Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/Today

Purge
Shortcut WP:AFD/T

13 December 2024

Read how to nominate an article for deletion.

Recent AfDs: Today Yesterday

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

< December 12	December 14 >

Guide to deletion

Purge server cache

Paris Yee

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

Article clearly failing general notability guidelines and references are not seems to be reliable. Nxcrypto Message 11:19, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Businesspeople, and Business. Nxcrypto Message 11:19, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Postcolonial anarchism

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

Two and a half years ago, Czar raised the article's synthetic scope over on the talk page, pointing out how the article was a "hodgepodge of various concepts [...] rather than any unified coverage of a singular concept". When I came across it, I concurred with this assessment, after finding that more than 2/3rds of the article was stringing together different concepts based on sources that never mentioned the subject.[1]

I think this is yet another "x anarchism" article from an older era of Wikipedia, when attempting to create new tendencies/philosophies out of passing uses of a term (or even just wholesale making shit up) was all the rage. Searching through sources about this term, I've only found passing references to Roger White's book Post Colonial Anarchism (see further reading section), none of which are substantial enough to even remake this article into one about the book.

As I'm not sure how to fix the scope of this article, as it doesn't appear to meet notability criteria and as I can't think of a suitable redirect target, I'm nominating this article for deletion. Grnrchst (talk) 10:59, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Philosophy, Politics, and Social science. Grnrchst (talk) 10:59, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Banj brdo

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

While the fighting in this area during 1994 and 1995 was significant, and the two-volume CIA history of the wars in the former Yugoslavia contains significant coverage of those later events, this fighting (if in fact it happened at all) in 1993 is not covered at all in that source. If it happened, then it could be covered by a couple of sentences in the Majevica front (1992-1995) article. As things stand, I can't even find proof in reliable sources that it happened. Thirty years after the fact, if this had significant coverage in reliable sources, is would be apparent. It certainly doesn't appear to. Not notable in and of itself. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 10:55, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, History, Military, and Bosnia and Herzegovina. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 10:55, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete fails WP:GNG. Another poorly sourced page by the same User. Mztourist (talk) 11:01, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of Japanese films of 2026

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

WP:TOOSOON, It's premature to create this list. Royiswariii Talk! 10:42, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film and Japan. Royiswariii Talk! 10:42, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 11:08, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Patrick Bet-David

AfDs for this article:

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

This page was already deleted in June 2024 as it failed to meet WP:GNG. Somebody has recreated it in November 2024. Zenomonoz (talk) 08:13, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Businesspeople, News media, and Entertainment. Zenomonoz (talk) 08:13, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Iran-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 11:09, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

American Chamber of Commerce in Turkey

AfDs for this article:

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

The people in the 2016 discussion at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/American_Chamber_of_Commerce_in_Turkey who did not want the article deleted have not added or suggested any inline sources and I don't think the general sources listed are enough to show notability. Chidgk1 (talk) 07:37, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Business, Turkey, and United States of America. Chidgk1 (talk) 07:37, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

McCoy's Building Supply

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

Clearly fails WP:NCORP, no significant coverage of this company anywhere online Cutlass ^Ciera 01:59, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Local news stories and PR items this was about all I could find [2]. No sourcing in the article now we can use. Oaktree b (talk) 02:17, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Article is new. Granted, needs work. Local/regional news stories: [3], [4], [5], [6], [7], [8], [9], [10]

Listed as one of USA's top retailers: [11] Tejano512 (talk) 02:41, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

And national news^ Tejano512 (talk) 02:41, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

https://familybusinessmagazine.com/growth/supplied-for-success/ Tejano512 (talk) 02:56, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: A little too quick on the deletion-axe there, as this is a brand new article still being worked on, when it was put up for deletion here. I just surfed the internet and found many mentions of this company, branched in Texas and multiple other states. The article could use more work, but the business is legitimate and a pretty big operation overall. — Maile (talk) 02:57, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Most of the sources are PR-type articles, and the few others that are local sources don't provide enough for significant coverage. An announcement claiming that a company had made a donation does not provide notability and significant coverage. Cutlass ^Ciera 13:26, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and Texas. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:33, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. The sources don't meet the rigor required by WP:ORGCRIT.4meter4 (talk) 06:06, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: New sources have been added Tejano512 (talk) 03:12, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 06:15, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As stated abv, new sources have been added. Are more sources needed? A good amount of articles are industry news and not PR. Tejano512 (talk) 02:54, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 06:55, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Starting Point Directory

AfDs for this article:

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

Fails WP: GNG. I could not find any sources that would establish notability. The previous AfD contained a lot of vague gestures about "historical significance" without suggesting sourcing improvements. If voting Keep, please show that the subject meets notability requirements by pointing to specific secondary sources that are reliable and cover the subject in-depth. HyperAccelerated (talk) 06:05, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 08:03, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 06:55, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Asmodel

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

Procedural nomination per Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2024_November_24#Asmodel * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 03:15, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements and Comics and animation. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 08:05, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Next to The DC Comics Encyclopedia, American Comics, Literary Theory, and Religion: The Superhero Afterlife also deals with Asmodel, but I believe both are plot summary. Which might suggest merging to List of DC Comics characters: A. Was there a WP:BEFORE search carried out and what where the results?

But to me another question is, if the DC version is actually the primary topic here, or if the original angel inspiring that character would be. If so, this article might be turned around to primarily cover the angel, and have a section for the DC character. The Dictionary of Angels has an entry on Asmodel. Daranios (talk) 11:08, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Admittedly I'm not sure on Angel notability since that is way outside of my coverage area, but we do have List of angels in theology as a potential AtD for this particular redirect if Asmodel is considered the primary topic over the DC character. Asmodel seems to have been removed from the list at some point in the past though, so it may be worth re-adding him in a light merge depending on what happens. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 21:56, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge No energy to do a deeper search for secondary sources myself. So until further input a merge to List of DC Comics characters: A in the spirit of WP:AtD seems the best course of action to me for a topic which appears in secondary sources, but where stand-alone notability is unclear. Daranios (talk) 16:01, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly the removed section at the suggested target could be of help in a merge. Daranios (talk) 11:17, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pinging editors involved in some way in case they would like to give input here. @I dream of horses, CycloneYoris, Jhenderson777, and Quindraco:. Daranios (talk) 11:17, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 06:51, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Uniswap Labs

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

No reliable sources found for this software developer Ednabrenze (talk) 02:47, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. Ednabrenze (talk) 02:47, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Plenty of sources can be found in traditional media, books, and academic papers. For example, the company has received coverage in Bloomberg News ([12][13][14][15][16][17]), the company has been covered by The Wall Street Journal ([18][19][20][21]), and there are two chapters dedicated to Uniswap in the book Automated Market Makers (published in 2023 by a division of Springer Nature). Sources available span multiple years. The subject of the article meets WP:GNG and WP:NCORP, even if the current state of the article could use some work. GeorgiaHuman (talk) 04:13, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Cryptocurrency, Companies, and United States of America. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 08:06, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to the product, i.e. Uniswap. Uniswap Labs has been involved in some legal cases but other than most of the coverage is about its DAO, Uniswap. As a company, Uniswap Labs fails WP:NCORP. Veldsenk (talk) 19:42, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge/redirect not notable on its own. Andre🚐 02:57, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 06:51, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hayden Adams

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

Notability is not inherited, and founding a (maybe) notable company doesn't make the person notable. Found no reliable sources online. '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk • contribs) 02:14, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and Cryptocurrency. '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk • contribs) 02:14, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

https://www.forbes.com/profile/hayden-adams/ he was 30 under 30 in finance (2023) https://www.forbes.com/30-under-30/2023/finance Szenon (talk) 02:43, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note that it is best to make a multiple page AFD when one nominates two related pages at the same time. It would be best to merge this AFD with the Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Uniswap_Labs one. IgelRM (talk) 02:59, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Uniswap. WP:TOOSOON for a standalone article. Veldsenk (talk) 19:19, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 06:51, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

PeerStream

AfDs for this article:

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

Fails WP:NCORP. This company was briefly covered by some reliable sources when its name was confused with Snap Inc.'s during their IPO in 2017 [22] [23] [24], and there was no WP:SUSTAINED coverage after that. The brief WP:TECHCRUNCH puff-piece isn't reliable, and the other sources are not independent. Maybe this article would merit a passing mention in the Snap Inc. page. This page was previously deleted in 2006, then it was recreated by a blocked sock in 2014 and then edited by multiple other socks after that. Badbluebus (talk) 03:34, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Internet, Software, Websites, United States of America, and New York. Badbluebus (talk) 03:34, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Ineligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 05:40, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - agree this fails WP:NCORP, no significant coverage, edit history doesn't inspire confidence. Void if removed (talk) 11:14, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Roman command structure during First Mithridatic War

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

Not WP:GNG, specifically – contra the First Mithridatic War itself – there not being significant coverage in reliable sources of Roman command structure at this specific period. Heavily reliant on unsourced interpretations of primary sources (WP:PRIMARY; WP:OR). See also previous discussion at WP:CGR. Ifly6 (talk) 05:38, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Both major authors of the page have been notified. Ifly6 (talk) 05:40, 13 December 2024 (UTC) [reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History and Military. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 07:02, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. The topic is not notable enough, and the writing is very confusing and even off-topic. There is nothing to save. The article has bugged me for several years now; I've tried to reread several times, in order to try to understand what is it about, but left confused every time. T8612 (talk) 08:38, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as WP:OR. Furius (talk) 10:56, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lycée Jean Mermoz (Saint-Louis)

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

Not finding anything that satisfies WP:NSCHOOL. Clarityfiend (talk) 04:56, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete unless several references to reliable sources independent of this school that devote significant coverage to this school are provided. This two sentence stub makes no plausible claim of notability. Cullen328 (talk) 06:22, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Schools and France. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 07:02, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 11:09, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jason Zandamela

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

Draftify as I am struggling to find sufficient in-depth coverage of the subject to meet WP:GNG. Everything that comes up is basic coverage of either his college commitment or his transfer to another school, which is what we call "routine transactional announcements" in other sports. The pieces that seem to be more "in-depth" contain most of the same re-hashed information taken from his college bio, etc., in lieu of any new reporting. JTtheOG (talk) 04:33, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, American football, Africa, and Florida. JTtheOG (talk) 04:33, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete unless several references to reliable sources independent of this college athlete that devote significant coverage to this player are provided. The current version of the article does not say that he has played any college games. Cullen328 (talk) 06:26, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Raids inside the Soviet Union during the Soviet–Afghan War

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

An unwarranted WP:SPLIT of the Soviet–Afghan War, clearly a Pov ridden article and glorification of measly notable Pakistani raids in Soviet Afghan. Garudam ^Talk! 00:49, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Military, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Russia, Ukraine, and United States of America. Garudam ^Talk! 00:49, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 01:04, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Its not a Split and these raids aren't "measley notable" in that it involved the forces of four different states infiltrating into the territory of a global superpower. Waleed (talk) 02:58, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: I think that the article is notable on its own. WP:SPLIT is justified for significant battles of the Soviet-Afghan war. Wikibear47 (talk) 17:38, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This could be merged at best. Otherwise, I don't see a reason why this article should exist in the mainspace when the parent article itself does not cover this topic or lacks sources, even if it does. Garudam ^Talk! 19:11, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: pure violation of WP:SYNTH. The topic is not notable and the article itself appears to be pushing a POV. - Ratnahastin (talk) 02:18, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The article has standalone notability of its own established through significant coverage and a necessary split from Soviet-Afghan war article. Muneebll (talk) 09:23, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The topic is not even notable for its parent article and lacks citations, clearly it does not pass GNG & SIGCOV. Garudam ^Talk! 14:55, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 01:38, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 02:31, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: There are real signs of notoriety here. Furthermore the story must be told without fear of repercussions from Moscow. 190.219.101.225 (talk) 03:21, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Genuine question, what do you mean by repercussions from Moscow? WP:LEGAL for more info. Conyo14 (talk) 08:41, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Libyan–Syrian Union

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

This article is at least two-thirds fluff. In its entirety, it is background, direct excerpts from a book, an uninformative scheduling timeline, and the personal puffery and conjecture of the respective heads of state. Given it is about a polity that never existed or even got at all close to existing, coverage of it should likely be limited to a blurb between a sentence and a paragraph in length on a handful of related articles. Remsense ‥ 论 01:52, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Politics, Africa, and Middle East. Remsense ‥ 论 01:52, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Draftify or Merge into Federation of Arab Republics#Other Federations of Arab Republics. The topic appears to be notable, e.g. The Washington Post, but probably not as an individual article, and the current set of sources are mostly offline and/or non-English, and the current editors have left in place in the current version what is very likely a WP:COPYVIO, which even has numerical references apparently from the original source retained: which provided for an "organic union" [7] or a complete merger of the two states. [5] [2] ... and thus become the core of a pan-Arab union . [9] ... effectively meant that the project failed. [10] [11], implying that no serious copyediting of the article has been done yet. The merge would best need someone in addition to EpicAdventurer to also have access to the existing sources, which appear to be mostly offline and/or non-English, or else to online English WP:RS such as The Washington Post (reliable in this context for factual type statements). Boud (talk) 02:51, 6 December 2024 (UTC) (clarify Boud (talk) 22:41, 6 December 2024 (UTC))[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Libya and Syria. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 08:07, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 02:30, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kamala (elephant)

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

Single news event, in November an elephant was euthanized. Fails WP:EVENTCRITERIA #4 - a routine kind of news event, and WP:SIGCOV - multiple newspapers publishing the same story. Further "in 2014 a zoo acquired some elephants" sources added also seem to cover a routine news event. Fountains of Bryn Mawr (talk) 01:34, 13 December 2024 (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/2024 December 13. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 01:54, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Having coverage from 2014 and 2024 establishes lasting notability. You claim that the coverage is "routine", but the vast majority of elephants don't receive widespread news coverage like this one, even when they die. If all elephants had this level of coverage it could be considered routine/normal, but they don't. EVENTCRITERIA also doesn't apply here because Kamala is an elephant, not an event. Even if this article was about the event of her death (which it is not), it still wouldn't be "routine coverage" because elephants with the same name as a major political figure dying within hours of a major political event and causing massive social media buzz is not a regular or common event. Di (they-them) (talk) 02:00, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Animal, Sri Lanka, Canada, and Washington, D.C.. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:26, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to National Zoological Park (United States)#Notable animals. It's certainly not unusual for large zoo animals to receive some coverage, particularly about their death; the fact that her name brought additional attention doesn't mean this short-lived buzz establishes notability. Since the main article has a section specifically for cases like this, per WP:NOPAGE a standalone article is not needed. The 2014 coverage is about three elephants that came together, not specifically about Kamala so I don't think that's lasting. There's also National Zoological Park (United States)#Elephant Trails. Reywas92^Talk 04:19, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per Reywas Andre🚐 05:17, 13 December 2024 (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 User:Windborne Rider/Boys II Planet. WP:SNOW redirect by article creator. (non-admin closure) — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 08:05, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Boys II Planet

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

WP:TOOSOON + there's no announcement of confirmed cast members. Aidillia^(talk) 01:48, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and South Korea. Aidillia^(talk) 01:48, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As the creator of the article I re-userfied it again so there's no need for this AfD. 𝙹𝚒𝚢𝚊𝚗 忌炎 (𝚃𝚊𝚕𝚔) 07:33, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If you want to re-userfied it again, you should comment it here, this is not how it's work once it's already in AfD. You can't just moved it like that. Aidillia^(talk) 07:57, 13 December 2024 (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.

Crew-served weapon

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

Fails WP:DICDEF. Only one, apparently unreliable source. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 18:00, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Military and Technology. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 18:00, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I suspect there's only one source because the creator was lazy. This is a very common term in military circles. I don't as yet have an opinion about Keep or Delete. Intothat darkness 18:17, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep common concept of weapons systems. Lack of RS on the page not determinative. Mztourist (talk) 07:29, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This is a WP:SOURCESEXIST argument, so please state which sources prove the article passes WP:NEXIST rather than just implying they might exist. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 18:22, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Did you do any kind of search before you nominated the article? The Google Books search alone turned up over 6000 hits, and Scholar over 600. Intothat darkness 21:21, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I did, and everything seemed trivial. WP:GHITS is relevant here. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 22:52, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Over 6000 hits is not trivial. That you choose to ignore this is concerning. Grossman's "On Combat" alone contains at least three references to crew-served weapons according to the Google book search, and one of those ties back to SLA Marshall's "Men Against Fire." Both works are hardly trivial. Intothat darkness 13:26, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Common military concept and term is frequently used in both specialist and general literature. Intothat darkness 13:31, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
AfD is WP:NOTAVOTE, please include valid sources instead of claiming they exist. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 21:35, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - well-established term and concept in military circles. Yes, the article is in a bad state now, but Wikipedia has no deadline. I have concerns about the nominator's mass nomination of weapon-type related articles over the last few days, as well. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 22:20, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Please don't cast WP:ASPERSIONs. Furthermore, like others you have not expounded on what sources are there, this is WP:NOTAVOTE. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 07:09, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ stop WP:BLUDGEONING the discussion. Mztourist (talk) 03:41, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I do not think any part of my response pointed to me desiring to force people to change their mind, so it is not bludgeoning... On the contrary, I want to see what kinds of sources people are claiming to possess, which is a legitimate question. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 04:00, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You have been here long enough to know that it is BLUDGEONING. Mztourist (talk) 07:21, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: 1. Responding to everybody IS central to the definition of bludgeoning. 2. Nobody has made a particularly persuasive case yet.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 08:12, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Soft-redirect to Wiktionary: which already has an entry for it. Multiple routine mentions, or being a well-established term, aren't sufficient for notability per our guidelines. Owen× ☎ 15:14, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Notability is not shown. No objection to turning it into a redirect. Nurg (talk) 19:57, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Allowing another week for discussion of the idea of redirecting.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Just Step Sideways ^{from this world ..... today} 01:43, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. A few editors have claimed that there is sufficient sourcing for an article beyond a dictionary definition, yet no sources have been provided here. Cortador (talk) 06:18, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

İstanbul Efsaneleri: Lale Savaşçıları

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

Was actually gonna do this some time ago. Anyway, this article has no sources (and been like that for a few years) and looking for possible source and there doesn't seem to be anything prove this article can still be rewritten and kept. Their official website seems to have been taken down, or perhaps never existed in the first place. The subject alone is likely non-notable, if not as much as Battle for Dream Island always tended to be. QuantumFoam66 (talk) 01:11, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. QuantumFoam66 (talk) 01:11, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Turkey-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 08:09, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per significant coverage in these sources: ^[1]^[2]^[3]. Also, 10 seconds on Wayback Machine yields dozens of snapshots of the official website listed in the external links section, so it's a poor WP:BEFORE by the nominator. Merko (talk) 00:12, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ Danacı, Beril Özge (2022-08-08). "Türk Oyun Sektörünün İlklerinden - Şeyh Cehalet'le Savaştığımız Oyun İstanbul Efsaneleri: Lale Savaşçıları". Onedio (in Turkish). Retrieved 2024-12-07.
^ Kocagöz, Yigilante (2014-08-22). "Lale Savaşçıları - Irospalar, Yobazlar ve 90'ların "Karanlık" Tanımı [Oyunlarda Türk Temsili - FauxPlayDosya] - Geekyapar!". Geekyapar (in Turkish). Retrieved 2024-12-07.
^ Hürmen, Tuana Seda (2023-05-06). "Nostalji Günlüğü: İstanbul Efsaneleri: Lale Savaşçıları". Oyun Günlüğü (in Turkish). Retrieved 2024-12-07.

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 01:37, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Sufficient sources have been provided. Cortador (talk) 06:27, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Naved Aslam

AfDs for this article:

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

Fails WP:NACTOR. Unsourced BLP. No indication of significance. Fails WP:SIGCOV scope_creep^Talk 14:21, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers and India. Shellwood (talk) 16:06, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Delhi and Maharashtra. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:36, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There is a reference so it's not unreferenced, imv Atlantic306 (talk) 22:42, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: The subject has worked in numerous movies and has also been part of multiple television shows. Previously, the article relied on a single source, but I have now added several new sources to improve its credibility. The subject clearly meets the criteria outlined in WP:ENT. Baqi:) (talk) 12:36, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 14:41, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: As it stands now there clearly is not a consensus for any course of action. Hopefulyy another week will remedy that.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Just Step Sideways ^{from this world ..... today} 01:11, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

William Franks (landowner)

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

William Franks was a british landowner that helped in construction of Fitzrovia District, Percy Street, Rathbone Street and Charlotte Street. This article was marked for speedy deletion due to lack of importance in 2015 but was shortly unmarked to help the creator expand it. A lot of new information and sources were added since then but i still think its is not notable. Being a landowner in British Empire does not make him automatically notable. SolxrgashiUnited (talk) 15:14, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. SolxrgashiUnited (talk) 15:14, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. No good rationale for deletion. Pure WP:IDONTLIKEIT. -- Necrothesp (talk) 16:38, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 16:38, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment this is one of those really tragic cases where we have a genuine nice little story that's of interest, but it's in the wrong place. This article is basically a nice bit of local history research, but relies very, very heavily on primary sources of information. It should be published somewhere. But Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia based on secondary sources, not a place to publish research. I don't want to say delete because I enjoyed reading it, but it really, really doesn't belong here. Elemimele (talk) 16:47, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
~~Delete~~ - Disagree with the keep vote. The deletion rationale is clearly that this is not notable. It does not meet GNG because there are no secondary sources. Perversely, contrary to the keep !vote, it looks like we are actually thinking of keeping it because of WP:ILIKEIT. Or rather, we like the original research done by the writer of the page. And yes, that is a nice collation of the information from primary sources. I hope that Philafrenzy has a copy, and would suggest that a userfied copy be made available to them if this is deleted. But it is not an encyclopaedic page. This is the wrong project for this information. A site that could make use of much of this information would be Family Search, which allows user content to provide referenced primary source information about people. See [25]. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 08:25, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- If you look at this editor's other AfD nominations, the rationale is almost always essentially WP:IDONTLIKEIT, which is why most of them have been rejected out of hand. They have also stated that they nominate articles for AfD because it's "relaxing"! Comments like A lot of new information and sources were added since then but i still think its is not notable and Being a landowner in British Empire does not make him automatically notable (italics mine) tend to imply this rather than a decent, properly thought out reason. -- Necrothesp (talk) 17:56, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I see that there were indeed rather a lot of nominations in quick succession, and that tends to overwhelm the effort at AfD. I am striking my delete in favour of a procedural/speedy keep. This was discussed recently in another context, and is sometimes allowed. My hope is that this will be closed as keep or no consensus with no prejudice against a better argued renomination (although perhaps not by the same nom.). My thoughts are unchanged. We don't have any secondary sources here, and this is the wrong project for histories synthesised from primary sources, but if we are going to take them down, let's do it in a more careful manner. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 18:18, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: While I understand the reasoning, I do not believe this qualifies for a speedy keep. The nomination mentions notability, and that is almost always the core argument in deletion discussions, and several comments indicate they don't think this should be an article even if they don't agree with the reasons presented in the nomination.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Just Step Sideways ^{from this world ..... today} 01:09, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Simon Lekressner

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

I was unable to find sufficient in-depth coverage of this American soccer player to meet WP:GNG. JTtheOG (talk) 01:02, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, California, Massachusetts, and Washington. JTtheOG (talk) 01:02, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kealan Patrick Burke

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

This subject appears to fail WP:GNG as well as higher bars at WP:NACTOR and WP:NAUTHOR. Note, not every Bram Stoker Award recipient is inherently notable. JFHJr (㊟) 00:17, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, and Authors. JFHJr (㊟) 00:17, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ireland-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:27, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

[1] Danacı, Beril Özge (2022-08-08). "Türk Oyun Sektörünün İlklerinden - Şeyh Cehalet'le Savaştığımız Oyun İstanbul Efsaneleri: Lale Savaşçıları". Onedio (in Turkish). Retrieved 2024-12-07.

[2] Kocagöz, Yigilante (2014-08-22). "Lale Savaşçıları - Irospalar, Yobazlar ve 90'ların "Karanlık" Tanımı [Oyunlarda Türk Temsili - FauxPlayDosya] - Geekyapar!". Geekyapar (in Turkish). Retrieved 2024-12-07.

[3] Hürmen, Tuana Seda (2023-05-06). "Nostalji Günlüğü: İstanbul Efsaneleri: Lale Savaşçıları". Oyun Günlüğü (in Turkish). Retrieved 2024-12-07.

[1]

[2]

[3]