Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2024 December 15
- Spirit of the Stones (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, only a single review is mentioned on Lemon 64. Searching for sources came up with numerous magazine advertisements for the game, but no actual reviews of it besides the mentioned one, making it likely to not be notable. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 13:11, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 13:11, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
- Rugby School Japan (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 is about a branch of Rugby School, only opened a year ago. I think that it is WP:TOOSOON for it to be likely to meet WP:GNG or WP:NCORP, and indeed I cannot find significant coverage in reliable, independent sources. There was an article in The Rugby Advertiser in 2019 about the planned school, but this is local coverage and about a third of the article was a statement from Rugby School. There was an interview with the head in Relocate magazine, but I am not sure that this is a reliable source - the magazine's About talks about sponsored content. There is this article in the Sustainable Japan section of the Japan Times, which is a reliable source, but again it is mostly an interview. There is also an article from the British Chamber of Commerce in Japan, but this is not an independent source. I added a section on overseas branches to Rugby School, and redirected this article there, but another editor reverted this; so bringing it here for the community's view. Tacyarg (talk) 11:30, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education, Schools, Japan, United Kingdom, and England. Tacyarg (talk) 11:30, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Merge to Rugby School. There is also a Rugby School Thailand which should really be considered together to avoid trainwrecks. Can that be added to this nomination? These are new ventures that purportedly are creating overseas campuses of Rugby school. Rugby is clearly notable, but the only thing making these other sites notable is the Rugby name, which is a clear case of WP:INHERITED. They are, per nom., too new to have gained any independent notability. They should, however, be discussed on the Rugby school page. There is mergeable content and the redirects would preserve former content and provide a pathway for readers to locate the relevant information in the relevant parent article. Spinout could occur if and when they become independenltly notable. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 12:03, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, I had redirected Rugby School Thailand too - having put brief details of both schools in the Rugby School article first - but that was also reverted. I had considered AfD for that too, but have not yet had time to carry out WP:BEFORE for that branch and it has been going longer (2017) so there may be more coverage, so was holding off on that. Happy for it to be bundled with this discussion though if people want. Tacyarg (talk) 12:26, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
RottenTomato0222 speaking here: I think both articles should NOT be deleted and be kept as independent articles for the following reasons: Though not many readers might recognise either Rugby School Japan or Rugby School Thailand, some teachers/families who are intended to move to those schools have the need to read about that school online whether if they're reading it on Wikipedia or not. Second of all, just because there's not a lot of articles dedicated to Rugby School's branches in Asia compared to the original school, there are tens of articles online discussing about Rugby School Japan and Rugby School Thailand, so we actually do have loads more to write on the article. Third of all, just because the article's discussion is not widely discussed doesn't mean that the article has to be deleted. As mentioned earlier before, there are people who really needs to read those articles. In addition, other world-famous school from the UK like Harrow School's branches in Asia have seperate articles on Wikipedia; like Harrow International School Bangkok, Harrow International School Hong Kong, Harrow International School Beijing, etc.. Furthermore, other UK boarding schools' branches in Asia other than Harrow School all have an article as well, for example; Haileybury Almaty, Marlborough College Malaysia, and Dulwich College Beijing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RottenTomato0222 (talk • contribs) 12:44, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- It might look a bit messy and have some grammatically incorrect sentences or structures as I was writing that on a hurry. RottenTomato0222 (talk) 23:24, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- WP:OTHERSTUFF is an argument to avoid at AfD, although here it raises an interesting question. Is this school a campus of Rugby School itself, or is it an international school in the way the Oxford International Schools (or Harrow) international schools, where these are legally independent private schools that affiliate to and adopt the syllabus of the affiliating body (e.g the Oxford Education group)? What is the legal arrangement? The page as it stands reads as if this is a campus of Rugby (which is a reasonably common arrangement, more so for universities). But if it is not really part of Rugby at all, but a legally independent private school that is permitted to use the Rugby name then a lot of what is on the page would necessarily be deleted and it is likely (as for a the Oxford International Schools) that there would not be notability of r an article as it would fail WP:NORG. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 09:10, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
- Answering your question, the legal arrangement is that Rugby School Japan is an independent private school, just like many other franchise schools. RottenTomato0222 (talk) 09:56, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
- Hope that helps. RottenTomato0222 (talk) 09:56, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
- But the school was set up by Rugby School? Looking at RSJ's website, it says
Rugby School Japan is proud to be part of the Rugby School Group, an international network of pupils, teachers and senior leaders
. The website for the original Rugby School saysRugby is in the process of developing a family of Rugby schools around the world, following the successful establishment of Rugby School Thailand
. So should there be an umbrella Rugby School Group article, if notability is met, and then if we don't find RSJ notable, it can be mentioned there and a redirect in place? Tacyarg (talk) 11:18, 9 December 2024 (UTC)- Rugby School Japan, or should we call it RSJ, was indeed established by Rugby School, but that doesn't mean RSJ is part of Rugby School's campuses. In contrast, Harrow International School Bangkok for example, was established by a British private school, but still has a Wikipedia page on its own, rather than being merged with Harrow School. The reason is simple; going back to the Rugby Schools Group, that is a brand of a school set up by Rugby School, though their schools are still independent. Another reason; many British private schools in Asia might have opened under the name of their original school in the UK, but the operator of the school in Asia are different. RottenTomato0222 (talk) 13:26, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
- It appears that this was not established by Rugby School at all. It is a venture of Clarence Education Asia [1], who seem to have funded the school and then partnered with Rugby School Group. This is a similar structure used by the Oxford Schools. The school is therefore not a campus of Rugby but an independent sister school that is licensed to use the Rugby name and branding, and follows a Rugby School Group curriculum. What this means is that it is a private for profit independent school. The appropriate notability guidelines are WP:NORG. My searches do not find independent sources that meet WP:ORGDEPTH, so we are still not at a keep here. The question is only whether an appropriate merge target can be found. I think there is still a case for a merge with Rugby School under a section called either "sister schools" or "Rugby school group". The alternative is there could be a Rugby School Group article per Tacyarg, and that could then cover all such schools. Failing these alternatives, my view is that it should be deleted as it currently lacks independent notability, but my preference is merge somewhere, and Rugby School remains my preference. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 14:39, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
- Exactly, Rugby School Japan is an independent school, either if Rugby School established it or not. Any school can be made into an article, even if it's operated under the name of another institution, unless the whole building is a campus of Rugby School, for example. RottenTomato0222 (talk) 08:30, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
- It appears that this was not established by Rugby School at all. It is a venture of Clarence Education Asia [1], who seem to have funded the school and then partnered with Rugby School Group. This is a similar structure used by the Oxford Schools. The school is therefore not a campus of Rugby but an independent sister school that is licensed to use the Rugby name and branding, and follows a Rugby School Group curriculum. What this means is that it is a private for profit independent school. The appropriate notability guidelines are WP:NORG. My searches do not find independent sources that meet WP:ORGDEPTH, so we are still not at a keep here. The question is only whether an appropriate merge target can be found. I think there is still a case for a merge with Rugby School under a section called either "sister schools" or "Rugby school group". The alternative is there could be a Rugby School Group article per Tacyarg, and that could then cover all such schools. Failing these alternatives, my view is that it should be deleted as it currently lacks independent notability, but my preference is merge somewhere, and Rugby School remains my preference. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 14:39, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
- Rugby School Japan, or should we call it RSJ, was indeed established by Rugby School, but that doesn't mean RSJ is part of Rugby School's campuses. In contrast, Harrow International School Bangkok for example, was established by a British private school, but still has a Wikipedia page on its own, rather than being merged with Harrow School. The reason is simple; going back to the Rugby Schools Group, that is a brand of a school set up by Rugby School, though their schools are still independent. Another reason; many British private schools in Asia might have opened under the name of their original school in the UK, but the operator of the school in Asia are different. RottenTomato0222 (talk) 13:26, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
- But the school was set up by Rugby School? Looking at RSJ's website, it says
- Hope that helps. RottenTomato0222 (talk) 09:56, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
- Answering your question, the legal arrangement is that Rugby School Japan is an independent private school, just like many other franchise schools. RottenTomato0222 (talk) 09:56, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
- WP:OTHERSTUFF is an argument to avoid at AfD, although here it raises an interesting question. Is this school a campus of Rugby School itself, or is it an international school in the way the Oxford International Schools (or Harrow) international schools, where these are legally independent private schools that affiliate to and adopt the syllabus of the affiliating body (e.g the Oxford Education group)? What is the legal arrangement? The page as it stands reads as if this is a campus of Rugby (which is a reasonably common arrangement, more so for universities). But if it is not really part of Rugby at all, but a legally independent private school that is permitted to use the Rugby name then a lot of what is on the page would necessarily be deleted and it is likely (as for a the Oxford International Schools) that there would not be notability of r an article as it would fail WP:NORG. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 09:10, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 12:52, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
- Sean Reed (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)
unnotable darts player, fails GNG and WP:SPORTCRIT. All my warmest wishes, ItsKesha (talk) 10:20, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Darts, and Australia. Shellwood (talk) 13:23, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
- Craig Ross (darts player) (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)
unnotable darts player, fails GNG and WP:SPORTCRIT. All my warmest wishes, ItsKesha (talk) 10:19, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
- Keep. This from Stuff is clear sigcov. Further coverage from the Dominion Post and again in same indicate he's of at least regional notability. ser! (chat to me - see my edits) 11:39, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Darts, and New Zealand. Shellwood (talk) 13:23, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
- Fabian Roosenbrand (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)
unnotable darts player, fails GNG and WP:SPORTCRIT. All my warmest wishes, ItsKesha (talk) 10:13, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Darts, and Netherlands. Shellwood (talk) 13:24, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
- Frans Devooght (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)
unnotable darts player, fails GNG and WP:SPORTCRIT. All my warmest wishes, ItsKesha (talk) 10:12, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Darts, and Belgium. Shellwood (talk) 13:25, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
- Glenn Moody (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)
unnotable darts player, fails GNG and WP:SPORTCRIT. All my warmest wishes, ItsKesha (talk) 10:10, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Darts, and England. Shellwood (talk) 13:26, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
- Michael Barnard (darts player) (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)
unnotable darts player, fails GNG and WP:SPORTCRIT. All my warmest wishes, ItsKesha (talk) 10:09, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Darts, and England. Shellwood (talk) 13:27, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
- Davyd Venken (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)
unnotable darts player, fails GNG and WP:SPORTCRIT. All my warmest wishes, ItsKesha (talk) 10:07, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Darts, and Belgium. Shellwood (talk) 13:24, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
- Kevin Voornhout (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)
unnotable darts player, fails GNG and WP:SPORTCRIT. All my warmest wishes, ItsKesha (talk) 10:07, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
- Keep. Decent (but not astonishing) coverage available in RTV Noord, Dartfreakz, RTV Noord again and ED, indicating he's at least regionally notable. ser! (chat to me - see my edits) 11:31, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Darts, and Netherlands. Shellwood (talk) 13:27, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
- Ram Vishwakarma (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 reliable sources are available on google, I also tried searching in Regional languages but got nothing. Fails WP:GNG and WP:ANYBIO. Taabii (talk) 09:40, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Medicine and India. Taabii (talk) 09:40, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
- Ancillary weapon (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:DICDEF with no evidence it passes notability criteria. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 09:32, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Military and Technology. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 09:32, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
- Mobile development framework (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)
Cruft-magnet - unsourced and out of date list containing original research. Long tagged as such and nothing has been done to address the issue. Doesn't look as if there's anything of value to preserve by moving to other articles. 10mmsocket (talk) 16:26, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. 10mmsocket (talk) 16:26, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 09:17, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
- Cornish Bakehouse (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)
Did a before search, and it seems all coverage is WP:CORPTRIV: "standard notices, brief announcements, and routine coverage, such as: [...] of the opening or closing of local branches, franchises, or shops". Jonathan Deamer (talk) 08:47, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 09:49, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 09:50, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 09:50, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 09:50, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 09:16, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
- Farakka Port (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 existence of this port is questionable due to a serious lack of sources. A Google search yields no results for the so-called "Farakka Port". The cited sources in the article refer instead to a Farakka inland waterway, used for transporting coal to the Farakka Super Thermal Power Station near the Farakka Barrage. It seems it is actually referring to a floating terminal listed here. In any case, the topic fails to meet WP:GNG. The Doom Patrol (talk) 09:01, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Transportation, India, and West Bengal. The Doom Patrol (talk) 09:01, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
- 2009 Aéro-Frêt An-12 crash (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)
Per WP:NOTNEWS and WP:EVENTCRIT. Per WP:GNG, "sources should be secondary sources, as those provide the most objective evidence of notability". From what I've been able to find, none of the sources were secondary in nature since none of them contained analysis, evaluation, interpretation, or synthesis of the event itself. The event does not have significant, in-depth, nor sustained continued coverage with coverage only briefly occurring in the aftermath of the accident. No lasting effects or long-term impacts on a significant region have been demonstrated. WP:EVENTCRIT#4 states that routine kinds of news events including most accidents – whether or not tragic or widely reported at the time – are usually not notable unless something further gives them additional enduring significance, which this event lacks. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 08:11, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Aviation, Transportation, and Democratic Republic of the Congo. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 08:11, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 08:02, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
- Think it's enough to keep. Some news, large and well-known kind of aircraft crashing with fatalities. Hyperbolick (talk) 08:42, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
- Whatever the aircraft type and whether the accident had casualties or not is not an argument based on Wikipedia's notability guidelines. There was news coverage, but that alone is not a reason to keep. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 09:59, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
- Votorantim Novos Negócios (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 This article was created by the sockmaster User:Edson Rosa. They have created many non-notable companies.
This was previous nominated for deletion but had no consensus. I am nominating this again as there's no justification so far to give the subsidiary its own article when article of parent Votorantim Group already exists. Imcdc Contact 06:56, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Finance, Organizations, Companies, and Brazil. Imcdc Contact 06:56, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, not eligible for Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 07:12, 8 December 2024 (UTC)Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 08:01, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
- Phiwa Nkambule (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)
So this article was created by Phwaice who seems to be a WP:COI user judging by username and behavior. The article was previously nominated for deletion and the consensus was to redirect to a company article that is now deleted due to lack of notability. The article was then reverted by Carloschilo who also seems to have COI behavior.
The issue is this article from a quick glance seem to be nothing more than a PR puff piece for the subject which is basically WP:PROMO. There’s also issue of notability. The vast majority of sources are basically brief mentions of the subject. You have some which are interviews, so they are not independent. The subject is mentioned in a few lists, but these again seem more like mentions and not really in-depth.
This article probably needs to be rewritten from scratch to comply with Wikipedia standards. That’s assuming we get enough independent in-depth sources of notability. Imcdc Contact 03:41, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Businesspeople, Business, Technology, and Africa. Imcdc Contact 03:41, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Imcdc Contact 02:02, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
- As previously stated my focus is primarily on articles of subjects linked to Eswatini, which are not many unfortunately as the country on has a 1 million population. This country is extremely under-covered. Here are a few examples that show notability of the subject:
- 1. https://www.google.co.za/books/edition/Entrepreneurs_Who_Changed_History/vAbnDwAAQBAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=phiwa%20nkambule%20entrepreneurs%20who%20changed%20history&pg=PT958&printsec=frontcover
- 2. https://www.google.co.za/books/edition/Simple_Algorithms/-IdeEAAAQBAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=phiwa%20nkambule%20simple%20coding&pg=PT23&printsec=frontcover
- 3. https://www.forbesafrica.com/cover-story/2019/10/14/forbes-africa-8-years-and-growing/
- 4. https://www.forbesafrica.com/under-30/2018/06/04/under-30-technology/
- 5. https://www.google.co.za/books/edition/Autonomic_Computing/nozJEAAAQBAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=phiwa%20nkambule&pg=PA1946&printsec=frontcover Carloschilo (talk) 09:42, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
- All the sources above so far seem to be mainly about another subject but has a brief mention on the current nominated subject with most of them just stating his role founding non-notable companies. Also AFD consensus shows lists like Forbes 30 Under 30 is not considered a reliable source in establishing notability since every year there are 1,230 people under 30 years old placed on the list so it gives the impression it is more of a promotional tool. Notability should not be driven by being on the list although some of the objective information may be used to provide further context on the subject. Imcdc Contact 02:02, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
- Comment So now there are three pages affiliated with the subject that are now deleted due to lack of notability. Looks a bit like a WP:WG - Imcdc Contact 04:53, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, not eligible for a Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 08:00, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
- The Lance (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Does not meet notability requirements. There is nothing in the article to establish notability of this student newspaper, and there is no coverage in non-local sources. Note that The Lance published its last newspaper issue in 2019. The official website (which was updated in a 2020 edit) is for a student news blog with the same name. Johnj1995 (talk) 03:40, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: News media and Canada. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:34, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Delete No reason for this to be kept. This0k (talk) 18:49, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, not eligible for a Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 07:59, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
- List of Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute fraternities and sororities (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 meet the WP:NLIST as there is a lack of independent third party coverage providing significant coverage of the grouping. PROD was removed but the issues with the article remain, so bringing it to AfD. Let'srun (talk) 03:38, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fraternities and sororities and New York. Let'srun (talk) 03:38, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Comment. This 1914 book about the history of the college does go into the history of the fraternities at the school. College publications marketed to perspective college students feature the Greek life aspect of the school prominently: [2], [3], etc. Occasionally, the school gets mentions in academic studies on Greek Life like [4], [5], [6], [7], [8], [9], [10], [11], [12], [13], Greek life is clearly an important part of this school's campus experience.4meter4 (talk) 05:33, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 07:12, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Keep: This article has secondary sources throughout. One is Baird's Manual, the primary source about Greek letter organizations for more than 100 years. Another is the Almanac of Fraternities and Sororities, created and maintained by academics and published by the University of Illinois. Regarding, WP:NLIST, that is covered via the Almanac, which provides information by institution. I don't have access to the cited edition of Baird's, but it probably includes information by institution as well. In addition, when the data set is itself notable, combining that group meets standards for stand-alone list articles. Consider, for example, a list of notable alumni from a college; there is rarely a secondary source that covers that list of people, but the included alumni are individually notable.
- Since several of these institutional GLO lists have recently been nominated for deletion, it is worth noting that these articles exist as a part of an agreement between WP:UNI and WP:FRAT. The former felt that complete lists of GLO were too much detail for university articles and the latter liked the ability to expand the level of detail, as in the way this article provides details about each GLO. This level of detail appears to be moving this list article toward the direction of University of Virginia fraternities and sororities, which is GA status. With that in mind, this article should be seen as a work in progress that can be moved from list article status, either as is or at a later date. Rublamb (talk) 16:59, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 03:37, 8 December 2024 (UTC)Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 07:58, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
- Comment There has been no adequate reason for this being relisted when the responses (even when not bolded) have been for keep giving guideline-based reasons and the nomination itself being vacuous. We should not treat low quality nominations as having credibility. Thincat (talk) 12:54, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
- Shalini Passi (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)
Unable to see enough SIGCOV to meet WP:NARTIST, WP:GNG or WP:ACTOR. LKBT (talk) 07:49, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Artists, Women, India, and Delhi. LKBT (talk) 07:49, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
- Comment: This nomination is a case of WP:6MONTHS. The previous nomination was closed just four days ago (on 11/12) with a consensus to "Keep."--— MimsMENTOR talk 13:01, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
- Port of Port Klang (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)
Port of "Port" Klang? It is a WP:CFORK of Port Klang, a leading port under the government-owned Port Klang Authority. See Google Books, Britannica and Google News. The Doom Patrol (talk) 07:06, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Transportation and Malaysia. The Doom Patrol (talk) 07:06, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
- Merge to Port Klang, as information should be included in article about port. Djflem (talk) 07:35, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
- Biometric Consortium (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Non-notable program. Per a WP:BEFORE], there is no WP:SIGCOV, only routine coverage of conference announcements. Longhornsg (talk) 05:37, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Military and United States of America. Longhornsg (talk) 05:37, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
- Dorsey Road Warehouse (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Non-notable logistics warehouse for the National Security Agency. The NSA likely has hundreds of such warehouses to store equipment, most of which do not pass WP:GNG, like this one. Longhornsg (talk) 05:31, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Military and United States of America. Longhornsg (talk) 05:31, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
- Saiyar Mori Re (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)
Unable to find independent sources with significant coverage. The existing sources about and around "Saiyar Mori Re" are mostly routine coverage and paid PR/brand content, failing WP:NFSOURCES. I am also unable to find the minimum number of full length reviews, so it fails WP:NFILM entirely. The sources mentioned in the previous XfD are paid PR, as evident from the bylines and reviews from unknown websites/blogs. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 15:33, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Artists, Film, India, and Gujarat. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 15:33, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- Why was this added to the Actors and Filmmakers list? It's a film not a person. -Mushy Yank. 19:15, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
- Keep: See precedent AfD and arguments presented by User:DareshMohan, for example. A redirect seems warranted anyway (same comment) so that I am opposed to deletion. -Mushy Yank. 19:01, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- Freelance journalist/blogger, Brand promoted content and an article from an unknown website with no byline? Can you please read the nomination statement and WP:NFILM guideline once again and consider revising your rationale to a policy based one instead of how you feel about deletion? Here are some more PR articles that they have given out: [14], [15], [16] Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 20:30, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- Can you please read DareshMohan's argument? Gujarat is not a "country" but I consider the film meets NFILM's inclusionary criterion #3, if you really wish me to provide a link to a guideline. I'll stand by my !vote, if I may. I've added a couple of things to the page, rapidly. -Mushy Yank. 20:59, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- All you have added so far is just brand promoted content, routine coverage and passing mentions with no bylines. Nearly five years on Wikipedia, yet how you interpret WP:NFIC to fit your own views is astonishing.
- Here, "distributed domestically in a country" means distributed within India. This film didn't see the light outside Gujarat and we are not maintaining a database of films released in India, but rather of notable films released in India. Comparing WP:NFIC#3's weight of a film being released/distributed domestically in a country is nowhere close to that of a film being distributed within a state. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 05:10, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- "didn't see the light outside Gujarat" is an absurd rationale. Indian cinema, being the largest producer of films globally, comprises multiple industries based on language and regional distinctions. The subject here being included in the Gujarati cinema, though less prominent than its counterparts like Bollywood or Tollywood, is still a significant part of this spectrum. Drawing a comparison between Gujarati cinema and the broader, more commercially dominant segments of Indian cinema is flawed. Keep in mind that Wikipedia:Notability is not a level playing field. — MimsMENTOR talk 07:44, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Don't bring essays here. If you want to change existing policies, start an RFC at Wikipedia talk:Notability (films).
- The current guidelines only support films that are successfully distributed domestically in a country that is not a major film-producing country. You have contradicted yourself by mentioning "Indian cinema, being the largest producer of films globally". WP:NFIC#3 does not apply to major film producing countries and if Saiyar Mori Re were a significant part of this spectrum, it would have received reviews in reliable sources. Instead, it only has paid PR. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 07:57, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Keep your tone out! this is a discussion space, essays, statements, facts and all are legit here. — MimsMENTOR talk 09:26, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- "didn't see the light outside Gujarat" is an absurd rationale. Indian cinema, being the largest producer of films globally, comprises multiple industries based on language and regional distinctions. The subject here being included in the Gujarati cinema, though less prominent than its counterparts like Bollywood or Tollywood, is still a significant part of this spectrum. Drawing a comparison between Gujarati cinema and the broader, more commercially dominant segments of Indian cinema is flawed. Keep in mind that Wikipedia:Notability is not a level playing field. — MimsMENTOR talk 07:44, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Can you please read DareshMohan's argument? Gujarat is not a "country" but I consider the film meets NFILM's inclusionary criterion #3, if you really wish me to provide a link to a guideline. I'll stand by my !vote, if I may. I've added a couple of things to the page, rapidly. -Mushy Yank. 20:59, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- Freelance journalist/blogger, Brand promoted content and an article from an unknown website with no byline? Can you please read the nomination statement and WP:NFILM guideline once again and consider revising your rationale to a policy based one instead of how you feel about deletion? Here are some more PR articles that they have given out: [14], [15], [16] Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 20:30, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- Keep: It seems the nominator has completely overlooked sources from TOI and other reputable outlets (which still lack full consensus on reliability). With that, giving an additional consideration and collectively reviewing the coverage's from the sources from TOI, TOI 2, TOI 3, One India and from the Gujarati media: navgujaratsamay, gujaratheadline and abtakmedia as well as the film's feature at the International Gujarati Film Festival 2023 is enough for notability.--— MimsMENTOR talk 09:17, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- TOI - Interview / Not independent / Pre-release coverage - Jun 14, 2022 (Part of PR)
- One India - Partner content as indicated at the top - July 14, 2022 (Part of PR)
- navgujaratsamay - Press release from trailer launch - Jun 27 (Part of PR)
- gujaratheadline - Same as navgujaratsamay article / Press release from trailer launch - Jun 25 (Part of PR)
- abtakmedia - Same as above / Press release from trailer launch - July 04, 2022
- International Gujarati Film Festival 2023 - Trivial mention / no awards
- None of the above news media outlets covered or reviewed the film after its release. It seems you have overlooked both the sources and the nomination rationale. Would you mind sharing your source analysis below? Mims Mentor Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 11:14, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- @Jeraxmoira Before diving into a source analysis, could you clarify or provide evidence for your claim that each of all sources mentioned are "(part of PR)"? — MimsMENTOR talk 11:33, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- The lack of coverage following the film's release is sufficient evidence. Apart from that, the OneIndia article is marked as "Partner Content". As for the trailer launch, inviting all the news media is standard practice and has been done this way consistently. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 11:39, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- I see your point about the "partner content", I do agree with that. However, when I emphasized the need for "collective reviewing" and "additional consideration" of the sources. I recognize that the coverage may not be strong enough to 'firmly keep' the article, but your own analysis doesn't solidly push for deletion either, leaning more towards WP:BARE. As for PR evidence, there isn't concrete proof to back up that claim you made (when you are talking about policies). Pre-release/press release (earned media) coverage isn’t inherently promotional, and reputable outlets like TOI often feature pre-release interviews without the coverage being purely PR-driven. — MimsMENTOR talk 12:40, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- You are bringing in more essays to XfDs. Please understand that essays are not P&G and hold no significant value in XfDs. The TOI sources are insufficient for a standalone article, especially given that there are literally zero reviews available. There are three articles about the trailer launch featuring the same banner image, yet you believe this isn't sufficient evidence that the press was invited to the event. The sources here are nowhere close to meeting GNG or NFILM. If you disagree, please provide a source analysis that might help me better understand your point of view. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 13:16, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Essays arent binding, but they offer relevant interpretations in debates like XfDs, especially for borderline cases. Dismissing them outright doesnt negate their value in offering nuance. The TOI sources, while not extensive, still provide verifiable coverage. Prerelease coverage is common, even for non-blockbuster films. Moreover, you havent fully explained why multiple outlets covering the same trailer launch definitively proves PR involvement. The case is WP:BARE now. I believe I’ve made it clear what aspects of the discussion align with GNG, based on policy guidelines. The nominator seems fixated on a single point and dismisses valid considerations by labeling them "essays," which is unproductive. Since the conversation is going in circles, I’ll be stepping back. I suggest exploring more sources from Gujarati media to verify additional coverage of the film instead of narrowing the focus to a single angle.--— MimsMENTOR talk 14:07, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- So, no source analysis? Cool. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 14:23, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Why? to count in more essay? Sorry No! — MimsMENTOR talk 15:02, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- So, no source analysis? Cool. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 14:23, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Essays arent binding, but they offer relevant interpretations in debates like XfDs, especially for borderline cases. Dismissing them outright doesnt negate their value in offering nuance. The TOI sources, while not extensive, still provide verifiable coverage. Prerelease coverage is common, even for non-blockbuster films. Moreover, you havent fully explained why multiple outlets covering the same trailer launch definitively proves PR involvement. The case is WP:BARE now. I believe I’ve made it clear what aspects of the discussion align with GNG, based on policy guidelines. The nominator seems fixated on a single point and dismisses valid considerations by labeling them "essays," which is unproductive. Since the conversation is going in circles, I’ll be stepping back. I suggest exploring more sources from Gujarati media to verify additional coverage of the film instead of narrowing the focus to a single angle.--— MimsMENTOR talk 14:07, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- You are bringing in more essays to XfDs. Please understand that essays are not P&G and hold no significant value in XfDs. The TOI sources are insufficient for a standalone article, especially given that there are literally zero reviews available. There are three articles about the trailer launch featuring the same banner image, yet you believe this isn't sufficient evidence that the press was invited to the event. The sources here are nowhere close to meeting GNG or NFILM. If you disagree, please provide a source analysis that might help me better understand your point of view. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 13:16, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- I see your point about the "partner content", I do agree with that. However, when I emphasized the need for "collective reviewing" and "additional consideration" of the sources. I recognize that the coverage may not be strong enough to 'firmly keep' the article, but your own analysis doesn't solidly push for deletion either, leaning more towards WP:BARE. As for PR evidence, there isn't concrete proof to back up that claim you made (when you are talking about policies). Pre-release/press release (earned media) coverage isn’t inherently promotional, and reputable outlets like TOI often feature pre-release interviews without the coverage being purely PR-driven. — MimsMENTOR talk 12:40, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- The lack of coverage following the film's release is sufficient evidence. Apart from that, the OneIndia article is marked as "Partner Content". As for the trailer launch, inviting all the news media is standard practice and has been done this way consistently. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 11:39, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- @Jeraxmoira Before diving into a source analysis, could you clarify or provide evidence for your claim that each of all sources mentioned are "(part of PR)"? — MimsMENTOR talk 11:33, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Comment: These sources can be used to write an article, but they certainly do not meet the standards required to establish GNG and there are no sources available after the film's release. Regarding WP:NFILM, there are literally no reviews for this film, despite it being released in the internet era. The fact that all the sources below greatly appreciate the film, its songs, trailer and its success, yet none of them have published a review, is quite amusing.
Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 17:05, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Delete - WP:NEWSORGINDIA applies to many of these references. The sources assessment shows these to not be reliable as far as notability is concerned. --CNMall41 (talk) 18:15, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
- Delete. Source assessment table is thoroughly convincing. Dclemens1971 (talk) 21:20, 14 December 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 05:17, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
- Section 108 (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)
Upcoming film that doesn't meet WP:NFF. Could be moved to draft space, but there's nothing in the article to show how this meets NFF. Ravensfire (talk) 04:20, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film and India. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:04, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
- Keep. Move to draft space or display maintenance tags for more verified sources which are available. WP:NFF state
Films that have not been confirmed by reliable sources to have commenced principal photography should not have their own articles ..
. However, this article provide information albeit from an individual's point of view. In addition [17] provide some context as well. QEnigma (talk) 05:37, 15 December 2024 (UTC) - Keep: meets NFF with the coverage about production; filming has started and is well advanced, premise known, cast confirmed, production issues mentioned. Even if it is never released it would remain a sufficiently-notable production. -Mushy Yank. 12:25, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
- Keep: Since we cannot enforce NFF to movies which have reliable sources confirming the start of principal photography/production after filming began, deletion is not warranted.--— MimsMENTOR talk 13:14, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
- Conrad Stargard (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 books series in which this fictional character exists could be notable, but there is no good indication that he himself is. The only source I found that seems to talk about him is this book review [18]. Badbluebus (talk) 02:46, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements, Science fiction and fantasy, and Literature. Badbluebus (talk) 02:46, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Keep if you don't dispute that the book series is notable, then it should be rescoped to be on the book series, as we have no article on the series. That is what is usually done with old articles like this, scoped around the main character instead of the series, which we have some of - and as far as I can tell, the name of the series is just this character's name. Most of the plot material can be kept, it just needs to be shuffled around. And have reception to the series added. There are reviews of the books on ProQuest, so it is notable. PARAKANYAA (talk) 02:54, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 02:41, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
- Al-Khair University (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)
It does not meet the criteria of WP:ORG or WP:GNG. The article was deleted in 2020 and recreated in 2021, but in my view, the school has not achieved sufficient notability to justify recreating the article. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 02:27, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Companies, Education, Schools, and Pakistan. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 02:27, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
- Victoria Leigh Soto (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)
Discussed in the aftermath of the shooting at Talk:Victoria_Leigh_Soto/Archive_1#Should_we_merge_this_article_with_Sandy_Hook_Elementary_School_shooting? but looking back 12 years, I don't see any sustained notability independent of the shooting nor material that couldn't be summarized at Sandy_Hook_Elementary_School_shooting#Legacy. Bringing here v. requested merge as it's a subject deserving of broad consensus. Star Mississippi 01:14, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Crime, and Connecticut. Star Mississippi 01:14, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators and Women. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:35, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
KEEP - This article should be kept because she was a notable heroric teacher.She has since been hailed as a hero. She is a posthumous recipient of the Presidential Citizens Medal.Plans and petitions to honor her by name via scholarships, roads, and schools were announced in late 2012 and 2013.In 2013, Acero Victoria Soto High School opened in Chicago, Illinois. The Nutmeg Big Brothers Big Sisters organization created the "Victoria Soto Volunteer Award" in honor of Soto, who was a former Nutmeg mentor.In June 2013, a playground in Long Brook Park in Stratford was named the "Victoria Soto Memorial Playground" in her honor. Only a notable heroric person like would have been honored as such. Tony the Marine (talk) 02:20, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
- Keep -- it's a one-event article, which would normally be a delete, but sometimes the one event generated enough external notable citations AND a really well cited and written article that this side overrides (it's not at the same level, but Lee Harvey Oswald is certainly a one-event person as well). The article shows external notability after the event with a school named after her, a playground, and an award. The one-event was so big as to require multiple subsidiary articles to contain all the independent coverage, and this is one of those (well-dritten) articles. Keep -- Michael Scott Asato Cuthbert (talk) 08:10, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
- Redirect and selective Merge to Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting per WP:BIO1E and WP:Victim. Mztourist (talk) 10:29, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
- I agree. She gave her life for her students like Jesus Christ gave His life for the whole world. This article should be kept because no one who didn't know her personally won't get to know what she did. This page is like a memorial to her for those who won't get to see her gravesite. Kellygirlaj (talk) 17:52, 14 December 2024 (UTC)
- Note -Victoria Leigh Soto sacrificed her life by covering her students with her body, therefore she safed the lives of many of them.
Had this been a act in the military, she would have been awarded the "Medal of Honor". However it was a heroic civiian act and as such her heroism as been recognized by the president and her community therefore making her notable. If every "Medal of Honor" recipient has an article, then she should also have hers. Tony the Marine (talk) 23:06, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
- No, it is the second-highest civilian award in the United States, so not equivalent to the Medal of Honor. Also it was a joint award with 5 others. What makes Soto any more notable than any of the other 5 awardees? Mztourist (talk) 03:02, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
- Note The medal recognizes an individual "who has performed exemplary deeds or services for his or her country or fellow citizens." However among the additional recognitions which she has been awarded are the following: In 2012, Eastern Connecticut State University created the Victoria Leigh Soto Endowed Memorial Scholarship Fund, awarded to students aiming to become teachers.In 2012, the Town of Stratford renamed North Parade, adjacent to town hall, "Victoria Soto Way".In December 2012, the Stratford High School Class of 2003 established the "Victoria L. Soto Memorial Fund" in her honor. The fund helped pay for funeral services, the creation of a memorial at Stratford High School, and a scholarship fund in the name of Soto, who had belonged to the class of 2003. Yes, she is notable. Tony the Marine (talk) 01:36, 12 December 2024 (UTC)
- Yeah, we can read the page. Don't add pictures to an AFD: [19] Mztourist (talk) 04:16, 12 December 2024 (UTC)
- Note The medal recognizes an individual "who has performed exemplary deeds or services for his or her country or fellow citizens." However among the additional recognitions which she has been awarded are the following: In 2012, Eastern Connecticut State University created the Victoria Leigh Soto Endowed Memorial Scholarship Fund, awarded to students aiming to become teachers.In 2012, the Town of Stratford renamed North Parade, adjacent to town hall, "Victoria Soto Way".In December 2012, the Stratford High School Class of 2003 established the "Victoria L. Soto Memorial Fund" in her honor. The fund helped pay for funeral services, the creation of a memorial at Stratford High School, and a scholarship fund in the name of Soto, who had belonged to the class of 2003. Yes, she is notable. Tony the Marine (talk) 01:36, 12 December 2024 (UTC)
- No, it is the second-highest civilian award in the United States, so not equivalent to the Medal of Honor. Also it was a joint award with 5 others. What makes Soto any more notable than any of the other 5 awardees? Mztourist (talk) 03:02, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
- Keep WP:BIO1E is a
general rule
that admits exceptions. This is one of them. Rather than thinking of it as something that should be wedged into the article about the event, we should regard it as a reasonable spinoff. XOR'easter (talk) 00:40, 10 December 2024 (UTC) - Keep. The main article is very long as is, and this is on a notable subtopic. BIO1E isn't end-all be all and there is enough material for an individual article. PARAKANYAA (talk) 01:53, 12 December 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, hoping to see some policy-based arguments. Having a playground named after a subject doesn't establish notability as defined on Wikipedia.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 02:18, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
- Keep and Ignore all rules for this genuine selfless hero who knowingly traded her own life to save the children. She wasn't just a person who happened to be in the wrong place and got shot. She deliberately put herself in harm's way trying to save those children. — Maile (talk) 03:29, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
- Keep She is a hero and got a award for trading own life. Clearly notable. RealStranger43286 (talk) 05:24, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
- Jalal khel (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)
Another administrator said that a clan (tribe) is not subject to WP:A7. I disagree, but I'm not 100% sure, so I'm nominating it for deletion. I have no idea how to evaluate whether a clan meets WP:GNG. I suspect, though, that others in the community are more knowledgeable. Bbb23 (talk) 00:44, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Ethnic groups, Afghanistan, and Pakistan. Shellwood (talk) 01:38, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Comment The above article mentions Jalal Khel or Jalalkhel clan is a sub-division of Mahsud Wazir larger
Pashtun tribe. In my brief search, I saw this.....Mehsuds and Wazirs, the King-makers in a game of thrones on khyber.org website...Ngrewal1 (talk) 06:17, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Merge this stub with Mahsud if the information in it is verifiable. – Jonesey95 (talk) 21:38, 14 December 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting to see if there is more support for a Merge.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 02:09, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
- Terry Blade (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)
Nominated on behalf of a non-autoconfirmed user claiming to be the article subject:
Does not meet Wikipedia criteria for notability BladeTerry (talk) 01:09, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
— Special:Diff/1263157720
I am the subject of this article, Terry Blade.
— Edit summary of Special:Diff/1263146142
I am the subject of this article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terry_Blade. I don't think it meets the notability criteria for an article on Wikipedia. The article is semi-protected. I'd like to request that an editor nominate it for deletion please? BladeTerry (talk) 01:04, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
— Special:Diff/1263156892
~ ToBeFree (talk) 01:15, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Bands and musicians, and United States of America. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 01:15, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
- Keep. There are enough sources here to merit an article per WP:GNG. The context of this AFD attempt is that I created a sockpuppet case page at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Roberteditor, tying together a bunch of IPs and some socks that have been editing the Terry Blade bio and related pages. Two hours and change later, User:BladeTerry registered the username to delete the bio. My guess is that the history of socking is what BladeTerry wants deleted. Binksternet (talk) 08:31, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
- Bhutabali (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 has only written a single text, apart from which, there is no other biographical information available. Hence, low notability. Not many WP:RS mention the subject. Moreover, the same information as on this page is also available on the page Satkhandagama. Tagging other active users of this project and those who responded to a similar AfD previously: User:RJShashwat, User:Goyama, User:Expectopatronum30, User:TheAstorPastor. To fellow editors: please feel free to not respond if you didn't wish to be tagged here. I apologize for the same. ParvatPrakash (talk) 00:46, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. ParvatPrakash (talk) 00:46, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
- Delete — Per nominator. Not seeing notability… or rather, not seeing the RSs to support alleged notability. Semi-merger or merger with Satkhandagama should be considered. MWFwiki (talk) 01:16, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Religion and India. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:00, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
- If there aren't more sources redirect to Satkhandagama. PARAKANYAA (talk) 03:03, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
- I couldn't find any more sources. Whichever I found only state that he wrote Satkhandagama, nothing more than that. I couldn't find any other biographical information about him. ParvatPrakash (talk) 03:08, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
- Delete: No notability except authorship of Satkhandagama. Didn't find any personal information about him that would enhance his biography. Goyama (talk) 07:08, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
- Dongergah (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 Wikipedia:Notability (geographic features), is unsourced, is an orphan, and is dedicated to a god with virtually no coverage outside of wikipedia. The place doesn't even had coordinates. Gaismagorm (talk) 00:02, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Architecture, Hinduism, and Chhattisgarh. Gaismagorm (talk) 00:02, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
- Merge with the already existing article of Dongargarh as this article fails to meet WP:NGEO and WP:GEOFEAT. QEnigma (talk) 05:56, 15 December 2024 (UTC)