This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to France. 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|France|~~~~}} 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 France. 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 Europe.

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

• WikiProject Deletion sorting/France/archive

• See also: Wikipedia:France-related topics notice board

Scan for France related AfDs Scan for France related Prods Scan for France related TfDs

Wheere (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 nominating this article for deletion because it was created by the company’s founder in violation of WP:COI and WP:NPOV. The article appears promotional and lacks significant independent coverage to establish WP:NPOV. No reliable secondary sources provide substantial coverage of the company beyond routine funding announcements and press releases. NenChemist (talk) 04:42, 28 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. NenChemist (talk) 04:42, 28 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Technology, and France. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:38, 28 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thomas Paire (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 have significant news coverage and fails, even tough he has completed ATP main draw, but still does not meet WP:NSPORT or WP:TENNIS RolandSimon (talk) 09:26, 27 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Sportspeople. RolandSimon (talk) 09:26, 27 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Tennis and France. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:44, 27 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete, fails WP:GNGCanary757 (talk) 12:20, 27 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• I've found [1] [2] [3] in a quick search from French langauge sources. They are more than the passing mentions you would see if they were reporting on his more notable brother, but I can't do a full analysis as I don't speak French and the last 2 of these appear to be paywalled. Iffy★Chat -- 13:21, 27 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  If this AfD isn't going to keep this article, we should redirect or merge to Benoît Paire as a suitable WP:ATD. That article currently has 0 mention of his family, background or personal life and could do with expansion regardless of what happens here. Iffy★Chat -- 13:28, 27 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Comment The first source is a curious article with a handful of sentences about him, much of which is taken from his facebook account and his young child is described three times in quick succession. Very little info about his tennis career, describes it as a 'great career' but little else. It sems to say he has a career high ranking of 111 but the ATP site says 1111. I don't think we have enough at the moment to be honest. Redirect seems fair if there is no consensus to keep at the end of the week though. Canary757 (talk) 14:54, 27 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

List of wars involving Bengal until 1971 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

A WP:POVFORK & WP:POVSPLIT of List of wars involving Bangladesh, in order to evade the WP:NLIST and anachronistic issues [4]. Possibly a sock creation as well [5]. – Garuda ^Talk! 19:16, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, History, Military, Bangladesh, China, Myanmar, Nepal, India, Assam, Bihar, Maharashtra, Odisha, Tamil Nadu, Tripura, Uttar Pradesh, West Bengal, Denmark, Norway, Portugal, and United Kingdom. – Garuda ^Talk! 19:16, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: France and Netherlands. – Garuda ^Talk! 19:24, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Pakistan and United States. – Garuda ^Talk! 19:26, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Rajasthan, Jammu and Kashmir, and Karnataka. – Garuda ^Talk! 19:27, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - There was a suggestion in the talk page of the List of wars involving Bangladesh suggesting the creation for this page. I don't see how this is a POV Fork, there is no particular point of view within this page, everything is from a neutral point of view. Thorough research was put in to include every war and battle, no defeats or victories were kept hidden as to push a certain perspective. Longsword4 (talk) 19:37, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes a poor proposal by a blocked sock, which really means nothing. By POVFORK we infer: bypassing the problems of an article by creating a new one, without actually addressing the issues raised. In this case the issues are notability and anachronism. – Garuda ^Talk! 21:26, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - This is not a means of bypassing anything as I did not create or partake in the creation of the original additions of the List of wars involving Bangladesh nor do I have any affiliation to it. I have been browsing Wikipedia on and off for the past few years and decided to make this account to make the List of wars involving Bengal until 1971 page. I thought that because I had prior experience editing Wikipedia from a few years ago that it would be easy, especially as this page is just a list. The issue of anachronism was flagged because of the the wars being on a page about Bangladesh and how Bangladesh is a relatively new construct. There were also no sources indicating anything about Bangladesh, all sources were pointing to Bengal as a whole. This is why, along with that person's suggestion, I decided to make the page. Now concerning anachronism and notability, I do not believe this page is another page based off of anachronism because there are books such as The History of Bengal or The Rise of Islam and the Bengal Frontier, 1204–1760 and Land of Two Rivers: A History of Bengal from the Mahabharata to Mujib that explicitly use the term Bengal while referring to it's history and wars such as Ancient, Late and Early medieval Bengal. Longsword4 (talk) 19:45, 27 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - I'm somewhat confused by this nomination. The nominator has fought to keep wars prior to the foundation of Bangladesh off List of wars involving Bangladesh yet objects to them being in another article. I don't see how this can be a POVFORK/SPLIT as a different time period is covered. If List of wars involving Bangladesh limits itself to events since the formation of Bangladesh, then events prior to the formation being covered in another article is not unreasonable. --John B123 (talk) 22:10, 27 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Vogue la galère (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)

Film article sourced entirely to IMDb. Not clear this passes WP:NFILM or WP:GNG. This was one of tens of thousand of stubs created by Lugnuts, and after the WP:ARBCOM outcome of that case it was determined those could be deleted by WP:PROD. However, rather than go that route, I decided to bring it here for discussion in case the community feels this might be salvageable. Best.4meter4 (talk) 04:57, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. 4meter4 (talk) 04:57, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of France-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:10, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• [Redirect to Raymond Rouleau] [is warranted]. -Mushy Yank. 08:29, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  [Rather] Keep. See below. I didn't have time to check sources as I should..... -Mushy Yank. 20:46, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment: I'm finding some mention of this in Google Books, in snippet view here and here, but I'd need someone with access (and fluency) to really give a better look at one. The first does appear to be a review as Google translate shows that part of what shows up in the search gives an opinion/interpretation of the film. This one does as well.

That aside, I'm seeing more promising results for the play the movie is adapting, like this, this, this, and this. I get the impression the film is probably notable, but coverage is kind of buried by time and the play seems to be more notable. My recommendation, if people are amenable to it, is to change this from an article on the film to an article about the play, where we cover the film in passing. ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (｡◕‿◕｡) 14:09, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I would support that direction if someone is willing to take that project on.4meter4 (talk) 20:07, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There is signifiant coverage in reliable sources, some reproduced here for example: http://php88.free.fr/bdff/image_film.php?ID=7085. I'd rather keep this but the play, Aymé's first (https://www.lemonde.fr/archives/article/1951/12/14/marcel-ayme-avec-vogue-la-galere-lance-une-revolte-une-querelle-classique-et-deux-jeunes-comediens_2069923_1819218.html) if I am not mistaken, should also have a page.-Mushy Yank. 21:17, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

ReaderofthePack, your second link is not about the film, it's about the play (1948). -Mushy Yank. 23:00, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep: Per Mushy Yank, deleting this article doesn't make sense. It appears promising and has potential, but it needs additional sourcing and improvement. Afro 📢Talk! 05:39, 28 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

LightOn (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)

More promo nonsense about a non notable organization. It's all WP:MILL at best. CUPIDICAE❤️ 22:37, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - The article needs work, but I found more reliable sources, such as this technical paper, this news article, this magazine article, and this journal article. Z. Patterson (talk) 22:53, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and France. Shellwood (talk) 23:37, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - This company has been mentioned in independant and reliable sources. While not sufficient, it is also a publicly traded corporations listed on a major stock exchange Pollockito (talk) 15:11, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Poolside AI (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)

More "upstart" vanity spam - utterly non notable at this point. nothing in the way of in depth coverage and the passign mentions are...exactly that. CUPIDICAE❤️ 22:33, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment - The article needs work, but I searched for this entity on Google News, and I found this Bloomberg article, but I cannot find academic journal articles on the subject. Z. Patterson (talk) 23:07, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Comment - I could not find academic journal articles specifically about Poolside AI, but I found two technical papers that briefly mentioned it. This technical paper only mentions a Poolside AI employee as a credit, and this technical paper mentions Poolside AI as a statistic. Other than that, I cannot find WP:SIGCOV in the academic journals and technical reports. Z. Patterson (talk) 23:12, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and France. Shellwood (talk) 23:37, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:22, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - This company has been mentionned in various independant and reliable sources. It is also quite a significant AI company in term of valuation (3B$). Pollockito (talk) 15:42, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Pollockito: Please drop the sources you are talking about so we can assess it Warm Regards, Miminity (Talk?) (me contribs) 14:53, 27 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, here are some of them :

• Les Echos - Video Reportage about Poolside -[[6]]

• Usine Nouvelle - Dedicated article - [[7]]

• Bloomberg - Dedicated article - [[8]]

• MIT Technology Review - mentioning poolside as a major AI company - [[9]]

• Fortune - Dedicated article - [[10]]

• Silicon Angle - dedicated article - [[11]]

• Financial Times - mentioning poolside as a major AI company - [[12]]
• Business Insider - dedicated article - [[13]]
• Geekwire - mention - [[14]]

Pollockito (talk) 16:16, 27 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Gael Mabiala (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; I did some searching and was not able to find significant coverage in any reliable source Joeykai (talk) 02:48, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and France. Joeykai (talk) 02:48, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: I am unable to find any WP:SIGCOV of the subject. JTtheOG (talk) 06:57, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete – Fails in WP:GNG. Svartner (talk) 08:37, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. GiantSnowman 19:05, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. GiantSnowman 19:12, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Damien Marie (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; I did some searching and was not able to find significant coverage in any reliable source Joeykai (talk) 02:47, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and France. Joeykai (talk) 02:47, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. GiantSnowman 19:05, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. GiantSnowman 19:12, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete not notable.--Loewstisch (talk) 14:50, 27 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Kévin Le Bras (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; I did some searching and was not able to find significant coverage in any reliable source Joeykai (talk) 02:47, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and France. Joeykai (talk) 02:47, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete – Fails in WP:GNG. Svartner (talk) 08:38, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - Hasn't played enough to have enough written about him. Fails WP:GNG – RossEvans19 (talk) 13:59, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. GiantSnowman 19:05, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. GiantSnowman 19:11, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Philippe Baden Powell (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

This is the subject of coverage by non-WP:RS and WP:BLPPRIMARY sources. No combination of multiple unrelated non-primary sources appears to provide in-depth biographical WP:SIGCOV to this subject. And he fails WP:NMUSICIAN as an alternative criterion. JFHJr (㊟) 02:25, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, France, and Brazil. JFHJr (㊟) 02:25, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I absolutely don't understand anything anymore. Three Wikipedias have an article about him, and that's still not enough. I give up.--Марко Станојевић (talk) 05:36, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment the sources in the article at the moment aren't the best, and the language is over-promotional, but the other articles in the other three languages use different sources (has anyone checked them? I don't feel qualified to go looking for Portuguese archived articles), and I'm finding quite a lot of shortish biographical bits for him that look at least slightly promising, e.g. at Jazz Music Archives [[15]] (admittedly user-contribution so probably not reliable source), Exclaim! [[16]], and JazzThing [[17]], these latter two looking useable. My feeling is that this might be a knee-jerk nomination without a full WP:BEFORE? A proper source search and assessment would be helpful. Elemimele (talk) 13:33, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment This article was less than one day old when nominated for deletion. It doesn't even have a Talk page yet! Surely it could have been tagged for needing more neutral language, more references, etc, before coming to AfD. Given that there are reviews of his albums in French, German, Portuguese and English, I think he is very likely notable. RebeccaGreen (talk) 14:31, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• CommentThank you for your comments. I just wanted to mention that English is not my native language, which might be why the articles don't look perfect. Regarding what you wrote, I would like to ask something unrelated to this article. My last three articles were literally nominated for deletion just one day after publication by the same user. This wasn't the case before. Previously, if an article didn't meet the standards, it would first be moved to draft. Has something changed that I might not be aware of?--Марко Станојевић (talk) 17:03, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  So far as I'm aware, if you move the article to main space yourself, then a new page patroller probably won't draftify it, because it would be a disputed draftification (i.e. it's assumed that you want it in main space so you are disputing it being in draft space - it's like the move equivalent of an edit war). If you submit it via AfC, then they simply won't move it out of draft space if they don't like it. If, at AfD, editors don't like this particular article, then because it has only been in main space for a short time, "draftify" is an acceptable suggestion. Articles that have been in main space for more than a certain length of time (I can't remember how long) cannot be draftified from AfD. I hope this helps, and I hope someone will correct me if I'm wrong. Elemimele (talk) 17:46, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Thank you very much for the explanation.--Марко Станојевић (talk) 18:32, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Lucien Besnard (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)

Unreferenced article. The French wiki page is tagged for sourcing issues. Not clear this topic meets WP:GNG. Was created by an editor permanently blocked for misrepresenting sources/adding unverifiable or false material (ie making up content). Not saying that is what happened in this particular article, but that past history makes the need to verify this content/source the article more pressing than in other cases if we are going to keep this in main space. 4meter4 (talk) 00:16, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. 4meter4 (talk) 00:16, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Theatre, and France. Shellwood (talk) 00:57, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Looking at BnF alone tells me that he is notable. I tried to find references, - some are still missing but I have other projects. Help wanted. The are digitilazations of some plays, others are at Google books, some won prizes, one was immediately made a silent film. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:47, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep I have found and added a few sources from Google Books. Looking at Newspapers.com, I see that reviews of his plays were published in papers in Cleveland, Ohio in 1927 [18], London, England in 1924 [19], and Montreal, Canada in 1942 [20]. The last is in French, but the fact that there are two long reviews in English, in far-flung places, is to me a strong indication that there would be plenty of reviews published in Paris. I'll add more refs, if I have time. RebeccaGreen (talk) 14:57, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep: Added coverage Seems notable both as playwright and critic. -Mushy Yank. 22:54, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Withdrawing per WP:HEY. Thanks to RebeccaGreen and Mushy Yank for rescuing this. Good work.4meter4 (talk) 00:35, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• And Gerda Arendt, who did a lot of editing before Mushy Yank and I looked at it. RebeccaGreen (talk) 12:44, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. Passes notability with multiple reviews on subject's plays. RangersRus (talk) 14:21, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Uplike (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. It's already been prodded and deleted. Another user attempted to prod it again after its restoration, which was declined, but they never brought it to AfD. It may be worth pointing out that the obviously biased creator is a blocked sock. I see the article was also rather uncontroversially deleted from French Wikipedia a few years ago, slightly after the most recent prod attempt in enwiki (their notability guidelines seem about the same as ours), and it doesn't appear to have gotten any additional coverage since that discussion. — Anonymous 21:30, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Business, Companies, Products, Technology, and France. — Anonymous 21:30, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Nothing found in google news, google books, or newspapers.com. I added wayback machine links to two of the broken ones in case anyone else wants to do a formal source analysis, but I don't see any that check all the boxes for WP:SIRS. Most are write-ups of a few hundred words as you would expect for any start-up at a trade show/expo. [4] is a bit more detailed, but it's on what appears to be a blog that contains affiliate links. I found a few other sources: the app caught the attention of Twitter's official blog in 2015[21], the founder was interviewed in a French business journal in 2015[22], and the app was reviewed in a startup news site in 2016.[23]. Altogether though, I don't think subject meets WP:NCORP. Zzz plant (talk) 01:10, 23 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:33, 23 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. : As per nomination. Doesn't meet WP: NCORP ......Gauravs 51 (talk)

• Delete not meet GNG. --Loewstisch (talk) 14:16, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: The StartUpBeat review linked in Zzz plant's thorough search above said "It’s not going to win awards for originality" and I am seeing nothing in the article/references to indicate more than a run-of-the-mill startup proposition. Nor does the pivot to Botnation chatbots seem any more notable. Fails WP:NCORP. AllyD (talk) 16:21, 27 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nico Corti (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 independent coverage of this Belgian footballer to meet WP:GNG. JTtheOG (talk) 06:12, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, Belgium, France, California, and Texas. JTtheOG (talk) 06:12, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 09:09, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. GiantSnowman 14:03, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Our subject does not meet the notability criteria. -The Gnome (talk) 00:27, 23 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete – Fails in WP:GNG. Svartner (talk) 15:16, 23 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - Hasn't played enough to have enough written about him. Fails WP:GNG – RossEvans19 (talk) 02:34, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Diplomatie (play) (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 tagged as unreferenced since 2016. The French wiki article is also sparse in its sourcing. Not clear this work passes WP:GNG.4meter4 (talk) 00:59, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Theatre-related deletion discussions. 4meter4 (talk) 00:59, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of France-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:02, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Surely it should be obvious that a 2011 play that was adapted into a major motion picture, is widely described as a "hit" and a "success" in articles about the film (e.g. [24] [25] [26]) and has had international runs in recent years is probably going to be notable. It's somewhat difficult to separate reviews of the play from reviews of the film by the same name, but contemporary reviews of the play include these in Le Figaro, Le Monde, and Les Echos. There are also a number of reviews from its Australian run, including these: [27] [28] [29]. The play is also discussed in detail in some coverage of its film adaptation, such as this extended piece of analysis that covers both the film and the play. I'll try to find time to expand the article and add some of these sources, but this should be kept as deletion is not cleanup. MCE89 (talk) 07:18, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep: Per MCE89. Advising the nominator to do BEFOREs and not take pages to AfDs for cleanup reasons. -Mushy Yank. 09:29, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. The fact that a play, novel or whatever was made into a film does not make it notable. Where did it premiere? How many people have ever seen it? Did it have any major productions? None are described in this article. I would say that before someone posts an article to Wikipedia, they sould be required to add at least some sources that cover basic information. Nothing would be lost by deleting this sad stub, which is entirely repeated in the film article. -- Ssilvers (talk) 18:48, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, per sigcov identified by MCE89. I have edited the page to include 4 sources and a bit more detail. Zzz plant (talk) 19:58, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Don Juan in Hell (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)

Not clear that this passes WP:NFILM or WP:GNG. Relies entirely on primary materials and IMDb.4meter4 (talk) 22:13, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film and Spain. Shellwood (talk) 22:19, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep: Significant awards and nominations, including one Goya win for best actor. Just check the sources on the corresponding articles in Spanish and French. Can we stop these cleanup nominations, please? https://www.elmundo.es/especiales/2006/01/cultura/goya/actores/guillen.html https://web.archive.org/web/20160305044259/http://www.cinecec.com/EDITOR/premios/palmares/1990.htm -Mushy Yank. 23:23, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Theatre and France. -Mushy Yank. 23:24, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. It does not seems like a cursory search for sources has been carried out in advance of the AfD request. --Asqueladd (talk) 09:36, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Following recent edits, this seems notable. Spartathenian (talk) 19:12, 23 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per WP:HEY. Bearian (talk) 13:37, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per @Asqueladd's improvements to the article. Madeleine (talk) 01:00, 28 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ange Auguste Joseph de Laborde de Boutervilliers (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

WP:NOTMEMORIAL and WP:NOTINHERITED. Accomplishments and sources are lacking. Clarityfiend (talk) 03:44, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, France, and Alaska. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:12, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge to Jean Joseph de Laborde, Marquis of Laborde, his more notable father. I do see coverage of Ange Auguste Joseph in [30], but its very much in the context of his father. (Édouard Jean Joseph de Laborde de Marchainville should likely get the same treatment.) Jfire (talk) 00:42, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:21, 27 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Wikipedia:WikiProject France/Article alerts, a bot-maintained listing of a variety of changes affecting France related pages including deletion discussions