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

Adding a new AfD discussion

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

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

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

Removing a closed AfD discussion

Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.

Other types of discussions

You can also add and remove other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Massachusetts. For the other XfD's, the process is the same as AfD (except {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName}} is used for MFD and {{transclude xfd}} for the rest). For PRODs, adding a link with {{prodded}} will suffice.

Further information

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

This list is also part of the larger list of deletion debates related to US.

Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at:

• WikiProject Deletion sorting/Massachusetts/archive

Digital Guardian (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)

Entirely promotional and no establishment of WP:SUSTAINED notability using WP:RS. Amigao (talk) 17:23, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Software, and Massachusetts. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:14, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Robert J. Blackwell (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:SIGCOV. I tried finding sources, and I was able to find lots of WP:PRIMARY materials in presidential libraries, government websites, and in government publications. The best secondary source I found was this one in The New York Times but so much of it is quoting what people said, including Blackwell, and not independent reporting/analysis it's difficult to know whether this too shouldn't be considered a primary document as well. I was unable to locate any source that wasn't PRIMARY that gave a big picture overview of Blackwell. Altogether, couldn't find enough to demonstrate WP:GNG is met.4meter4 (talk) 04:27, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Military, Florida, Massachusetts, and New York. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:37, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Melvin Coombs (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:VICTIM. Also can not be solved by simply renaming to Murder of Melvin Coombs. The murder itself fails WP:EVENTCRIT.4meter4 (talk) 02:23, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: Non-notable individual dying under unclear circumstances, the other person was not guilty. I'm not seeing notability. A simple natural death. Oaktree b (talk) 02:30, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Dance, Crime, Massachusetts, and Rhode Island. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:52, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Notability not found. Xxanthippe (talk) 09:23, 11 January 2025 (UTC).[reply]

Comment: I don’t know why WP:VICTIM is being invoked here because that very clearly is not the claim to notability? While he is not notable as a murder victim and the murder itself is not notable, The claim to notability is of him as a Native American dancer. That he happened to be killed doesn’t seem to be the notability claim (not mentioned in the lead, little to none of the article is about it). We should be evaluating off NBASIC or GNG. The sources in the last AfD aren’t nothing, but eh. While being murdered doesn’t make a non notable person notable, just the same being murdered does not make a notable person NOT notable PARAKANYAA (talk) 17:58, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@PARAKANYAA That's because the sources don't support notability in a different context. There aren't any sources with significant coverage about him as a dancer or educator. The one source pre-death used mentions the subject as participating at the Quinnehtukqut Rendezvous & Native American Festival and then gives a brief passing interview with the subject about the festival, but this is neither in-depth nor significant and arguably not independent as its an interview about a different topic. All of the sources where he is the primary subject involve him as a victim and occur after his death. The "Melvin Coombs is not forgotten" piece is primarily about a grand jury, and while it mentions what he did in other contexts, it is clearly a memorial piece about his killing. We would have to see coverage external to coverage of his death and the subsequent court cases to prove notability outside his death, and that just isn't the case. The sources don't exist. As such WP:VICTIM is the cogent policy which tells us he isn't notable because of this lack of sourcing external to his death. 4meter4 (talk) 18:22, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@4meter4 I’m not saying the other sources are enough for notability in any context (I have not checked yet which is why I haven’t voted) but it’s strange to me to use the rationale when it’s not the claim to notability. Will check later and then vote (from what I’m seeing I assume my vote will be delete but I am away from the computer at the moment lol) PARAKANYAA (talk) 18:30, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete after checking for sources, little outside of local coverage, even right when it happened, and what local coverage is there is not particularly extensive. The search was quite annoying because this is not a rare name, but I could not find much, though there were some prior hits it was not helpful. As the nominator states the crime is not notable either. PARAKANYAA (talk) 21:09, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Jonah Herscu (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 am unable to find enough in-depth coverage of this assistant basketball coach to meet WP:GNG. The most I found was coverage from his days as a high school basketball player (1), which I think would fail WP:YOUNGATH anyways. JTtheOG (talk) 02:31, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Basketball, Illinois, and Massachusetts. JTtheOG (talk) 02:31, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Stanley Lieberson (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 cited to a staff biography at Harvard and a paid obituary in the Boston Globe (not a staff written one). Neither of these are independent. Fails WP:GNG.4meter4 (talk) 05:26, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Speedy/snow keep. The nomination does not mention the relevant notability guideline of WP:NPROF, which the subject here clearly passes multiple criteria of. Sourcing could be better -- the Harvard source in the article doesn't work for me, but this one does [1], the AAAS membership is verified here [2] -- but as usual, WP:DINC. Russ Woodroofe (talk) 05:50, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Social science, Canada, Illinois, Massachusetts, and New York. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:53, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy keep WP:SK3, completely erroneous nomination that fails to even consider the correct notability criteria, WP:PROF and WP:AUTHOR, noting also that PROF notability is not about independence of sourcing. This stub manages to pack in five separate and unambiguous claims of WP:PROF notability: named professor at Harvard (at a time when that meant much more than it might today), member of NAS, Amacad, and the American Philosophical Society, and president of the American Sociological Association. The Harvard link (visible in archive [3]) gives even more, including another fellowship, two more presidencies, and a very likely pass of WP:AUTHOR even before looking for book reviews. —David Eppstein (talk) 08:01, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy keep per criterion 3 (lack of accurate rationale in nomination) and passing both WP:AUTHOR and multiple criteria of WP:PROF. XOR'easter (talk) 20:20, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Withdrawing per WP:HEY as well as the cogent remarks above. Article has been majorly improved by Vycl1994 in particular. Clearly meets the SNG criteria provided by others above. Thanks to those who improved the article. Good work.4meter4 (talk) 20:25, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy keep I share the views of above voters. Gedaali (talk) 14:21, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Kevin Thurm (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 relies entirely on one source which is the website of the foundation which the subject directs. With zero independent sources, fails WP:SIGCOV.4meter4 (talk) 21:05, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. 4meter4 (talk) 21:05, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 21:37, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Law, England, and Massachusetts. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:28, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete unless the article sees improvement. He's held roles where it's possible that WP:GNG-worthy coverage about him and his work might exist, so I'm willing to reconsider if somebody with the necessary resources can actually find enough of that to improve the article to a keepable standard, but he hasn't held any role that would be "inherently" notable enough to exempt him from having to pass GNG — and since the article has existed for 6.5 years without ever having a whit of GNG-worthy sourcing added at all, we can't simply assume that better sourcing exists than anybody has bothered to show. Bearcat (talk) 18:05, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Not notable and article itself is very weak. Go4thProsper (talk) 00:22, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Maddelynn Hatter (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 relies on blogs, self-published podcasts, and non-independent sources. Fails WP:SIGCOV. Additionally, fails WP:BLP1E as everything revolves around competing on a television show.4meter4 (talk) 03:35, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I did not expand this redirect, but I removed the bad sources and added a few more sources + claims to the article. I'd say there's probably enough coverage to stitch together a decent biography about her early life, career, and personal life, but IF the subject is deemed not notable then please just redirect the page to The Boulet Brothers' Dragula season 3. The page serves a purpose and there's no need to delete the article history. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 04:11, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Television, Photography, Sexuality and gender, Massachusetts, and New York. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:15, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep based on the additional text that's recently been added. I think there's room to expand this. If there's insufficient support for keep, I would also settle for a merge with the Dragula article. Lewisguile (talk) 08:15, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep per GNG. I've added several more sources and think the entry should be expanded and improved, not deleted ---Another Believer _(Talk) 14:58, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: does not appear to meet WP:ENT, no valid secondary sourcing. Interviews do not count, nor do blogs or Youtube. Mamani1990 (talk) 02:17, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Danielle Etrasco (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 am unable to find anything approaching WP:SIGCOV for this American lacrosse player. JTtheOG (talk) 03:01, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Women, Massachusetts, and New York. JTtheOG (talk) 03:01, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Question for JTtheOG are these any good? [4], [5], [6] The second one in particular has a fair amount of information about her. Lookslikely (talk) 18:59, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. None of the sources above are independent—the first says it is from press releases, and the other two are governing sports orgs. No other coverage turns up beyond press releases, mentions in routine announcements and recaps, and quotations from her in her capacity as an assistant coach. The large majority of the 80 hits on PQ are reprints of the same high school game recaps in local news, which are especially disallowed from counting toward notability. Even her college and national team appearances garnered little more than passing mentions like Danielle Etrasco and Katrina Dowd both had hat tricks; anything beyond that was inevitably coming from the University Wire. JoelleJay (talk) 21:21, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Harvard Ichthus (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)

Can't find WP:SIGCOV for this, article mostly relies on primary sources. Side note, the article's tone is also a little inappropriate for an encyclopedia; makes persuasive arguments. seefooddiet (talk) 02:22, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Journalism, News media, Schools, and Massachusetts. seefooddiet (talk) 02:22, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 07:23, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment. No independent sources have been provided. Almost all the links are to this publication's own website. The only one that isn't is a broken link to the Harvard University website, which, I suspect, used to be a listing of this publication as being a student organization. But that would only establish existence, not notability. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 23:11, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to Collegiate Network (where it is listed) as an AtD. No standalone notability here. Dclemens1971 (talk) 14:42, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting to see if there is more support for a Redirect.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:22, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: Delete or Redirect - agree with nom Asteramellus (talk) 23:46, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Watts Water Technologies (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)

OK, lets see what the references here suggest.

• Reference 1 is from GlobalData, which would at first glace appear to be a reliable source. That said, it would seem verify that a company of this name simply exists, and does not support its notability as a corporate entity
• Reference 2 simply asserts that this company is a subsidiary of Emerson Swan, an article that I can see has never been created. While not in any determinative, this would appear that a notional WP:REDIRECT from subsidiary to parent company would have negligible chance of passing a Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion.
• Reference 3 is from that respected broadsheet Foster's Daily Democrat. That said, the lack of a byline and the text "Webster Valve, Inc" suggests that it may possibly be paid content rather than journalistic content
• reference 4 is a Home Depot link that I am unable to access.
• reference 5 is a product page from Lowe's
• reference 6 is an assertion on Yahoo Finance that Watts Water Technologies is listed (as "WTS") on the New York Stock Exchange

It would appear to me that this more complex than a simple WP:A7 about a historical manufacturer of plumbing fixtures and a local company in Franklin, New Hampshire. As always, please do let me do know if you disagree, revert without an edit summary, or whatever you chose otherwise. Shirt58 (talk) 🦘 11:42, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Watts is a component of the S&P 400. That alone makes it notable. KMaster888 (talk) 12:47, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It's also not a subsidiary. KMaster888 (talk) 12:51, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep based on @KMaster888's argument

Taksoh17 (talk) 14:33, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and Massachusetts. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:29, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Nominator comment: looking back over this, it might appear to an independent observer that is an instance of the AFD process being used to basically repair an article, rather than assess it on its merits, and lacked an initial policy-based deletion rationale. Those should have included WP:CORP, WP:GNG and any number of other policies and guidelines. Heck, it looks like this to me, and I am the nominator. Shirt58 (talk) 🦘 10:20, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Think this could do with more eyes.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 16:05, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A City Dressed in Dynamite (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 album; shows no indication of notability. TheTechie@enwiki (she/they | talk) 04:34, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Albums and songs and Massachusetts. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:20, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:42, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]