Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/Today

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Purge

4 April 2025

Read how to nominate an article for deletion.

Purge server cache

Mount Sinai South Nassau (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

There is nothing indicating this hospital is notable. This article has not been improved since it was created nearly a decade ago. The corporation fails WP:NCORP and WP:GNG. An alternative would be to have it redirected to its parent corporation, Mount Sinai Health System. Aneirinn (talk)

Oppose. Firstly, NCORP is the wrong criteria for physical structures like hospitals. Nomination fails WP:BEFORE, because a quick search shows clearly that the hospital has significant third party news coverage [1][2] (and that's just the first two results). WP:ATD demands at least a suggestion to merge to the parent health system, but the hospital itself is notable. oknazevad (talk) 17:51, 20 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hospitals in the United States are corporations, this is a well known fact. This one particularly is a nonprofit corporation, so WP:NCORP, which applies to corporations and organizations, does apply. The WP:DOGBITESMAN routine coverage and press release that is mentioned above from your "quick search" does not do anything to contribute to its notability. Per WP:NOTADVERTISING, " Wikipedia articles about a person, company, or organization are not an extension of their website, press releases, or other social media marketing efforts." The nomination has been changed to reflect the possible alternative to deletion. Aneirinn (talk) 18:55, 20 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Is an article about the company the runs it, or is it about the facility? Northern of those are "dog bites man" unless you think every news story that's not a national headline is such (and they're not, by longstanding consensus that local news contributes to notability). oknazevad (talk) 21:02, 20 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
In the United States, it is commonplace for hospitals to operate as their own entities, for tax purposes. Aneirinn (talk) 22:00, 20 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
That doesn't address my question. oknazevad (talk) 17:12, 21 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It seems like you did not read WP:NCORP before publishing the above statements. If you read WP:NCORP, you would discover that WP:NCORP explicitly mentions hospitals in the guideline. Aneirinn (talk) 23:20, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Partial Merge >>>Mount Sinai Health System (location, history, size). Djflem (talk) 19:11, 20 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and United States. Aneirinn (talk) 19:45, 20 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep I agree NCORP is not the correct guideline here - the sources presented above are more about the building itself than a specific business, and the corporation/business would be Mount Sinai, not the specific hospital. Operating as its own entity for "tax" reasons isn't really why we have NCORP. SportingFlyer T·C 02:40, 21 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    The hospital itself is its own corporate entity. That is how it is structured in large companies that own hospitals in the United States that are variously known as "health systems" or hospital networks. Thus WP:NCORP is applicable. It is also without a doubt an organization, which WP:NCORP concerns. Aneirinn (talk) 22:22, 21 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    The article even refers to what the hospital complex was before Mount Sinai took over. The article is clearly about the complex. SportingFlyer T·C 00:56, 22 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    WP:NCORP even explicitly states "This includes commercial and non-commercial activities, such as charitable organizations, political parties, hospitals, institutions, interest groups, social clubs, companies, partnerships, proprietorships, for-profit educational institutions or organizations, etc." Aneirinn (talk) 03:03, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Well we also have WP:NBUILDING, which simply requires WP:GNG. Considering this is clearly an article on the building and not on the business, since it covers the building throughout its organisational history including as a former independent hospital, we don't need to apply the higher standard. I can't access historical American newspapers at the moment, but I bet it should be easy to find coverage from 1928. SportingFlyer T·C 04:11, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    The article is severely lacking in significant coverage, one of the integral requirements for WP:GNG. It is a list of its name changes. Hospitals are not inherently notable for being located in New York, this one is certainly not. Aneirinn (talk) 23:48, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:13, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× 17:44, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Article has been there since 2016. Poorly sourced, does not look particularly notable and seems like a directory. Ramos1990 (talk)
Kitchen (song) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NSONG; should be redirected to its album. Zanahary 17:35, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Crybaby (SZA song) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NSONG; no WP:SIGCOV of this song. Should be redirected to its album. Zanahary 17:34, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Diamond Boy (DTM) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NSONG; only WP:SIGCOV of the song (not the album) is the HNHH review. Should be redirected to its album. Zanahary 17:33, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Paris (Sabrina Carpenter song) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NSONG; should be redirected to album. Zanahary 17:29, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

On Purpose (song) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NSONG; should be redirected to album. Zanahary 17:28, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Middle of Starting Over (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NSONG; not enough WP:SIGCOV. Zanahary 17:28, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm Fakin (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NSONG. Zanahary 17:25, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Honeymoon Fades (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NSONG. Zanahary 17:24, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Smoke and Fire (Sabrina Carpenter song) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NSONG. Zanahary 17:23, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thumbs (song) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NSONG. Zanahary 17:21, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hyderabad Heroes (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NSPORT with very limited WP:SIGCOV Agent 007 (talk) 17:21, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

We'll Be the Stars (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NSONG Zanahary 17:20, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Eyes Wide Open (Sabrina Carpenter song) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NSONG, not enough WP:SIGCOV Zanahary 17:18, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Can't Blame a Girl for Trying (song) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NSONG. Zanahary 17:17, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Bad Time (Sabrina Carpenter song) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NSONG. Zanahary 17:16, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

All We Have Is Love (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NSONG. Zanahary 17:15, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Paradise (film) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

As per WP:CRYSTAL and still not notable per WP:NPP. Draft:The Paradise (film) already exists. Agent 007 (talk) 17:14, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Happier (Olivia Rodrigo song) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NSONG. Note that the chart clause at that guideline explicitly says that charting is just a positive indicator that a search for WP:SIGCOV will be successful—it does not replace SIGCOV or strengthen notability. Zanahary 17:08, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Veslački Klub Partizan (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Article about a rowing club that fails WP:GNG. I was unable to find any significant coverage about it. There is one news source from "Agencija Beta" briefly mentioning its victory in Serbian championship, but its not enough. WhoIsCentreLeft (talk) 16:01, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Suzana Gartner (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

WP:BLP with some résumé-like overtones of a lawyer, not properly sourced as passing inclusion criteria for lawyers. As always, lawyers are not automatically entitled to have Wikipedia articles just because they exist, and have to be shown to pass WP:GNG on third-party reliable source coverage about them and their work.
But this is "referenced" almost entirely to primary sources that are not support for notability, such as her "staff" profiles on the self-published websites of directly affiliated organizations and her own writing being cited as metaverification of its own existence -- and the only properly reliable third-party source present at all is a Q&A interview in which she's talking about herself in the first person, which thus does not magically get her over GNG all by itself as the only non-primary source in the article.
Nothing here is "inherently" notable enough to exempt her from having to pass GNG on better sourcing than this. Bearcat (talk) 15:33, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wayne LeClos (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

WP:BLP of a film editor, not properly sourced as passing inclusion criteria for film editors. As always, film editors are not automatically entitled to Wikipedia articles just because they've had credits, and have to be shown to pass WP:GNG on third-party coverage in reliable sources about them and their work -- biographical coverage, external analysis of their work's impact, evidence of notability-conferring awards, etc.
But this just states that he exists and lists a bunch of films without saying anything notability-building at all, and is referenced entirely to primary source directory entries without showing any GNG-worthy sourcing at all.
The fact that his work exists is not "inherently" notable enough to exempt him from having to have better referencing than this. Bearcat (talk) 15:13, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ohq (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:BIO. No significant coverage in reliable sources; given sources are routine coverage and Ohq is mentioned in passing. No significant achievements in tier-one leagues or tournaments during his career. Yue🌙 22:10, 20 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 21:41, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× 15:08, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
2021 Tapuah Junction shooting (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No secondary coverage. Wikipedia is not a repository of news stories. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 🛸 20:39, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

User:Thebiguglyalien hello, im not familiar with the English Wikipedia article deletion policy, so i would be happy if you would be able to explain to me why 2013 Tapuah Junction stabbing, and 2010 Tapuah Junction stabbing considered notable enough for an article, and this article isn't. There an important detail that i didn't mention in the article cause i didn't found source in English for this particular claim but there a lot of Hebrew sources. This detail is the fact that the settlement of Evyatar was re-establish be Israeli settlers as "response" for this attack.Benbaruch (talk) 20:55, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Someone would have to look at those articles, but it's possible they aren't notable either. Articles about events on the English Wikipedia require sustained coverage beyond the initial reporting of the event. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 🛸 20:59, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
User:Thebiguglyalien, i understand, but what do think about the fact that a large output that currently being regulated by the Israeli government, was re-establish as "response" for this attack, don't you think that this fact makes the article about the attack notable enough? Benbaruch (talk) 21:05, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep There was the attack. Following that there was a manhunt which got coverage including his wife being arrested. He had a trial which got additional coverage. Then Israel military demolished his family home, which got coverage including the US State Department condemning it (a rare event).
The article needs work and additional sources, but I do think this incident and it's aftermath got sustained notice both within Israel but also around the globe. Searching using the name of the perpetrator is a good place to start for additional sources[6] -- Bob drobbs (talk) 21:23, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Under scholarly sources, I found one book which doesn't just have a description of the attack but also discuss clashes and violence in response to Israel engaging in the manhunt[7] Bob drobbs (talk) 21:56, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • KEEP Second the opinion of Bob drobbs. There is ample news coverage of the attack, manhunt, trial result, and aftermath with the destruction of the perpetrator's home. The state department issuing a rebuke to Israel is enough to confer notability to this event in my opinion (seriously the US state department is usually pretty chill about the bombing of civilians overseas).
Anonrfjwhuikdzz (talk) 02:12, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. I'd consider merge or redirect to an appropriate page, which is the level of treatment that this gets in the book above. To meet GNG, a subject must have significant coverage in multiple reliable independent secondary sources. The newspaper coverage is primary, as is the state department rebuke. The book, Jewish Lives Matter has only a short entry that does not significantly describe the attack such that a wikipedia page can be written. The nature of the work shows why multiple sources are required. We are certainly not at a WP:N pass yet, and if we are to rely on this kind of sourcing to keep an article then systematic bias in our coverage is likely. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 08:20, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    > The newspaper coverage is primary...
    I'm not sure this understanding of secondary sources is correct.  Reading through it again, a newspaper journalist synthesizing facts regarding an incident seems sufficient to qualify as secondary:
    "A Secondary source provides thought and reflection based on primary sources, generally at least one step removed from an event. It contains analysis, evaluation, interpretation, or synthesis of the facts, evidence, concepts, and ideas taken from primary sources"
    Wikipedia:No_original_research#Primary,_secondary_and_tertiary_sources
    In which case, this incident got plenty of secondary source coverage over an extended period of time.
    -- Bob drobbs (talk) 17:01, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Restricting participation to EC editors per WP:PIA.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× 15:05, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Shyam Sunder Vyas (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This article was created almost 10 years ago and till now the referencing of article hasn’t improved. I also removed two bare urls from this article. On WP:BEFORE, i didn't found any sources about the subject except this[1], which is repository data and dosent establish notability. This subject fails WP:SIGCOV and WP:GNG TheSlumPanda (talk) 15:00, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Antonio Ramon Horta AG7 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I've searched for sources, and found none, except one that says who Antonio Ramon Horta was (whose publisher I'm uncertain about, and which does not mention the school itself). I've no objection if someone wants to WP:MERGE this to Forest siege instead, but at present, I can find no sources that mention the name of this short-lived school. As a closed school, I don't think it meets the WP:List selection criteria for List of medical schools in the Caribbean, and adding it to List of colleges and universities in Cuba would be best if we had a solid source to add with it. WhatamIdoing (talk) 19:18, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× 14:58, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Clive Elliott (barrister) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The person doesn't pass WP Anybio. All the sources are not of really depth coverage, and his overall achievements are not making him to be eligible in terms of GNG. Insillaciv (talk) 11:28, 20 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I don't see how GNG is met, none of the sources in the article are independent SIGCOV. I also don't see how ANYBIO is met even if you stretch the definition of 'award' to include serving as a president of an organisation. The criteria for ANYBIO is 'The person has received a well-known and significant award or honor, or has been nominated for such an award several times' perhaps serving as the president of the New Zealand Bar Association is a significant role, but it certainly is not a well-known one. I for one couldn't tell you who the president was prior to this. I don't see any news articles talking about the selection of any new president for the bar association, which suggests it isn't exactly a well-known nor significant role. Traumnovelle (talk) 08:53, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, GrabUp - Talk 13:11, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× 14:49, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Ausar Auset Society (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Lack of notability Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 09:53, 20 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep the chapter devoted to this in a Routledge book and the Encyclopedia source are enough. PARAKANYAA (talk) 03:55, 22 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Also [8] [9] [10].
This group appears in basically every significant NRM encyclopedia - quite absurd for us not to have it! PARAKANYAA (talk) 04:00, 22 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Also [11] [12] [13] [14]
This fulfills WP:GNG. WP:NORG explicitly says it does not apply to religions, but even if it did it would pass that too. PARAKANYAA (talk) 15:05, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per the above argument and sources. Zanahary 18:12, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
For reference, that's this. Definitely significant coverage. Zanahary 18:14, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, plicit 13:06, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak Delete. Right now the page has been around since 2005. But it looks so underdeveloped. Some previous revisions had more content about the movement but not much citation. As such it make more sense as a section than a stand alone article. Ramos1990 (talk)
Notability is based on the existence of sources, not the development of the article. As far as I know, stubs aren’t against the rules - a section on what? That argument would make sense if you are proposing a merge, but you are not. PARAKANYAA (talk) 22:22, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed. There's clearly enough sourcing to make a detailed article. Zanahary 18:15, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× 14:47, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Choa Kok Sui (Master) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Repost of previously deleted and salted material: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Choa Kok Sui * Pppery * it has begun... 14:26, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Irakli Toçi (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Tagged for no sigcov since August. I am not able to find any significant coverage, only passing mentions and articles that are not really about him. [15] [16] [17] [18] Geschichte (talk) 14:07, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Arsen Zylyftari (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This footballer has only played in the second Albanian tier, which has matches with attendance in the hundreds and is therefore not professional. But does he meet GNG? No, I think not because the only sources I was able to find were a short interview and this short one. The two links in the article are dead, but I can't imagine they were significant either. Geschichte (talk) 14:12, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Abdoulaye Toungara (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

His career in Europe did not pan out at all, having played only 7 minutes in Albania and 4 games in Kosovo. Most sources are WP:ROUTINE such as this, though this is slightly longer. It's just that the level he plays at is so low; the Africafoot article describes him signing at the third tier in Albania which is just so inconsequential. Geschichte (talk) 14:18, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Brightcom Group (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

A suspended company from the stock exchange. Fails WP:NCORP, and WP:CORPDEPTH. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 13:04, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Previous WP:PROD candidate, ineligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, plicit 14:11, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nauroz Khan (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Article is barely comprehensible and topic shows little significance/notability, no reliable source coverage GoldRomean (talk) 14:05, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nuclear Medicine Oncology & Radiotherapy Institute Nawabshah (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Was soft-deleted through AfD last year, and then restored after the soft delete was contested. No improvements were made to the article, and the original nom's rationale, "Lacks sig/in-depth coverage so, fails WP:GNG. I don't see it passing WP:ORG either." still holds true. Onel5969 TT me 11:40, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× 13:58, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Superchess (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No evidence of notability. Both sources are reviews and the second is very advertorial. Tagged for notability for several weeks without response. Fails WP:GNG  Velella  Velella Talk   13:47, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Two reviews in my view usually fullfil the minimum requirements of WP:GNG. More specifically, they do fullfil WP:NBOOK, which I think is the most closely related specialized guideline to the topic of tabletop games: "A book is presumed notable if ... The book has been the subject of two or more non-trivial published works appearing in sources that are independent of the book itself. This can include ... reviews." Daranios (talk) 15:10, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Khodeswar Ran Shelter (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Completely fails any form of notability requirements for locations. Absolutely no outside coverage. The only source in the article is the official website (which isn't even up anymore, but it did use to exist, I checked on the wayback machine). I would try to search it up in Hindi to see if I can get any results for that, but the Hindi name isn't even listed on the article (nor is there any versions of the article in any language either). Gaismagorm (talk) 13:43, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

All India Gaming Federation (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

fail NCORP; possibly hoax. every link I open leads to not related article. Insillaciv (talk) 11:37, 20 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 07:36, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Trade org that sued an Indian state, unsure how notable. IgelRM (talk) 21:04, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× 13:41, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Influence of cultural and linguistic diversity in communication (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This article doesn't just read like an essay, it essentialy is an essay. I don't have much else to say on it, but it legitamately is just an essay on, well, the influence of cultural and linnguistic diversity in communication.

Ps: sorry about the deletion tags, it didn't really fit anywhere

TLDR; WP:NOTESSAY Gaismagorm (talk) 13:33, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Attack on Lankaran (1812) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fail to see how this is WP:NOTABLE. Just another article part of this "Slicing history into pieces" trend. Basically to get an easy win or "point" for the involved faction. HistoryofIran (talk) 13:14, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If you look at the sources and read a little about the Qajar-Russian war, you will understand that the war was real. But you will not be able to understand this because you plan to destroy the work of others and delete their pages. Eminİskandarli (talk) 13:47, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Rohtas Goel (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

A promotional biographical page of a businessman fails WP:GNG and WP:NBIO. None of the sources constitute WP:SIGCOV. Just a concise WP:RESUME. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 13:02, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Omaxe (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Consensus has been that notability is not automatic in WP:LISTED (or any other) case. Fails to meet WP:NCORP, WP:CORPDEPTH. Indian media sources should be viewed carefully, as they often present press releases as news WP:RSNOI. WP:BEFORE is all about new project launches, funding news, winning government contracts., etc - all are merely routine coverage WP:ROUTINE, regardless of where they are published. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 13:00, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Medica Hospitals (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NCORP and WP:CORPDEPTH. Indian media sources should be viewed carefully, as they often present press releases as news WP:RSNOI, WP:ROUTINE. Furthermore, the WP:BEFORE check has failed. An alternative to deletion could be merging with Manipal Hospitals. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 12:55, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Fortis Healthcare (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Consensus has been that notability is not automatic in WP:LISTED (or any other) case. Fails to meet WP:NCORP, WP:CORPDEPTH. Indian media sources should be viewed carefully, as they often present press releases as news WP:RSNOI. Apart from that, activities like government approvals, profit/financial reporting, capacity expansion news, acquisition news, partnership news etc., are merely routine coverage WP:ROUTINE, regardless of where they are published. WP:ATD - Manipal Hospitals. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 12:53, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Poonawalla Fincorp (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Consensus has been that notability is not automatic in WP:LISTED (or any other) case. Fails to meet WP:NCORP, WP:CORPDEPTH. Indian media sources should be viewed carefully, as they often present press releases as news WP:RSNOI. Apart from that, activities such as name changes, appointments, fundraising, and business acquisitions are merely routine coverage. WP:ROUTINE, regardless of where they are published. WP:ATD - Cyrus S. Poonawalla. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 12:46, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Adam Matoš (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

He played 12 matches for Liptovský Mikuláš which was in Slovak First Football League back then before silently ending his football career in 2022. In terms of secondary sources, I found nothing better than two passing mentions on SP21 and Dnes24. ⋆。˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚。⋆ 11:26, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Camera, hand lens, and microscope probe (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails GNG. For reference, CHAMP was a proposed instrument that doesn't seem to have been included in the Mars Science Laboratory. Originally proposed at https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/20090007927 - all sources I can find are either primary (authored by one or more of the inventors) or mention the instrument only in passing. Deprodded on account of Google Scholar hits, but I don't think any of those articles are secondary. Anerdw (talk) 07:19, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Previous WP:PROD candidate, ineligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, plicit 11:21, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Lagos Marriott Hotel (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

A non-notable chain hotel. If we're applying WP:NCORP to it, it fails since all the coverage of it is WP:ORGTRIV, press release-driven news about its opening. If we apply WP:NBUILDING, what's required is significant in-depth coverage by reliable, third-party sources to establish notability. We don't have that for this. Searching for additional sources beyond the two in the article, which read like regurgitated press releases, I find only WP:NEWSORGNIGERIA sources that do not appear independent from the hotel ([24], [25], plus material that is over-the-top WP:PROMO like [26] and [27]) or hospitality industry WP:TRADES publications ([28]). What I don't see is anything that's explains why this Marriott is anything other than a WP:ROTM corporate hotel. Dclemens1971 (talk) 10:54, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Radio in the Flemish Community (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The subject of this article fails WP:GNG. WhoIsCentreLeft (talk) 09:32, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This type of article is very common. To link a few: Radio in France, Radio in Germany, Radio in Austria and Radio in the Republic of Ireland. Concerning the notability of the Flemish Community: since Belgium is roughly split into two language regions, each region has its own set of radio stations. AllOriginalBubs (talk) 15:59, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Donald Pelmear (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No evidence of notability found. Played in notable series like Dr Who, but only a minor role. He is just a name appearing in lists of actors, but doesn't get further attention in books[29]. No news sources paid significant attention to his death[30]. General Google results are wiki's and fora, no indepth reliable sources there either[31]. Fram (talk) 09:30, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Bainu (website) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

There is a lack of more references,I can't find any more reports about this website.Maybe this content is not notable,and I found that the software can still be downloaded and used normally, which is inconsistent with the description in the entry. It is possible that the reference is fake news. Babaibiaobin (talk) 08:34, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Rameshwar Dadich (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

He has not been elected to any state/national wide office. He was a mayor of Jodhpur district for which there should be significant coverage about the subject in secondary sources to establish notability. On WP:BEFORE, i found that almost all sources about him are about joining BJP and due to being close aide of former cm Ashok Gehlot. This subject fails WP:GNG and WP:NPOL TheSlumPanda (talk) 08:24, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hostile government takeover (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Article of dubious notability, having been rejected multiple times. It appears that the rationale is "not meet wp:NSONG. This article needs some input as to whether it should deleted or not, because there are sources that contribute to notability but it might not be just enough. ToadetteEdit (talk) 07:49, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

this source contains daily dot deadline billboard and indy100. all of these are credible sources. although some of them are not considered to be credible sources in the credible sources list by themselves. However all 4 of those sources contribute to notability. The msn source is actually Distractify which I did not realize is a very short article. the yahoo entertainment source is actually from a source called mandatory. Mandatory is a fairly unknown source but it does talk extensively on Hostile government takeover. There is also the official Last Week Tonight episode that was mentioned in the deadline article. This may be unnecessary because the deadline article talks about it extensively. The Resetera source may not be necessary which is why it's marked in bold. it has an embed of the original video around the time the TikTok was first made and is useful since TikTok doesn't give upload dates. I think hawk tuah only has 9 sources if you don't include the source that cites it's youtube video. Cradleofcivilization (talk) 07:59, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
there is an additional source that can be used which is moby's remix of Hostile Government takeover. however sources on it aren't credible so the original TikTok would have to be sourced. Cradleofcivilization (talk) 08:01, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. This page is a mess (name not being properly capitalised, MSN/Yahoo cited instead of the original source, talk page content put on top of the article), but there's sufficient sourcing in "non-trivial, published works appearing in sources that are reliable, not self-published, and are independent from the musician or ensemble who created it". Cortador (talk) 08:16, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    thank you. the original sources for the msn(Distractify) and yahoo entertainment(Mandatory). hopefully that doesn't change your mind. Cradleofcivilization (talk) 08:23, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
50 State quarter mintage figures (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Pre-nomination research (WP:BEFORE):
Before submitting this nomination, I carefully followed the steps outlined in Wikipedia:BEFORE to search for reliable sources that could demonstrate the notability of this topic. I began with a search on Google News (https://www.google.com/search?q=50+State+quarter+mintage+site )to check for any substantial media coverage of the 50 State quarter mintage figures. Most of the results turned out to be either official press releases or brief mentions, and I could not find any in-depth or independent reporting focused specifically on the mintage data. I also consulted JSTOR (https://www.jstor.org/action/doBasicSearch?Query=50+State+quarter+mintage&so=rel) to see if there were any academic publications on this topic. However, the search yielded no relevant results. Finally, I reviewed the official United States Mint website, but this is considered a primary source and does not qualify as independent secondary coverage under Wikipedia’s standards. Reason for deletion:
Based on my research, I believe this article does not meet Wikipedia’s general notability guideline (WP:GNG). There is no significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources that would establish the subject’s notability. The article relies almost entirely on primary data from the U.S. Mint, with no substantial secondary analysis or commentary. Additionally, the article does not meet Wikipedia’s verifiability policy (WP:V), which requires that information be supported by reliable, independent, published sources. Given the lack of such sources, I believe this article should be considered for deletion. Although the 50 State Quarters program itself is notable, the specific mintage figures alone do not seem to attract independent attention significant enough to justify a standalone article under Wikipedia's guidelines. Cuicuizan (talk) 07:06, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Grand National Unity Party (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This article does not meet the general notability guideline (WP:GNG) nor the specific criteria for political organizations (WP:POLITICALPARTY). The Grand National Unity Party appears to be a minor political entity with minimal lasting impact and lacks significant coverage in reliable, independent sources. Most of the references are primary or fail WP:RS. Therefore, I believe this article should be deleted. Kim jong min (hanyang) (talk) 06:52, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Very minor non-notable South Korean political party. An editor from Mars (talk) 07:36, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Dreaming Tree (café) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I propose the deletion of this article because it fails Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies). I searched for sources using Google News, JSTOR, Naver News, and reliable Korean news databases. I could not find any in-depth, independent secondary coverage. The article mostly relies on trivial mentions and promotional sources. The cafe's concept may be interesting, but there is no evidence that it has received significant attention from reliable sources that are independent of the café. This does not meet Wikipedia's requirements for verifiability and notability. Therefore, I believe the article should be deleted. LookatmiWiki (talk) 06:45, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Non-notable South Korean café. An editor from Mars (talk) 07:21, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Cho Hee-soo (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I have conducted a WP:BEFORE search to assess the notability of this article. I searched in Google, Naver News, and English-language Korean news sources including The Korea Herald, Yonhap News, and KBS World using both English ("Cho Hee-soo rhythmic gymnast") and Korean ("조희수 리듬체조") keywords.

The only results available are routine coverage from sports result listings and minor announcements in domestic outlets. There are no significant independent sources that offer in-depth coverage or analysis of the subject.

According to WP:NSPORTS (Wikipedia:Notability for sportspeople), an athlete is presumed notable if they have "received significant coverage in multiple, reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject." Cho Hee-soo has not met this threshold. The article does not demonstrate lasting impact or significant coverage beyond simple event participation.

Therefore, I believe this article does not meet Wikipedia's general notability guideline (WP:GNG) nor the specific guideline for athletes (WP:NSPORTS) and should be deleted. Jeong seolah (talk) 06:10, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Caracas Ibero-American Film Festival (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Promo for non notable festival. Lacks coverage in independent reliable sources. Lots of announcements, PR and listings but not independent coverage. One of multiple promo pieces for Francisco Villarroel and his creations made by the same spammer. duffbeerforme (talk) 03:39, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Two Autumns in Paris (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Promo for non notable film. Lacks coverage in independent reliable sources. No sign of any reviews. Being screened at minor festivals and winning minor awards does not satisfy NFILM. One of multiple promo pieces for Francisco Villarroel and his creations made by the same spammer. duffbeerforme (talk) 03:38, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Per the reasons you have just said. An editor from Mars (talk) 04:27, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Tango Bar (2024 film) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Promo for non notable film. Lacks coverage in independent reliable sources. No sign of any reviews. Being screened at minor festivals and winning minor awards does not satisfy NFILM. One of multiple promo pieces for Francisco Villarroel and his creations made by the same spammer. duffbeerforme (talk) 03:37, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Previous AFD Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tango Bar (2021 film). duffbeerforme (talk) 03:46, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Surely this is a hoax article. As the AFD discussion @Duffbeerforme linked above, it had a deletion back in 2021 but with has been put back up only with 2024 replacing the 2021 in it's title. An editor from Mars (talk) 06:19, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Personally, I think IMDB got fooled by this article. An editor from Mars (talk) 06:21, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Looks like it was in production in 2021 and finally got released in 2024 which explains the two different dates. duffbeerforme (talk) 06:46, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Francisco Villarroel (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Promo for non notable filmmaker. Lacks coverage in independent reliable sources. No sign of any reviews for his films. Having his films screened at minor festivals and winning minor awards does not satisfy FILMMAKER. One of multiple promo pieces for Villarroel and his creations made by the same spammer. duffbeerforme (talk) 03:35, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Biomimicry Institute (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This is one of the most elaborate cases of WP:REFBOMBing I've seen.

This article on a small nonprofit has an astonishing 46 well-formatted references, which has kept it safe the last 15 years.

I've just finished going through all 46 and discovered:

  • 8 are to the organization's own website(s)
  • 4 are Medium.com blogs
  • 3 are to trade / business media outlets (e.g. Sustainable Brands) that may be RS but (as is customary) we typically treat as WP:ROUTINE and don't contribute to meeting WP:N
  • 4 are fleeting mentions of the organization in local daily newspapers in reference to a contest it sponsored
  • 2 are to company or organizational websites that (e.g. The Sierra Club) that might be RS for limited reference but don't contribute to WP:N
  • 25 are RS, including scholarly journals, that don't mention the organization at all! (they mention the discipline of biomimicry and would be appropriate for that article, but are apparently used here merely to fluff the references section of the article)

My WP:BEFORE fails to redeem this organization and it fails the WP:GNG. Chetsford (talk) 00:06, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • I believe (though not 100%) that European Journal of Natural Sciences and Medicine is a predatory journal. It doesn't appear to be indexed by anyone, has not been cited by anyone according to Scimago, and their publication options require fee payment [46]. Chetsford (talk) 05:55, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, plicit 02:40, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as Not Notable per the careful analysis by Chetsford. There is no substantial coverage; presumably the neatly-formatted references are the result of paid editing. "A beauteous garden, but by vice maintain'd". Chiswick Chap (talk) 16:43, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
NewsBreak (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

NewsBreak is not nearly notable enough for a Wikipedia page, they do not have enough articles/news information about them to even expand the page further than it is now. There is nothing SIGNIFICANT about this; per Wikipedia guidelines for Notability, to determine if a topic merits its own article, it requires significant coverage in reliable, independent sources that are not self-published or promotional. And so far, this article is WP:UNDUE, ONE Rueters article covers an entire paragraph. No notability. OhNoKaren (talk) 01:28, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Can't you see? That article literally has local in it's opening paragraph! Well, I mean... You can see that. Everyone with vision can see that. An editor from Mars (talk) 04:23, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Notability is not determined by how big of an area a news organization covers. We have hundreds of articles on daily newspapers that publish local news. Iiii I I I (talk) 08:35, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep – I found several secondary sources that span a good period after a brief search:
Plus Chinese-language articles from secondary sources:
Plus many reliable sources covering Reuters' June 5, 2024 article, which shows newsworthiness:
I don't see a problem with that paragraph citing just one source, considering 1) the source is Reuters, which is reliable, and 2) the article in question is an in-depth, long-form investigative piece. Iiii I I I (talk) 07:55, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
ElderTreks (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The company is not notable per WP:NORG. I have done a WP:BEFORE and found no sources. CF-501 Falcon (talk · contribs) 01:09, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete Agree with nominator. The only sources I have found are articles on travel for older people that mention eldertreks as an option. No in-depth, significant coverage of the company
Anonrfjwhuikdzz (talk) 01:20, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I also agree with you, the nominator. Also, per the reasons @Anonrfjwhuikdzz has said above. An editor from Mars (talk) 04:26, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Sara Matsui (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:GNG; subject is not notable yet. Additionally, WP:MINORS applies here, given that she is only 14. Subject has the potential to become notable within the next couple years, and therefore I have no prejudice against the recreation if/when she becomes notable. GalacticVelocity08 (talk) 00:41, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Draftify:A well made point, I'm fine with karters having drafts, but it'll take a while for them to get into single-racing and it is a bit difficult to judge potential in karting imo. Matsui is an academy member as well and her results are good, so getting an F1 Academy and F4 seat in the future is a bit more likely. BurningBlaze05 (talk) 07:32, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I considered this, but I did not want to make the nom too long so I didn't include it.
The main issue with draftification is that it could still be a year or two until she makes it into single seaters, and she might not even be notable at that point. The draft would end up sitting for a long time. GalacticVelocity08 (talk) 15:19, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Wikipedia should not have articles about random fourteen year olds who have competed in incredibly minor sporting events. I am begging the people who keep making these sorts of articles to gain some basic WP:COMMONSENSE and understand how creepy it looks to make articles compiling a load of information about children they don't know. At most notable for WP:ONEEVENT (connection to a driver academy) and even then is basically just mentioned on a WP:ROUTINE level as a part of the churn of coverage of said driver academies. WP:NOTDATABASE applies here. HumanBodyPiloter5 (talk) 11:03, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Warren Bryant (executive) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This completely unsourced article on a CEO and previously serial executive reads like a very condensed version of a resume. An impressive resume, but not an encyclopedic one. BD2412 T 00:26, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete Not finding any WP:SIGCOV specifically about the subject. There is a decent amount of material mentioning him in the sale of Longs Drugs to CVS, but that seems to be his most notable event in business. Otherwise just a fairly standard executive/board member type.
Anonrfjwhuikdzz (talk) 01:15, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Cody Bragg (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Subject does not appear to meet the WP:GNG due to a lack of WP:SIGCOV. Let'srun (talk) 00:02, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete No sources outside USL. Non-notable American soccer player. An editor from Mars (talk) 04:03, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  1. ^ Mahotsav, Amrit (21 January 2025). "Shyam Sunder Vyas". Azadi Ka Amrit Mahotsav, Ministry of Culture, Government of India. Retrieved 4 April 2025.