This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Florida. 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|Florida|~~~~}} 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 Florida. 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/Florida/archive

Sam McCandless (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)

Been sitting in the unclear notability pile for 10+ years now, and it cites only one source that doesn't help for NBIO or GNG. There's one mag profile that doesn't go into much real depth but I guess could help, but I couldn't find anything else. WP:BANDMEMBER is pretty clear that members don't automatically inherit notability from the band, so I don't see a NMUSIC pass either. theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 06:14, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and United States of America. theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 06:14, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Florida and Georgia (U.S. state). WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:37, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to Cold (band). Plasuible redirect and it appears to be the only band he released music with. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 07:50, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect per policy. SerialNumber54129^{A New Face in Hell} 22:27, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lisette Titre-Montgomery (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 SIGCOV, I can only find 1 independent, non-sponsored, in-depth, and reliable source. Bearian, just because we're scrutinized by the public doesn't mean we need to keep articles that are not within policy. In fact, we should be making every effort to delete articles out of policy. The book user:Megalibrarygirl added (from my one-in-the-morning skim of Google Books) appears to be fairly trivial, stating facts and that's 'bout it. JayCubby 06:15, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women and Video games. JayCubby 06:15, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Artists, California, and Florida. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:35, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep: I wrote this article and there's plenty of coverage for GNG. Please look at the full set of sources the article uses. They include:

1. Changing the Equation: 50+ Women in STEM Published by Abrams 2020
2. Coverage on NPR: Changing the Game in Video Gaming 2013
3. Biography on BlackPast: [1] 2018
4. Women in Gaming 2018 DK Publishing biography
5. Business Insider from 2015 [2]
6. Gaming magazine [3] 2024
7. Biography on Centre for Computing History [4]

As shown above, the subject of the article has been noticed by important people in her field, such as the Computer History museum. The assertion that books made for general consumption are trivial is not an argument for deletion. What is a trivial book to one person is not trivial to others and can still be a good source of reliable information. Non-fiction books by large publishers (Such as Abrams) go through a good amount of copyedit and scrutiny. In addition, books for general consumption show that a person is notable in their field enough to break through to the general public which is why they are included in 2 popular reading anthologies. With all of the coverage from several sources over time, including two books, the article demonstrates WP:GNG. Megalibrarygirl (talk) 19:46, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep per Megalibrarygirl. ~ A412 ^talk! 22:53, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep I agree with Megalibrarygirl here. I saw this delete nomination and started looking through the sources. This looks pretty solid to me. An aside that normally wouldn't matter, but warrants a little mention here → Megalibrarygirl is by profession a librarian. — Maile (talk) 02:39, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment by Jay Cubby with re-formatting by Nnev66 to keep discussion consistent and hopefully easier to follow:

1. Google Books: From the pages that were available there (I couldn't find a PDF to pirate), mentions appear trivial but Google Books probably omitted lots of pages.
2. NPR: It's an interview, so not really independent.
3. BlackPast: "This entry is sponsored by Quintard Taylor" -- unless sponsored means someone made a donation to BlackPast and got their name on articles in return, I'm skeptical.
4. That book was written by Meagan Marie, at the time of that book's writing she was an online community manager (whatever that means) for Crystal Dynamics. I don't see a professional connection between Marie and Titre-Montgomery on my skim of the article. The book reads (again , from the Google Books sample) like children's pulp fiction (pixel font, headings like "♥STATS: Industry Level: 20; CURRENT CLASS: Co-Chair")
5. Business Insider: Titre-Montgomery is 23 of 23 on the list, and the portion devoted to her is short enough I can quote it without fear of running into copyright issues:
• Titre has been a video game developer for over thirteen years. A couple of months ago she landed at Ubisoft, makers of the smash hit Assassin's Creed series, as a manager in its art/computer department.
• Not only does she have a geek's dream job, but Titre has also been a tireless advocate encouraging more young women, especially underprivileged youth, to consider the gaming industry as a career.
6. GamesIndustry.biz: (see also Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/GamesIndustry.biz) From their about: "GamesIndustry.biz is the market leading website and community for news and information about the global video games industry." The article mostly consists of quotes from L-TM.
7. CfCH: No sigcov. The entirety of her bio is a whopping 124 words.

JayCubby 18:08, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment: Highlighted by CNN. Someone will probably argue with WP:NARTIST. IgelRM (talk) 19:54, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nice catch on the CNN footage. — Maile (talk) 23:14, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep per references provided by Megalibrarygirl, of which #3, #6, and #7 IMO are the strongest sources for WP:SIGCOV in reliable sources for WP:GNG. The other references provide more than passing mention. In the next week or two I'll try to see how much coverage the books have. I added info from the CNN video to the article. I'd also include "5 Top Black Women In STEM" in Black Enterprise as a GNG source. Nnev66 (talk) 16:32, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment: I still believe WP:GNG is met by sources in the article. For #3, it looks like BlackPast asks for sponsorships for all articles. Note Quintard Taylor sponsored a variety of pages, i.e. no reason to think the subject paid for the article. Regarding #6, which includes 300 words that are not direct quotes, GamesIndustry.biz appears to have editorial oversight and is referenced in other newspapers, i.e. seems like a reliable source. I had not originally included #2, the NPR "Tell Me More" interview by Michel Martin for GNG, but it does have 225 words of secondary independent commentary by the interviewer. I also believe 5 Top Black Women in STEM in Black Enterprise (let's call source #8 for this discussion) contributes to GNG, which is a bit over 200 words without direct quotes by subject. Note all of these sources are more than trivial mention. WP:SIGCOV doesn't give a word minimum to count towards GNG, just that the source "addresses the topic directly and in detail". Nnev66 (talk) 19:36, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mark Spain (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 news anchor. Only obituaries and no viable career coverage, while a real estate agent dominates name searches. Article was created by blocked editor whose objective was to promote Jacksonville TV personalities on Wikipedia. 💥Casualty ^{• Hop along. •} 04:32, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Journalism, Television, Florida, Ohio, and Virginia. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 07:21, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Fail WP:GNG (WP:NBIO / WP:JOURNALIST) criteria. Lacks WP:RS and WP:IS. QEnigma talk 11:20, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

While an understandable catch now, he just died and the community he belongs to seems grateful for the Wikipedia article. He was an TV personality for decades; deleting the article now just seems like really poor timing. I would at least wait a bit and see what comes of it. I know Wikipedia doesn't have to do this, but from what I read he died suddenly and tragically. It's been up for 13 years; it won't hurt for it to stay up for a little longer.

If marked for deletion, then https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WSET-TV#Notable_former_on-air_staff would need to be updated, and we should consider marking https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dave_Walls for deletion, as he seems to fall in the same category as Spain. I am wondering if it may be notable to add a section on the WSET-TV article about Mark Spain, as from what I researched the community went all out in purple, including notable institutions such as Liberty University. Spbooker (talk) 04:32, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Adding on, since his passing, popular outlets such as the New York Post, Daily Mail, Deadline, and People have posted about his death. He is gaining notability post-mortem, and it is impossible to tell within a week what these articles may do for his notoriety. Spbooker (talk) 01:40, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, it would be helpful to review new sources.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:36, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Patrick Bet-David (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 page was already deleted in June 2024 as it failed to meet WP:GNG. Somebody has recreated it in November 2024. Edit: having read the new sources, I am not convinced there is sufficient coverage to meet GNG. The Spectator source seems to be the only one with a focus on him, and it’s reliability seems questionable. Other editors may like to evaluate. Zenomonoz (talk) 08:13, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Businesspeople, News media, and Entertainment. Zenomonoz (talk) 08:13, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Iran-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 11:09, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment: This was passed through the WP:AFC process[5] and WP:G4 presumably doesn't apply. This doesn't mean a guaranteed keep, but it does mean that the nomination should be closed as Speedy Keep WP:SKCRIT#3 (unless Zenomonoz can update their nom with an proper rationale ref WP:DEL-REASON before someone gets to it) ^~Hydronium^~Hydroxide^~(Talk)~ 13:06, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Have updated. Thanks. Zenomonoz (talk) 02:17, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Thanks - struck. Pinging AFC reviewer Grahaml35 for comment. ^~Hydronium^~Hydroxide^~(Talk)~ 02:29, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Also pinging Snowman304 for comment, who rejected Avaldcast's initial draft for this article. Zenomonoz (talk) 04:21, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Please reiterate what the problem with the article is again?

  Notability and source reliability (original issue) was addressed after it went article creation process and was approved.

  Is the issue that it was deleted, improved and then re-approved? Avaldcast (talk) 04:30, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Avaldcast, it's quite hard for editors to evaluate the article when you were inserting reliable sources that do not even mention Patrick Bet-David. Zenomonoz (talk) 09:55, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: Same as the last two AfD, non-notable business person with passing mentions in sources. Being a podcaster isn't notable in 2024. I'd SALT at this point, three times in AfD is more than enough. Oaktree b (talk) 16:16, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: California and Florida. Skynxnex (talk) 17:14, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There was claims that the sources were not reliable but as this individual has become more notable, more reliable sources have been published. Therefore being approved despite being deleted. Avaldcast (talk) 01:57, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep : Patrick Bet-David played a notable role in the 2024 presidential election discourse by hosting significant figures such as Donald Trump on his podcast tour. His platform, Valuetainment, served as a space for Trump to engage with his base and discuss campaign messaging, drawing millions of views and contributing to public conversations about the election. Bet-David’s interviews with Trump and other political figures have been widely covered in reliable sources like Vanity Fair and The Spectator, highlighting his influence in political media. This demonstrates that Bet-David is a public figure of notability, with substantial impact on contemporary political dialogue. Avaldcast (talk) 02:32, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Notability is not inherited. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 22:01, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per Avaldcast. ChopinAficionado (talk) 21:26, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Please see my comments in the last AfD for source evaluation. Nothing has changed none of this new coverage is specifically about David, but only mentions him in passing, and the majority of sourcing is from self-published sources like podcasts which are not indicative of notability. Hemiauchenia (talk) 02:19, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  The article was approved when new articles from reputable sources were published since he interviewed President Trump and Crown Prince of Iran and other politicians and notable guests. Avaldcast (talk) 14:45, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Thanks for pinging me, Hydronium Hydroxide. I approved this article and moved to it to mainspace because of the sources that were added to the aricle with the the Vanity Fair one added very in depth coverage. With the other sources of CNBC and RealClearPolitics I felt that it passed WP:GNG. Grahaml35 (talk) 05:40, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • • • • • KEEP! Liberals hate the truth. This page must be allowed to stay.
• Comment I've had a brief look over some of the sources added by avaldcast, and they did not verify much of the content added to the article. See: Talk:Patrick Bet-David#Editing by Avaldcast. I've done tidy up, but might be helpful if other users considering this AfD could briefly check others before they decide. Zenomonoz (talk) 10:09, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Please just delete lol you have a personal issue with this person. Avaldcast (talk) 23:42, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep References in RealClearPolitics, ABC News, and Vanity Fair among others. Fernweh0 (talk) 21:32, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Fernweh0, brief mentions in RCP and ABC do not establish notability. Bet-David is not the focus of those articles. I just removed the ABC one because it didn't confirm the sentence it was cited against. The RCP source is simply a transcript of a Fox News interview, not reporting from RCP. Zenomonoz (talk) 02:33, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Can his interview on Fox News establish notability? I don't fully understand the notability rules. Fernweh0 (talk) 14:04, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  @Fernweh0: interviews are generally considered to be not independent because the subject is talking about themselves. So the interview on Fox News would not contribute to notability. TipsyElephant (talk) 20:42, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: A source analyst would be helpful at this point. User:NebulaDrift, I assume you didn't mean it when you asked for the article to be deleted. AFD discussions are a give and take between editors who hold different opinions, getting to a consensus is part of the process.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 08:48, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• keep I think its a keep because of the sources already mentioned above because as per my experience experts often say that even if its one article in a reliable source it should be good. NatalieTT (talk) 18:01, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong Keep I really don't know why this is even at AFD. Plasticwonder (talk) 18:02, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete the cited sources are nearly all from contributing writers not staff writers and many of these sources are listed at WP:RSP as being marginally reliable. For instance, the WP:SPECTATOR article is written by someone who is not even listed on the masthead. Many of the other sources are interviews with Bet-David or in some cases written by Bet-David himself, which do not contribute to his notability because they are not independent sources. TipsyElephant (talk) 08:50, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Good points. Take a look at the RCP source for example. It's not even secondary source reporting from RCP. It's just a transcript of a Fox News interview? Zenomonoz (talk) 02:39, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  In addition to being a transcript of an interview from another source, the author of the RCP source is not even listed as a staff writer on the RCP website (not sure what exactly he even wrote though, did he transcribe the interview himself?). TipsyElephant (talk) 11:24, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Strong Keep Regardless of how any of us may feel about the article itself or the subject, his notoriety makes him more than worthy of having a Wikipedia page. Frankly there are people in his field with far less subscribers and views and name recognition who've had profiles here for quite some time and without any arguments. If there are issues with the quality of the article, they can and should be addressed, but deleting the article would be foolish. Johnny Rose 11 (talk) 19:14, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  @Johnny Rose 11: would you mind linking to reliable sources that you believe demonstrate notability? Having subscribers and views and name recognition does not equal notability. TipsyElephant (talk) 19:30, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Have you people taken a look at Wikipedia lately? The "hawk tuah" girl has a Wikipedia page. Everybody with subscribers and views has a Wikipedia page. You people need to get a reality check. 118.149.67.235 (talk) 03:17, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  If you'd like to discuss the notability of Hawk Tuah feel free to do so at Talk:Hawk tuah. This page is for discussing the notability of Patrick Bet-David. TipsyElephant (talk) 11:35, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting as I still don't see a consensus. Some editors arguing to Keep are focusing on factors like subscriber numbers of podcast guests which have nothing to do with establishing notability. While they are fewer in number, editors advocating Deletion are focusing in on sources which is how we primarily determine notability in AFD discussions. An impartial source assessment table could be very useful at this point in the discussion so there can be some agreement on which sources provide SIGCOV and which ones are only passing mentions.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:48, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Strong Keep Meets WP:ENT and certainly not a WP:1E case. Has interviewed polititians and played a small role during the election. Deleting would be odd. Wikisempra (talk) 13:40, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Check here for any current CfD.

• None at present

• None at present