is, please point it out. Tau Corvi (talk) 20:16, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
So by your understanding, IndiaTimes is not independent only if it is affiliated with Kaavya Sha? Please read and understand WP:PRIMARY, WP:SECONDARY, WP:INTERVIEWS and Indiscriminate sources before dropping your two cents in an AfD discussion. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 20:44, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, very informative. I just don't think that, for example, the announcement of a film with Sha, in which her commentary is given, can be considered an interview. In my understanding, this is first and foremost an article about her debut in cinema. Tau Corvi (talk) 22:06, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 02:39, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment:

Source assessment table
Source	Independent?	Reliable?	Significant coverage?	Count source toward GNG?
Kavya Shah to Tamil, item number to good roles	No byline		~	✘ No
Actress Kaavya Sha talks about being grateful	Interview	~		✘ No
Kaavya Sha debuts in Bala’s Thaarai Thappattai		Independent blog	~	✘ No
Mr & Mrs Ramachari Actress Kaavya Sha Bagged Her Next Flick	Press release			✘ No
Kaavya Sha gets married to producer Varun Gowda		~	Video coverage of her marriage	✘ No
Mr & Mrs Ramachari actress back in action	Press release	~		✘ No
'Loudspeaker' review: A cheesy, forgettable film			Passing mention - Review	✘ No
Kaavya Sha signs her next in Sandalwood		~	Routine coverage	✘ No
Kaavya Sha turns television reporter		~	Routine coverage	✘ No
Rachita, Bhavana To Shake A Leg With Sudeep In ‘Mukunda Murari’			Passing mention	✘ No
'Loudspeaker' movie review: ‘Simple’ game leads to complicated situation			Passing mention - Review	✘ No
Mookajjiya Kanasugalu Movie Review : Jnanapith Award-winning novel comes alive onscreen		~	Passing mention - Review	✘ No
Kaavya Sha shoots with Santhanam for the Tamil film Paris Jayaraj	~ Interview	~		~ Partial
In memory of Puneeth, guests at Kaavya Sha’s wedding will be able to donate their organs	Interview	~		✘ No
Kaavya Sha to debut with Paisa	~ Partial Interview	~		~ Partial
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{source assess table}}.

Per WP:GNG, even if we consider multiple publications from TOI group as a single source for the purpose of establishing notability, we would still require two more good sources. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 06:26, 24 January 2025 (UTC) Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 06:26, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Loudspeaker (2018 film): Source analysis by Jeraxmoira provides a clear and insightful overview. Charlie (talk) 07:58, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Any more support for redirect as ATD?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Benison (Beni · talk) 06:47, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Loudspeaker (2018 film). RangersRus (talk) 00:58, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Loudspeaker (2018 film). After discounting WP:NEWSORGINDIA not much is left. Gheus (talk) 00:12, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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

The result was redirect‎ to Rice People#Cast. ✗plicit 00:09, 4 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Mom Soth

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

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

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, and Cambodia. Waddles 🗩 🖉 19:01, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Rice People#Cast: a very significant role in a very notable film. If others wish to keep per WP:NACTOR (a lot of coverage about the film, including some on his role, exists), considering his appearances in the 3 shorts by Norodom Sihanouk, I am not opposed to the idea. If some judge that he meets WP:BASIC trough the various mentions of his role, also not opposed. -Mushy Yank. 21:20, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Beeblebrox ^Beebletalks 23:06, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - only because I suspect there would be more sources in Khmer; unfortunately I don't know the best way to search for them, and the Khmer Wikipedia does not seem to have a corresponding article. Also I might consider that such sources are more likely to exist in offline rather than online form. I would also be happy, as Mushy Yank suggests, with a {{Redirect with possibilities}} to Rice People#Cast. Cheers, SunloungerFrog (talk) 15:17, 22 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!} 23:52, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Rice_People#Cast. RangersRus (talk) 14:09, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect – Per above. Svartner (talk) 22:43, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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

Yaron Gottlieb

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

Fails to meet WP:N. I have been unable to find any significant coverage in reliable sources. The article's sources are mostly the subject's own works along with an article that quotes the subject a single time. Should be deleted per WP:GNG. --Helleniac (talk) 22:46, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2025 January 13. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 22:54, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2025 January 14. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 00:34, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: I have fixed some malformed formatting in this nomination that hid a good chunk of it when transcluded. No opinion. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:47, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Law, Israel, and France. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:48, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Just noting that the nominator has been blocked as a sockpuppet, and some of their other contributions make me a little concerned that this nomination might not have been done in good faith. No opinion at this point on the merits of the AfD. MCE89 (talk) 10:35, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Brief article on a professional at work. Fails the GNG. gidonb (talk) 04:23, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep - while it's true that he's not notable as an adjunct professor, he's the executive director of legal affairs for Interpol, and he's gotten some coverage for that. Bearian (talk) 05:16, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 00:44, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Patar knight - ^chat/_{contributions} 02:46, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ali Raza (actor)

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

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

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, Film, Television, and Pakistan. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 09:55, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Meets WP:NACTOR with at least two main/lead roles in notable productions + other significant roles. Can be expanded through sources like https://www.thenews.com.pk/magazine/you/1063549-ali-raza (containing an interview; bylined presentation). Declining creation because iit needs improvement could have been OK but not because it does not meet WP:NACTOR. Because it does. -Mushy Yank. 12:25, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think that interview means means much for to WP:Notability, see WP:INTERVIEW. And declining wasn't an option for the nominator, as they said in the nom, this is a disputed draftification; this is an procedurally correct nomination. Follow up @Mushy Yank, I'm just going through the filmography on the article, which two are you considering main/lead roles in notable productions? I'm not sure I'm totally convinced but I could be persuaded to agree. Bobby Cohn (talk) 18:38, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Bobby CohnOh, no the interview is not to prove notability directly, just an exemple of what can be used to improve the page and verify the importance of the roles. Regarding procedure; I did not say this could not be AfDed (everything can), just commenting on the fact that the nomination's rationale is based on NACTOR, just like the reason to decline the creation at AfC was. Lead/main cast roles in Muhabbat Gumshuda Meri, & Noor Jahan (2024 TV series) ; significant roles (not minor) in Duniyapur (TV series) & Gunah (TV series). I'm leaving it at that. Best, -Mushy Yank. 20:24, 13 January 2025 (UTC)EDIT: +lead role in Iqtidar (see page)-Mushy Yank. 18:36, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: per nom. --- Bhairava7 • (@píng mє-tαlk mє) 14:22, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Having lead roles does not make someone inherently notable. They need the significant coverage to support. The references are interviews, puff pieces, or otherwise unreliable. On a side note, this was more than just draftification. It was draftified, then declined, then still moved to the mainspace. --CNMall41 (talk) 19:26, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Echoing the nom, fails NACTOR and GNG. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 02:47, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Pardon me, but "fail[ing] WP:NACTOR", how, please? -Mushy Yank. 12:10, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
How is it otherwise? Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 21:17, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Just read the guideline and read the page. It is obviously a pass of WP: NACTOR. See my comment above. -Mushy Yank. 21:26, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I read the guidelines and read the page. In my opinion, he did not have any significant roles, in fact filmography section is devoid of any reliable sources. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 21:46, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
No significant roles????? REALLY? I will assume good faith then.... if you honestly want to check, just click on the links about the series.....I’m leaving it at that. -Mushy Yank. 21:52, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
How does a mention in a Wikipedia article confer notability? Almost, none of those articles has his role supported by a reliable source. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 22:05, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Almost? Meaning, you find a few that confirm them, after all? :D Again, I am assuming good faith. -Mushy Yank. 22:09, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Once again, the content covered in other Wikipedia articles about the subject does not establish notability. Almost meaning the ones I checked lack reliable sources amounting to WP:SIGCOV. He is a young emerging actor but does not have coverage at the level of establishing notability. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 23:26, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
NACTOR is not about SIGCOV (just read it, it's not long), NACTOR is about significance of roles in notable productions. 2 sources in English almost at random to confirm 2 different significant roles in 2 notable productions: https://www.dawn.com/news/1773436 ; https://images.dawn.com/news/1192720. Again, read my comments above. Thank you. (NB- I never said that mentions in WP confer notability, please read me carefully.) -Mushy Yank. 23:41, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

NACTOR is 100% about significant coverage. Again, it is under additional criteria (a subsection of WP:BIO which is the actual guideline) and says "may" which is only an indication a person could meet the overall WP:BIO guideline. --CNMall41 (talk) 23:52, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No. See below and read the guideline. -Mushy Yank. 00:07, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

He is barely mentioned in those two sources. In my opinion, both of these roles do not fulfill the merits of WP:NACTOR. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 00:01, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

But mentioned, right, with his roles? That are significant (not minor), and in notable productions? Correct? So, well, NACTOR applies.. -Mushy Yank. 00:06, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

significant roles in multiple productions, in my opinion, a role is only significant if it is thoroughly discussed in reliable sources. Merely the role being mentioned does not make it significant. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 00:55, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"Merely the role being mentioned does not make it significant", sure, absolutely, but again, that is not what I said; it depends on what is said about it. Significant roles in the production (lead/main/recurring/etc) make a NACTOR pass; just like a director plays a significant role in the making of a film. A noted part in/of a noted film can be considered notable enough and that is why such guidelines exist. If coverage allows to verify it, it can/may be considered enough. By the same token, it may be considered insufficient and I understand that is your take but that does not change the fact that it's a NACTOR pass. Really no further comment from me here. Thanks. -Mushy Yank. 01:02, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The guideline reads "may be considered notable" (as pointed out in other AfD's), not "is considered notable." The person could have 20 significant roles and not be notable unless there is significant coverage to support. Here, the coverage falls short.--CNMall41 (talk) 21:51, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Even GNG uses ”may”. WP: NACTOR is a solid reason to keep a page. You can judge it’s not enough if you want but still it’s a perfectly acceptable reason to consider a person notable. This is a NACTOR pass and that is that and that is the applicable guideline. -Mushy Yank. 21:56, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

NACTOR is not a pass/fail, it is only an indicator of WP:BASIC which requires significant coverage. --CNMall41 (talk) 22:40, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No. That is simply. not. true. NACTOR is a specific notability guideline for people. You may not like it, you may want to change it or to get rid of it, and you still may !vote to delete or to redirect a page when a subject passes its requirements but it is a notability guideline and the applicable one in the present case. Thank you for your time. -Mushy Yank. 22:55, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It is not. It is only part of a guideline that says "may" (meaning "could be" or "possibly"). If you look at the entire guideline (not just the tiny carve out under "additional criteria"), you will see that a person must still meet WP:BASIC. It is not what I like or don't. It is literally what the guidelines says. I do not see anything that says a person "is" notable if they have had significant roles. If I missed that part, please point it out. --CNMall41 (talk) 23:32, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you but again, I am very sorry but what you are saying is not true. Again, even GNG does not say something like "Subjects Meeting GNG "ARE" notable and this cannot be discussed and their notability cannot be challenged".

The page WP:Notability (people) says: "People are likely to be notable if they meet any of the following standards...."(=additional criteria [including NACTOR] ). Not "if they meet any of the following standards AND the basic criteria".

Again, one can perfectly judge that a WP:NACTOR pass (or a GNG pass, or a NDIRECTOR pass, or a BASIC pass) is not sufficient but one can also think it's enough; and that is one reason why AfDs exist. I will rephrase: a simple WP:NACTOR pass CAN be (and often is) considered enough for notability (and that is because it is a (specific) notability guideline); it does not guarantee inclusion, that's all.

You may not like it, you may call that specific guideline tiny and want to change it but that is the way it (currently) is. See Cavarrone's comment on the thread you yourself initiated there, please......I really have no further comment. -Mushy Yank. 00:05, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Fallacy by assertion. I also never called something tiny. Again, please show me where it says someone "IS" notable for having significant roles. I will not hold my breath here. --CNMall41 (talk) 00:09, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Fallacy by assertion?? :D Sure, if you say so. "I also never called something tiny." But of course you did. "(not just the tiny carve out under "additional criteria")" No further comment.... -Mushy Yank. 00:15, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Don't twist my words to support your assertion. "Tiny" referred to the size, not the significance. --CNMall41 (talk) 00:17, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't twist your words (let alone to support any assertion of mine, mind you). I just quoted one word you wrote. And you denied having used it. That's all. -Mushy Yank. 00:20, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Final question which still hasn't been answered. Is there anywhere in NACTOR that says an actor "is" notable for having significant roles?--CNMall41 (talk) 01:01, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This article has significantly changed since its AfD nomination. -Mushy Yank. 11:52, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Meeting WP:NACTOR is a valid reason to keep an article, but the discussion so far has focused on GNG and on meta disputes about the wording of NACTOR - evaluating whether this person's roles are sufficient to count toward that guideline is necessary to establish consensus here.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Vanamonde93 (talk) 18:27, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Question - @Vanamonde93:, for clarification, are you saying that someone would meet NACTOR for significant roles despite not having the significant coverage to support? Meaning, as long as we verify those are significant roles then NACTOR is met? --CNMall41 (talk) 18:29, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Meeting NACTOR is usually enough to keep a standalone article, so long as there is enough reliably-sourced material to write a BLP-compliant article. All of our notability guidelines - including GNG - are written with some degree of qualification, because they are meant to be interpreted with common sense and allowing for exceptions. You need to look at the entire documentation, and the history of applicability, to determine whether a notability guideline is treated independently from GNG or not. NACTOR, alongside NPOL, WP:PROF, NAUTHOR, and a few others, is typically treated as an alternative to GNG. I am explicitly not stating that this individual is notable, only that their roles require evaluation with respect to NACTOR. Vanamonde93 (talk) 19:04, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I agree with that assessment. I believe some arguments in this and other discussions is that NACTOR is in itself enough despite NACTOR saying "may be notable." It is also a subsection of WP:BIO which still requires people to meet WP:BASIC which is where I think there is confusion. --CNMall41 (talk) 20:58, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You say you agree with me, but what you're saying is directly in contradiction to what I said: NACTOR can indeed be enough without GNG. Vanamonde93 (talk) 16:57, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How so? I referred to WP:BASIC, not WP:GNG. --CNMall41 (talk) 18:19, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If you expect a reply from me on an obscure page, it would be useful to ping me next time...WP:BASIC does not in any way obviate other criteria. NPOL, NAUTHOR, PROF, NACTOR, and a few other criteria have long been held to be sufficient despite GNG. NSPORTS was too, before the community decided it wasn't. "Presumed notable doesn't mean notable" is not the gotcha that you seem to think it is - it means that common sense needs to be applied in every case, not that that particular criterion can be set aside altogether. The summary at the top of WP:BIO also uses the "presumed" language with respect to what is essentially GNG - yet nobody would argue that GNG was insufficient. Anyhow, this is the last I will say about this, because I don't want or need to persuade you - I am only explaining how a closer will usually weigh arguments. A clear NACTOR pass with sufficient sourcing to write a biography will usually be kept. A clear GNG pass will also usually be kept. A failure of both criteria will usually be deleted. I have no opinions on which case is true here. Vanamonde93 (talk) 22:30, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Didn't mean for it to be a subject of contention. I was discussing NACTOR versus NBASIC and you were discussing NACTOR versus GNG. NACTOR uses the term "may" which means there may be significant coverage. GNG uses the term "presumed" which means there is likely coverage. Some cite NACTOR as meaning if they have significant roles then the coverage doesn't need to exist. And, I am not saying that off of a guess - it has been the argument for a select few in many deletion discussions, including one that just closed as delete.--CNMall41 (talk) 19:01, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep He has had significant roles in two or three TV series which have Wikipedia articles (so are presumably notable), so he meets WP:NACTOR. RebeccaGreen (talk) 10:16, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"Presumably notable" is not notable. We need significant coverage to support that presumption. Can you provide a list of the sources you feel are significant coverage?--CNMall41 (talk) 19:25, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

(1) We don't need significant coverage for someone to meet WP:NACTOR, we just need evidence that they had significant roles in notable shows. (2) I said the TV series were presumably notable. The series are not being debated here, and do each have two reviews, hence my "presumably". RebeccaGreen (talk) 22:26, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I did read that wrong. Apologies. As far as "just need[ing] evidence," how are we able to get that evidence with there being significant coverage in reliable sources? Are press releases okay? Primary sources? Honest question. --CNMall41 (talk) 21:15, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The presumed notability of the TV series does not necessarily indicate that the actor had a significant role. It is entirely possible that their role was minor. On what basis do you consider their roles to be significant, and how do we establish that? Shouldn't we determine this by examining coverage in reliable sources? Do you really think an actor with a significant role would only be casually mentioned in an article about the series spanning ten paragraphs? Wouldn't you expect a bit more detailed coverage for a truly significant role? Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 19:50, 25 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Sources are poor and there is not enough significant coverage on the career and reliable sources to verify the roles (if lead or not) played by the actor. I have seen "Noor Jahan" show and the actor didn't have a lead but a supporting role (one of the sons of the lead female character who played title role) in that show and the page wrongly calls it lead role. So without verification and evidence on the roles played and significant coverage, we cannot assume the subject meets WP:NACTOR. RangersRus (talk) 16:39, 25 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Updated the page rapidly again to address raised concerns.-Mushy Yank. 19:34, 25 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Iqtidar: The only significant role I can verify as of now is from Iqtidar. In the future, coverage from Tauba, Girhein and Dastak may help establish notability. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 09:57, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Vanderwaalforces (talk) 21:45, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Meets WP:NACTOR, he has had significant roles in two or three TV series. NACTOR is enough to keep an article. Jitujadab90 (talk) 12:45, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Which roles and where is the significant coverage supporting they are significant?--CNMall41 (talk) 00:43, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

People who meet the basic criteria may be considered notable without meeting the additional criteria such as WP:ARCHITECT, WP:ARTIST, WP:AUTHOR, WP:CREATIVE, WP:FILMMAKER, WP:DIRECTOR,WP:JOURNALIST, WP:POET, WP:PRODUCER, WP:PHOTOGRAPHER, WP:ENT, WP:ENTERTAINER, WP:NACTOR, WP:NMODEL. And he subject is notable as per NACTOR. Jitujadab90 (talk) 07:13, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Already discussed in this afd that was just closed for a page you created and in the deletion review discussion for that page which is ongoing. --CNMall41 (talk) 08:27, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

See above comment of Vanamonde93, RebeccaGreen. Jitujadab90 (talk) 09:17, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Keep as per Mushy Yank. Behappyyar (talk) 21:40, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

George de Meo

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

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

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

~~Keep~~ quite a bit of coverage here [106] [107] [108] [109], for his weapons dealing was "the single most important source of weapons" of The Troubles, quite the claim to notability as evidenced by sigcov. That is without looking into newsy/other book sources (if you are unsatisfied by the sources I have provided or want me to incorporate them into the article, please ping me I will attempt to find more). PARAKANYAA (talk) 00:38, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

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

For the sake of building consensus, I am ok with a redirect to Provisional Irish Republican Army arms importation per WP:ATD.4meter4 (talk) 21:12, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting as there is no consensus here yet.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:39, 18 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!} 04:50, 25 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist - Can we reach consensus on redirecting to Provisional Irish Republican Army arms importation?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ThadeusOfNazereth(he/him)^{Talk to Me!} 03:39, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. I don't think this needed another relist. As the nominator, I supported the redirect. That's two of three commenters supporting the redirect, and one editor remaining supporting deletion. This could have easily closed as a redirect under WP:ATD.4meter4 (talk) 17:32, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sven Pichal

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

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

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

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

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

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

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:00, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 09:20, 25 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: I tried a .be websearch for news on this person before the trial, there isn't any. News is about the incident at work or about the trial, he was sprayed with urine at one point... I don't consider much of this terribly notable. The lack of any sourcing before the incident shows this isn't a notable individual. Oaktree b (talk) 16:34, 25 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
At least 1'740 records according to Google https://www.google.com/search?q=Sven+Pichal+site%3A.be&sca_esv=f94ce9e8bf588227&hl=en&sxsrf=AHTn8zpQsmp7KIZ0i2jgyWuujlzJL5Fh9A%3A1737921576789&source=lnt&tbs=cdr%3A1%2Ccd_min%3A%2Ccd_max%3A2022&tbm=

He had a daily radioshow where he was the main person, he was also the chairman of "het Roze huis" and the spokesperson of "Wel Jong Niet Hetero", and made news items. He even appeared on a music album "de Sinterklaas Zingt" (https://open.spotify.com/track/3VAay1Zh4hy3LdGttUumoj) where celeberties sang songs about saint Nicolas. KommuSoft (talk) 20:03, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: He doesn't appear to have been an on-air personality, so not well known by the public in Belgium. He worked behind the scenes. I'm not sure that's enough for notability. Oaktree b (talk) 16:36, 25 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Vanderwaalforces (talk) 13:14, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I'm having to rely on Google translate, but I don't find sources about him as a TV personality prior to being arrested for crimes. And the articles about the crimes do not go into much detail about him. That there is an article in NL wiki is not a reason to have an article in EN wiki - each separate language wiki has its own policies for inclusion, and that is how it should be. Lamona (talk) 01:52, 4 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Edd Gould

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Benison (Beni · talk) 02:54, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge with Eddsworld: but really not opposed to Keep as this seems to be a WP:CREATIVE pass. -Mushy Yank. 23:31, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep There are several primary references and the sourcing can improve, but the subject meets WP:GNG. --NoonIcarus (talk) 19:33, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Merge or Keep?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Vanderwaalforces (talk) 12:15, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge with Eddsworld. Not sure about sourcing individually but I think merging together would be good. Procyon117 (talk) 14:41, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Edd's influence on the indie animation community and Internet as a whole is worthy enough to warrant a seperate article Flixxy0 (talk) 18:49, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Flixxy0: With your permission, I have bolded your position:[110] Kind regards, --NoonIcarus (talk) 19:12, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist. There's yet to be a consensus on whether this is a keep or merge.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Vanderwaalforces (talk) 14:06, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: The sourcing is not great, but the article passes WP:CREATIVE.--DesiMoore (talk) 15:29, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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

People proposed deletions

Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Academics and educators Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Actors and filmmakers Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Athletes Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Authors Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Businesspeople Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Lists of people Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Politicians