Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/People

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

Note: In most cases there is another, more specific category than this one.

If possible, please use one of these instead:

Note: The following pages are transcluded onto the Biography Deletion sorting page

Note: the following pages are not transcluded onto the Biography Deletion sorting page

Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Bands and musicians
Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Fashion (e.g. models)
Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Fictional elements
Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Women
Wikipedia:WikiProject Pornography/Deletion for adult film actors and actresses

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:

Edit this page 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, 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.
You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|People|~~~~}} 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.

Note that 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 links to other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to People.

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.

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

Purge page cache

watch

People

Oga Amos

AfDs for this article:

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

This was REFUNDED after soft deletion from the previous AfD. My rationale is still very much intact. This subject fails WP:GNG or WP:NCREATOR. Sources, with a partial exception of The Nation, are all paid and promotional puff. I also suspect UPE going on here. Sources from BEFORE are also paid puff. See source analysis below;

Currently on the article;

Source	Independent?	Reliable?	Count source toward GNG?
Source assessment table:
https://thenationonlineng.net/comedian-oga-amos-wins-best-skit-maker-in-ghana/	~ Even though the "win award" is true, this is paid promotional puff	~ Ditto	~ Partial
https://pmnewsnigeria.com/2024/02/25/from-content-creation-to-philanthropy-inspiring-journey-of-oga-amos/	paid promotional puff	Ditto	✘ No
https://leadership.ng/oga-amos-from-anambra-roots-to-lagos-stardom/	paid promotional puff ("Oga Amos’s commitment and talent haven’t gone unnoticed, earning him well-deserved awards that acknowledge his substantial contributions to the dynamic world of online entertainment.", really? Only one non-notable award?)	Ditto	✘ No
https://pmnewsnigeria.com/2023/01/27/oga-amos-one-of-nigerias-leading-content-creators/	Ditto	Ditto	✘ No
https://www.vanguardngr.com/2023/11/oga-amos-floats-charity-foundation-to-transform-lives-of-his-fans/	paid promotional puff	WP:NGRS, paid promotional puff	✘ No
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{source assess table}}.

From BEFORE:

Source	Independent?	Reliable?	Significant coverage?	Count source toward GNG?
Source assessment table:
https://newtelegraphng.com/oga-amos-cheers-content-creators-for-incredible-creativity/	~	~ Even though WP:NGRS, this is still dependent on the subject	This is not about him directly	✘ No
https://tribuneonlineng.com/oga-amos-floats-charity-foundation-to-transform-lives/	paid promotional puff	Ditto		✘ No
https://www.thisdaylive.com/index.php/2023/11/05/oga-amos-floats-charity-foundation-to-transform-lives-of-his-fans	Ditto	Ditto and WP:NGRS		✘ No
https://guardian.ng/news/oga-amos-floats-charity-foundation-to-transform-fans-lives/	Ditto	Ditto		✘ No
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{source assess table}}.

Vanderwaalforces (talk) 22:29, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Entertainment, and Nigeria. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 22:29, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Same as last time, stuff in non-RS or puff pieces, nothing we can use for notability. The before is the most telling, there just isn't enough about this individual. Oaktree b (talk) 23:08, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jack Colman (author)

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

No independent reliable sources found. Author thus fails WP:NBIO. GTrang (talk) 01:11, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Authors, and England. GTrang (talk) 01:11, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
del No discussions of the person in RS. - Altenmann >talk 16:43, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

De'Anyers family

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

WP:NOTGENEALOGY. I don't think any reliable sources cited or available elsewhere provide significant coverage of the article subject, instead providing lots of tangential mentions that do not by themselves confer notability. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 12:44, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, History, Royalty and nobility, and United Kingdom. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 12:44, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is not an accurrate statement, the sources listed are entirley comprehensive, I ask which ones precisely are 'tangential'.

Notability is sufficent as seen in the extensive sources primary and secondary. Starktoncollosal (talk) 08:21, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am happy to discuss which sources in particular do not provide significant coverage and see where we go from there, I am aware that there are yes a significant number of sources used which may convey this, however are consolidated by a number of reliable and imparital sources used in this article as well as other articles of a similar nature which cover landed families. Starktoncollosal (talk) 08:25, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hiten Dharpure

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

Dharpure has achieved a couple of obscure records recognized by the "India Book of Records" and the "Worldwide Book of Records", neither publication notable enough to have their own Wikipedia articles. Given the number of newspaper clippings posted by the article's author at Commons (now mostly nominated for deletion as copyright violations), it is likely that this is an autobiography. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 11:52, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and India. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 11:52, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete This is exactly the sort of non-notable nonsense that should be removed. Clearly written by the subject themselves or on their behalf. Shrug02 (talk) 18:00, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, it seems to be written by themselves or on their behalf but this what I found on Instagram of Sakal News, with likes of 7,647 people. [1] WikiDan404 (talk) 13:07, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Respected Editor, I was known of that person and I contacted him to collect the Information and made the new Article. If it seems to be Written by himself so, that's wrong. But if it seems like that so no problem. I was also known of him by Social Media Only. The Editor committee (talk) 17:06, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Vanity spam, creating dancing robots is not notable here. Sources about various records that are not notable. Oaktree b (talk) 16:19, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think this should article should exists as what I had read and Checked the Article and found the work done by him at such less age. [2][3] WikiDan404 (talk) 13:14, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Respected Editor, I found this video of his Robots Dancing Altogether [4] and making robot at this age made me to make an Article for him. If it doesn't agree to policies so no problem. The Editor committee (talk) 18:24, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: And the image is tagged as a copyvio, further red flags. Oaktree b (talk) 16:20, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. No notability and blatantly COI. Procyon117 (talk) 17:53, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I found this on Instagram of Sakal News, liked by 7,647 people. [5] WikiDan404 (talk) 13:05, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not only is Instagram an unreliable source, but the amount of people who liked it is completely meaningless here. Procyon117 (talk) 15:45, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Respected Editor, That's Right. Actually I found this in his account on Facebook that he was felicitated twice by Hon'ble Union Minister of Road and Transport, Nitin Gadkari for his achievement that why I have added that.[6][7] The Editor committee (talk) 18:05, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Dance, Technology, and Maharashtra. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:12, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Fails notability. RangersRus (talk) 22:16, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
https://www.instagram.com/p/C8ip_V2hrHq/?igsh=Z2lwOWJ5ODJhZGdk WikiDan404 (talk) 13:16, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Respected Editor, I found this that he was covered by Media and felicitated twice by Hon'ble Union Minister of Road and Transport, Nitin Gadkari that's why I have added an New Article by looking his work with age. [8][9][10][11][12][13] The Editor committee (talk) 18:33, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Not to Delete. I think that it should not be deleted as it was covered by Newspapers. --Wikitopeople (talk) 12:43, 18 July 2024 (UTC)— Wikitopeople (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
Actually it seems to written by themselves or on behalf on someone but from my side I found this [14] which made myself to support this Article. WikiDan404 (talk) 13:32, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Respected Editor, It can also be seen at different platforms. [15][16][17] The Editor committee (talk) 18:35, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Do not Delete. He gained huge popularity as I found that it was published on Instagram of Sakal News, which is liked by 7,647 people. Link to check the Likes on Instagram --WikiDan404 (talk) 12:59, 18 July 2024 (UTC)— WikiDan404 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
Delete One Event applies. Also Not notable and instagram is not a reliable source and it doesn't matter how many likes they have.--VViking_TalkEdits 13:28, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
He was felicitated twice by Hon'ble Union Minister of Road and Transport, Nitin Gadkari.[18] [19] as mentioned by @The Editor committee. WikiDan404 (talk) 18:11, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Respected Editor, I have made this Article on basis of Media Coverage and his twice felicitations done by Hon'ble Union Minister of Road and Transport, Nitin Gadkari.[20][21] The Editor committee (talk) 18:11, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

* Note to Closer. WikiDan404 account created 3 hours ago and Wikitopeople account created 22 hours ago have made no contribution to any other AFD. RangersRus (talk) 15:18, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Fails WP:GNG. Youknow? (talk) 15:29, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Respected Editor, The evidences can be checked and proofed as that make me to write the Article. [22][23][24][25][26][27][28] The Editor committee (talk) 18:40, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Respected Editor @WikiDan61, Thanks for your review. I respect and follow the Wikipedia Rules and Policies, if it seems to be not eligible, so no problem. It's my pleasure that you worked for it. The Editor committee (talk) 17:09, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not to be deleted. I think it should not be deleted. --The Editor committee (talk) 18:14, 18 July 2024 (UTC)— Note to closing admin: The Editor committee (talk • contribs) is the creator of the page that is the subject of this AfD. [reply]
should not be deleted. The things provided above gives an clear information regarding person. --Unknewed (talk) 18:48, 18 July 2024 (UTC)— Unknewed (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
@RangersRus I am new for Contributions of Information on Wikipedia and this is my first Reply in Discussion as it is seen first and at top. Unknewed (talk) 20:40, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

* Note to Closer. Unknewed another new account created few hours ago and have made no contribution to any other AFD. RangersRus (talk) 19:30, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kulwant Singh Rauke

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

Disputed PROD. My rationale still stand, the subject fails WP:NPOL and there's no evidence that there's a passing of the criteria that constitutes WP:GNG either. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 21:41, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Politicians, India, and Punjab. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 21:41, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sikhism-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:32, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: The creator has made multiple similar articles which fail WP:NPOL, this should be deleted as well. Xoocit (talk) 09:13, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Per nom. Fails WP:NPOL. The degree of significance of the subject and of role as politician and activist is not enough to warrant a page on the subject. RangersRus (talk) 22:30, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Per nom, also failed WP:NPOL. Youknow? (talk) 15:27, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Martin Wiesmann

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

I speedy-deleted the article for promotion, and it was then recreated with the promotional material removed. It was then PRODded, but the PROD was removed. On its face (I haven't done WP:BEFORE because I'm lousy at it, especially when most of the sources are non-English), Wiesmann appears to be a senior investment banker but nothing rising to the level of satisfying WP:GNG. Although not dispositive here, Wiesmann doesn't have an article at de.wiki. Bbb23 (talk) 23:47, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Finance, and Germany. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:15, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I can find sourcing about a radiologist/doctor, a German car company and a few other things, but nothing comes up for this particular person. Sourcing used now in the article is either primary, or confirmation of his appointment to one job or another. I don't see notability. Oaktree b (talk) 00:23, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Peter Crocker

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

Disputed draftification. Fails WP:BIO. It is difficult with things so long ago. Even so, I am struggling to see what makes this industrious man notable in a Wikipedia sense. He appears to have had a decent, unexceptional life, like so many of his peers. WP:ROTM 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 13:28, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and New York. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 13:28, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have personally done research on this topic as a professional in the field and can vouch for this page to be published, as is.

I’m confused as to what you mean by “unexceptional”. It’s as if you haven’t read the article, where it is mentioned that he was a postmaster, civil war veteran, trustee of Philippi School and city planner.

He was an early pioneer of Sarasota, Florida and is grouped in with his notable peers (A.B. Edwards, William Whitaker, and John Hamilton Gillespie) in various newspapers which I have provided citation to. The cemetery he established still exists and the church he built is on the historical register and owned by the historical society. Two other Wikipedia pages (Crocker cemetery and Crocker church) reference him as the founder. He deserves to have a page where readers of the other pages can find out who he was and what he did. When citizens of Sarasota go to learn more about their history it is important they have a resource (Wikipedia) to learn about this man and his contributions to the early community. A surplus of information is always better than a lack of it.

Your grounds for deletion, not "notable in Wikipedia sense," have no pertinent standing whatsoever. Htystudent (talk) 15:25, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
In addition to the source already listed within the article, here is some verifiable, objective evidence that the subject has received significant attention from independent sources to support the claim of notability. Though, viewing these may be an issue since the database requires a subscription. The links look identical, but they are all individual articles that mention Peter Crocker.

Access Newspaper Archive Institutional Version | Viewer

Access Newspaper Archive Institutional Version | Viewer

Access Newspaper Archive Institutional Version | Viewer

Access Newspaper Archive Institutional Version | Viewer

Access Newspaper Archive Institutional Version | Viewer

Access Newspaper Archive Institutional Version | Viewer

Access Newspaper Archive Institutional Version | Viewer

Access Newspaper Archive Institutional Version | Viewer

Access Newspaper Archive Institutional Version | Viewer

Access Newspaper Archive Institutional Version | Viewer

Access Newspaper Archive Institutional Version | Viewer

Access Newspaper Archive Institutional Version | Viewer

Access Newspaper Archive Institutional Version | Viewer

Access Newspaper Archive Institutional Version | Viewer

Access Newspaper Archive Institutional Version | Viewer Htystudent (talk) 16:12, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the Church article was sent back to draft and the cemetery looks rather non-notable as well. Oaktree b (talk) 23:08, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The church article, if you reviewed the sources, likely meets the notability guidelines and should be published. However, it has not been reviewed. Htystudent (talk) 18:30, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment both Crocker Cemetery and Crocker Church were created by the same editor as this article, in the past week. Their existence on-wiki does not demonstrate anything. Walsh90210 (talk) 15:56, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, but were they moved to articles for deletion? That means they were significant enough to still exist, so this page should be as well. Unless you think Peter Crocker did not make the standard for notability, which I have just demonstrated that he likely does. I will include that information in this reply as well.
In addition to the multiple sources already listed within the article, here is some verifiable, objective evidence that the subject has received significant attention from independent sources to support the claim of notability. Though, viewing these may be an issue since the database requires a subscription. The links look identical, but they are all individual articles that mention Peter Crocker.

Access Newspaper Archive Institutional Version | Viewer

Access Newspaper Archive Institutional Version | Viewer

Access Newspaper Archive Institutional Version | Viewer

Access Newspaper Archive Institutional Version | Viewer

Access Newspaper Archive Institutional Version | Viewer

Access Newspaper Archive Institutional Version | Viewer

Access Newspaper Archive Institutional Version | Viewer

Access Newspaper Archive Institutional Version | Viewer

Access Newspaper Archive Institutional Version | Viewer

Access Newspaper Archive Institutional Version | Viewer

Access Newspaper Archive Institutional Version | Viewer

Access Newspaper Archive Institutional Version | Viewer

Access Newspaper Archive Institutional Version | Viewer

Access Newspaper Archive Institutional Version | Viewer

Access Newspaper Archive Institutional Version | Viewer

Htystudent (talk) 16:15, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Htystudent I have left you advice on your user talk page, Most people find such advice of value. I hope you do as well. On a technical matter, I was not allowed under WP:DRAFTIFY to return this to draft once more. My two options since I was not going to edit it were to send it here, or to ignore it. I chose to send it here for community discussion.

Any editor, you included, is entitled to offer Draftification (please place it in 'bold at the start of the line, and on a new line). The deletion discussion is a direct result of your moving it to mainspace before it was ready. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 16:25, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I am not averse to the outcome of this discussion being to send back to draft for further development. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 18:43, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Military and Florida. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:04, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. I cannot view any of the newspaper links to validate whether they include WP:SIGCOV. I agree that Crocker seems like a WP:ROTM individual, but without being able to view the sources I cannot weigh in with a !vote either way. I have not been able to turn up any other appropriate sources to establish notability. If the page creator were to request draftification I would support that. Dclemens1971 (talk) 20:18, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Dclemens1971 I have told them the same thing on their user talk page 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 21:21, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Served in the army and worked in a lighthouse, this is not notable. Likely better suited to a local history website, I'm not seeing notability for our standards here. Oaktree b (talk) 23:04, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - I am able to view the Newspaper Archive sources through WP:TWL and I think most WP:XC users can as well (though I'm not positive). I don't plan on going through all of the newspaper links above, but I have looked over the ones in the article currently:

FN3 (December 1911) - Burb placed in the paper by his wife and an acquaintance expressing gratitude for kindness shown by others during his sickness and death.
FN5 (March 1958) - The region's "Oldest Native" is apparently the daughter of Peter Crocker, and he is briefly mentioned as an Albany native, soldier, and Key West lighthouse tender.
FN6 (March 1906) - One mention in the "County Commissioner's Proceedings" as being designated to mark out a road.
FN7 (January 1907) - One mention in a list of "other growers" in the region.
FN8 (August 1977) Mentioned as introducing coffee beans to the region

All told, this individual seems quite WP:ROTM. He is mentioned in the newspapers, sure, but these mentions are almost all plainly trivial; there is no WP:SIGCOV. AviationFreak💬 01:28, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reply: The Crockers; Church, cemetery bear family's name - Document - Gale Power Search Htystudent (talk) 16:03, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The daughter spoke in depth about her father, Peter Crocker, so I don't see how that cannot count. Htystudent (talk) 18:31, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I have now been able to access the newspaper archive. I have not checked every archive relating to the subject, and I have taken into account the stye of the era - brevity. Even with this taken into account I only find passing mentions, public notices etc. WP:SIGCOV is not fulfilled. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 08:29, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The ones linked directly to the article discuss him more in length, as I mentioned. Htystudent (talk) 13:37, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I see some news/coverage in media, but not GNG here. LusikSnusik (talk) 10:26, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
https://go.gale.com/ps/retrieve.do?tabID=T004&resultListType=RESULT_LIST&searchResultsType=SingleTab&retrievalId=951a568c-e995-41e5-b445-f4c298ac82f7&hitCount=10&searchType=BasicSearchForm&currentPosition=1&docId=GALE%7CA74049424&docType=Article&sort=Relevance&contentSegment=ZGPN&prodId=GPS&pageNum=1&contentSet=GALE%7CA74049424&searchId=R2&userGroupName=sara65726&inPS=true

This whole article is solely about him and his family Htystudent (talk) 12:24, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rewant Ram Danga

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

Clearly fails WP:NPOL. He contested the Rajasthan Assembly Elections in the year 2023 from Khinwsar Assembly constituency. In which he was defeated. Youknow? (talk) 06:55, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Politicians, India, and Rajasthan. Youknow? (talk) 06:55, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

https://www.livehindustan.com/assembly-elections/rajasthan-elections/constituency/khinwsar-110/

Check this news to verify that he contested the Rajasthan Assembly Elections in the year 2023 for Khinwasar Assembly Constituency. TejalGraphics (talk) 07:22, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@TejalGraphics The point is that he contested but didn’t win. Politicians aren’t presumptively notable by virtue of their candidacy in an election. They have to, at least, win the notable position they contested for. If they don’t win and they pass the general notability guideline, then that’s a different case. Neither is the case for Danga. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 10:03, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Clearly fails NPOL. 𝐋𝐨𝐫𝐝𝐕𝐨𝐥𝐝𝐞𝐦𝐨𝐫𝐭𝟕𝟐𝟖🧙‍♂️^{Let's Talk !} 09:11, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Fails WP:POL and WP:GNG. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 09:59, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Does not meet notability criteria Xoocit (talk) 08:48, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Paul Suni

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

References are a mile wide and an inch deep, primarily including the subject's own LinkedIn page, writings, patents, and grants. BD2412 T 20:43, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Finland, and California. BD2412 T 20:43, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: An inventor with patents, is not notable... I can find this reference [29] but it could just be a similarly-named individual. Otherwise, I don't find any sourcing for this person. Oaktree b (talk) 21:32, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Engineering, Medicine, and Technology. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:00, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I do not understand how this page survived so long. It has massive peacock claims, none of which are verified by sources that are searchable. For instance the only mention I see in Google for [4] is in fact this page! As just one other, the claim of "Father of Digital Radiography" is unsourced, and not in the Digital radiography page. The onus is on the editors of the article to provide properly verifiable sources for the various claims, WP:BURDEN. Unless they do this, and it seems it has not happened for many years, this should be a Speedy delete. Ldm1954 (talk) 21:07, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Frank G. Bussing

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

Bussing isn’t presumptively notable as a politician WP:NPOL. Mayors from Compton shouldn’t be presumptively notable by virtue of their positions, they have to pass other criteria. Bussing also fails WP:NPOL since he didn’t get elected for HoR. Also fails WP:GNG in general. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 20:03, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Politicians, and California. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 20:03, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to List of mayors of Compton, California.Djflem (talk) 14:53, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to List of mayors of Compton, California, where the subject is listed. We do not presume notability for local elected officials. --Enos733 (talk) 16:15, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge/Redirect into List of mayors of Compton, California. Information on the article would be fine included within the target article. Bussing is not notable on his own per available information, per nom. Royal Autumn Crest (talk) 21:33, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to List of mayors of Compton, California. Fails NPOL. LusikSnusik (talk) 10:34, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sir Charles Firebrace, 2nd Baronet

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

Baronets are not normally notable and there doesn’t seem to be anything that would amount to a claim of notability with this subject. Mccapra (talk) 19:50, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and England. Mccapra (talk) 19:50, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Royalty and nobility-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 21:22, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. First Baronets are certainly notable, but not necessarily their successors. -- Necrothesp (talk) 10:33, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Miraboi

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

A biographical article about a Nigeria man that doesn't meet WP:GNG. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 19:18, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Businesspeople, Lists of people, Music, Africa, and Nigeria. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 19:19, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Critically fails WP:NCREATIVE or WP:GNG, utterly nonsense and promotional article that serves no purpose whatsoever than to promote the subject. No credible claim of importance. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 19:30, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Netherzone (talk) 20:51, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Keep : as per nomination by various editors in terms of the same GNG Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Yung Miraboi Mark (2nd nomination). Clean up is just required which I would be contributing later due to my time schedule. In 2021 appeared at the Ghana national TV as a musician with one of his top song featuring Peruzzi [30]and no longer do music. In 2022, he was dragged by Nigerians for a political act [31] further details nomination 2 can be cited [32]. Nominator 2 has also been a block user for 4 years now I just noticed that. Theirs no point AFD nominator replying. Look forward to other editors as I will be busy. --Gabriel (talk to me ) 00:45, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep : Passes WP:SIGCOV.--Afí-afeti (talk) 00:57, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Chris Okagbue

AfDs for this article:

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

I don’t see how this subject passes WP:GNG. The only thing here was that he won the Gulder ultimate search. The rest are just biography with no source. No evidence he won those awards.Since 2023 the issue tag was placed no fixed has been made. Even when I had to google. The news source fails independent as they are likely stating his quote. Gabriel (talk to me ) 00:50, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, and Nigeria. Gabriel (talk to me ) 00:50, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Funnybros

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

Saw this page and wanted to over look it not until almost all the source, possibly all fails to meet Wikipedia independent, reliable and secondary. No point calling him a musician when all the source are from promotion link and also fails in music notability. Since 2023 issue was tagged but no changes. Gabriel (talk to me ) 00:31, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, Bands and musicians, and Nigeria. Gabriel (talk to me ) 00:31, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Coverage is looking sparse. These two sources might count towards GNG, although they do look low-quality: [33] [34]. I am unable to consistently access guardian.ng. Helpful Raccoon (talk) 03:08, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don’t see how those sources you provided meets GNG neither low quality. Meanwhile, i have never heard the word “Low quality” while determining either an article meets GNG or not. If it passes it passes. If doesn’t pass, it doesn’t. You can visit the article page. Check the tag to understand what reliable, independent source it’s all about. The two source you provided failed to be independent because it doesn’t speak from a disinterest of the article subject. Gabriel (talk to me ) 04:00, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
By "low-quality" I meant that the tone is tabloid-style and the articles don't contain a lot of independent analysis. The sources use non-neutral language, but I don't see indications that they have a vested interest in the subject. If the articles were sponsored, for example, they would be completely non-independent, but there is no indication of that (unless there's something I'm missing about the sources). Per WP:IIS, "Independence does not imply even-handedness. An independent source may hold a strongly positive or negative view of a topic or an idea." Helpful Raccoon (talk) 05:27, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The sources could also be non-independent if the coverage is almost entirely based on the subject's own words, which is possible but not obvious. Helpful Raccoon (talk) 08:46, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I understand u. But before i nominated the page. The sources are not just making sense to me. The few newspaper that was cited was just all about Meet Funnybros. The rest are from Nigerian blogs and music link containing Apple Music and the rest. Personal life he bought a Benz the two source cited are from blogs that are not reliable besides buying a Benz has nothing to do with notability. Gabriel (talk to me ) 11:53, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: The article about a comedian that meets WP:GNG. Appearing in independent sources is notable if not presumably. There is a recognition for his skits but I see some unreliable sources, which can be cleaned. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 19:04, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

* Keep: Aside the facts that the article is poorly sourced in terms of headlines. The references are organically written based on the fact fans appreciate his work, this is a notable comedian in Nigeria. I think the article will be improved over time, I suggest an external link should be added to his article i.e (His official YouTube channel). Madeforall1 (talk) 14:44, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oh my God. Please @Madeforall1 AFD discussion is not meant for all editors. Focus on improving yourself here on Wikipedia before jumping into AFD. U have been using the same tone on your talk page to vote keep here. What business does Wikipedia has with his YouTube page. What do you understand by notable on Wikipedia. Just because someone is famous and you know them by that you call them notable here. I will advise you stay off AFD & start practicing how to write a good article. Gabriel (talk to me ) 15:40, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I’ve been advise by some admins to participate in AFD, and yes I know when an article is notable or not. I’ve seen cases where external links are added, those links can’t be used as references. Madeforall1 (talk) 15:46, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
All your articles created since 2022 to 2024 are all deleted and all you could think of was AFD. If anyone could have advise you. Then you definitely have misunderstood them. My last reply to you on this AFD. So don’t bother responding rather take my advice and put that into practice. It’s definitely gonna help you here. Cheers. Gabriel (talk to me ) 17:13, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your advice Sir. Madeforall1 (talk) 20:23, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete — fails WP:GNG. Too few reliable, independent sources. A few rather promotional articles on a small number of online news sites are insufficient to establish notability in my opinion. I can see further coverage on Legit.ng, but the articles seem to be very low-quality "entertainment" pieces (one of them being "Look, this YouTuber bought a flashy car!" — c'mon). The majority of the remaining references are very brief: low-effort pieces mostly focused on social media reactions. There seems to be little else available. Coverage is neither significant nor from particularly reliable sources, as best I can tell. WP:NBASIC. GhostOfNoMeme 16:12, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That is the point. Almost all the source are just talking about what he has acquired. House, Benz and instagram verification has nothing to do with Wikipedia article for creation. Talking about notable outside of Wikipedia to my best of knowledge as a Nigerian ‘he has never trended for anything’ just a popular skit maker I know as well being famous due to his style of video. Gabriel (talk to me ) 22:07, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I agree. Articles like "How Female Fan Proposed To Me" and "Skit Maker Funnybros Trends As He Becomes a Mercedes Benz SUV Owner" seem poor references, even if the sources are generally reliable (also, I note the majority of stories about Funnybros on Legit.ng are from the same author; I can't help but wonder if they're paid articles or if there is some connection, but I have no evidence of that). Same goes for "Top 10 Skit Makers To Look Out For In 2023" which is literally just a low-effort listicle in which he's briefly mentioned. I don't think these entertainment fluff pieces are enough to show WP:SIGCOV. I can't find much else on Google beyond these types of articles — and I was mindful to search beyond the English-language sources — that, as Helpful Raccoon noted, are tabloid-style and hardly represent in-depth coverage of the man himself. If this level of referencing were all that is required, I could probably make a thousand Wikipedia articles about various YouTubers who, in reality, are not remotely notable. GhostOfNoMeme 12:07, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jahangir Alam Kabir

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

Non-notable person. Sources are either unreliable or merely passing mentions. —Yahya (talk • contribs.) 23:19, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Authors, and Bangladesh. —Yahya (talk • contribs.) 23:19, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think don't need to deletion because he mainly journalist so it's better to stay and he is vice president of satkhira press club Antu Official (talk) 05:38, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
bro what's the problem with this article. Even in bangla Wikipedias many article is hasn't valid references or local news reference. Unfortunately some article delete by national newspapers so I provided local daily newspapers reference so where is the problem? So I reference it Daily kalantor news and they approved as well they make infobox I just edit and upgrade everything properly, that's it. Antu Official (talk) 06:48, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

bro what's the problem with this article. Even in bangla Wikipedias many article is hasn't valid references or local news reference. Unfortunately some article delete by national newspapers so I provided local daily newspapers reference so where is the problem? So I reference it Daily kalantor news and they approved as well they make infobox I just edit and upgrade everything properly, that's it. Antu Official (talk) 06:48, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

if you search "দৈনিক আজকের সাতক্ষীরা পত্রিকার নির্বাহী সম্পাদক জাহাঙ্গীর আলম কবীর " you guys get news references and I agree one or two are national newspapers. But if you are watch deeply so you guys get name 'দৈনিক আজকের সাতক্ষীরা পত্রিকার নির্বাহী সম্পাদক জাহাঙ্গীর আলম কবির or দৈনিক আজকের সাতক্ষীরা পত্রিকার নির্বাহী সম্পাদক জাহাঙ্গীর আলম কবীর' into all article . And the main fact is you guys always delete this article and removing with out using common sense. Antu Official (talk) 06:49, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Journalism and Poetry. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:28, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think don't need to deletion because he mainly journalist so it's better to stay and he is vice president of satkhira press club Antu Official (talk) 05:37, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

bro what's the problem with this article. Even in bangla Wikipedias many article is hasn't valid references or local news reference. Unfortunately some article delete by national newspapers so I provided local daily newspapers reference so where is the problem? So I reference it Daily kalantor news and they approved as well they make infobox I just edit and upgrade everything properly, that's it.

if you search "দৈনিক আজকের সাতক্ষীরা পত্রিকার নির্বাহী সম্পাদক জাহাঙ্গীর আলম কবীর " you guys get news references and I agree one or two are national newspapers. But if you are watch deeply so you guys get name 'দৈনিক আজকের সাতক্ষীরা পত্রিকার নির্বাহী সম্পাদক জাহাঙ্গীর আলম কবির or দৈনিক আজকের সাতক্ষীরা পত্রিকার নির্বাহী সম্পাদক জাহাঙ্গীর আলম কবীর' into all article . And the main fact is you guys always delete this article and removing with out using common sense Antu Official (talk) 06:50, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete it This have no any significance coverage. ~ Deloar Akram (Talk • Contribute) 09:32, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jack Mills (Great Train Robbery)

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

Fails WP:VICTIM. This seems like a totally un-necessary biography and a WP:CONTENTFORK of the Great Train Robbery. The subject was not individually notable, and his death was a part of the larger train robbery so having a separate article like Death of Jack Mills doesn't seem appropriate. A merge or redirect to Great Train Robbery would be an acceptable WP:ATD. 4meter4 (talk) 19:25, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support a redirect to Great Train Robbery (1963). Procyon117 (talk) 19:33, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and United Kingdom. Shellwood (talk) 21:00, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:31, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 10:30, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 10:30, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect per nomination. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 19:00, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jazz Henry

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

No sources given that meet WP:GNG (her father's website, herself talking, some name drops, and dubiously reliable articles), I didn't find any better ones, and the article also fails WP:NMUSICIAN or WP:ANYBIO. — Alien333 (what I did & why I did it wrong) 18:30, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Bands and musicians, and Music. — Alien333 (what I did & why I did it wrong) 18:30, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Women, Television, and Louisiana. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:33, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sue Robbie

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

Does not contain any reliable, verifiable references and no other sources can be found through a web search, adherence to WP:ENTERTAINER is dubious; limited evidence of significant coverage in multiple notable productions. Redtree21 (talk) 06:24, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Women, and England. Redtree21 (talk) 06:35, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:47, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete lots of images of her, not much sigcov in RS Traumnovelle (talk) 08:32, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Not enough coverage for WP:GNG. — Alien333 (what I did & why I did it wrong) 17:10, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Baanty

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

Yet another musician, creative director, or music executive who critically fails WP:NCREATIVE and WP:NMUSICIAN. Another article written in a way that, if not carefully looked at, will look like it clearly passes any notability guideline, whereas it critically doesn't pass any. Just like Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Emperor Geezy, looking at the sources, they are either PRs/advertorials for music releases or lacking in WP:SIGCOV, they are also mostly unreliable pieces (without a proper byline). The source cited for the claim that they won an award Nigerian Books of Record in 2021, here utterly fails verification because there was no mention of Baanty, Ikpon Kelvin or even "Creative Director" which they won. It is also pretty dubious since the article says they've been active since 2022, so how come winning an award from the prestigious NBR? The other award and nominations isn't/aren't significant enough to make the subject presumptively notable under any criteria. Overall, fails WP:GNG. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 00:16, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: This article fails WP:NCREATIVE and WP:NMUSICIAN. The sources cited in the article are PR pieces. It lacks independent coverage and fails to establish notability. Further, the timeline and awards are inconsistent, further undermining the article's credibility and notability.--AstridMitch (talk) 01:01, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Bands and musicians, Businesspeople, and Nigeria. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 00:16, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: not enough WP:SIGCOV, most of it promotional. — Alien333 (what I did & why I did it wrong) 17:23, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: The subject fails to meet WP:GNG, WP:NCREATIVE or even WP:NMUSICIAN. Comr Melody Idoghor (talk) 18:59, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Imre Vallyon

AfDs for this article:

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

I'm nominating this page for deletion again because the initial discussion lacked sufficient engagement and the sources provided were inadequate in both quality and quantity. There's a notable absence of substantial coverage of Imre Vallyon, his work, or his organisation in multiple reliable secondary sources. Meeting notability criteria typically requires presenting at least three such sources. The article from Stuff, while primarily focused on his legal issues, appears to be the only source that meets these criteria. Without it, the page is mostly information sourced by primary sources and a list of his self published books and ebooks.

In terms of Vallyon's notability as a writer, the two book reviews presented by Oaktree b in the previous discussion are clearly poor sources, as they seem to be paid content from freelance writers on unreliable websites. Additionally, Vallyon does not meet the criteria for notability as a criminal according to Wikipedia guidelines on crime perpetrators, despite the only significant coverage of him focusing on his legal issues. His organisation, FHL, does not seem to meet the notability standards either. Ynsfial (talk) 16:55, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Authors, and New Zealand. Ynsfial (talk) 16:55, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Hungary-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:07, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep has enough to meet WP:GNG. NealeWellington (talk) 10:13, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment for Ynsfial - it seems pointless making multiple attempts to have this article deleted as the previous Afd covered the arguments in sufficient depth. I suggest you look at the deletion review process if you consider there is an issue. NealeWellington (talk) 10:13, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No, deletion review is the wrong avenue here. It was a no consensus close, and closed over 2 months ago. It is perfectly fine to bring it back for another look. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 13:59, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Emperor Geezy

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

This fails WP:NCREATIVE, and overall, WP:GNG based on WP:SIGCOV and WP:MILL. The award they won is not significant enough to help them pass, if they had 'won' their 'nomination's, that would be a different case, just merely being nominated at NEA isn't significant enough. The noms are unsourced while the piece the award they won is sourced to is an unreliable one from a marginally reliable publication (WP:NGRS). Taking a close look at the sources, they are mostly WP:RUNOFTHEMILL and unreliable pieces and do not provide WP:SIGCOV. I am skeptical about the notability of G-Worldwide Entertainment itself. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 15:42, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Businesspeople, Entertainment, and Nigeria. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 15:42, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 16:49, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: winning a non-notable award isn't notable, the rest of the sources are puffy entertainment/lifestyle sources, not really helping notability. Oaktree b (talk) 20:55, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: nominated for a notable award twice in 2015 and 2017.--Afí-afeti (talk) 07:34, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Passes WP:SIGCOV(both in the Nigerian media and in foreign ones). At least you can look at the Nigerian Wikipedia article and find several sources. I’m not sure about WP:NMUSIC, but it’s not the main criteria anyway. Tau Corvi (talk) 08:43, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Tau Corvi You clearly don't know how the general notability guideline works. For an subject to have a standalone page on Wikipedia, they have to be the subject of discussions from multiple secondary sources that are independent of the subject, reliable and provides a substantial coverage of the subject. These are needed to pass WP:GNG, a subject doesn't just pass SIGCOV to qualify for a standalone page. Even the SIGCOV you claim it passes is even not exactly correct because that is not the case. I understand you're a new user, you may need to familiarise yourself with the policies and guidelines before venturing into AfDs. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 09:49, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment : If an Award has been reviewed, has a Wikipedia page and meets the WP:GNG then it’s notable. But reference from reliable source that are independent of the subject are needed to be cited for proof. The fact he has Won, being Nominated for notable awards, contributed to the notable movie Suga Suga (film) as an executive producer makes him passes WP:ANYBIO and notable. Per source cited on the article, subject passes WP:GNG. If the award section can be addressed then my vote is a Keep. Please to the AFD nominator theirs no point responding to me. I’m not here to argue unreasonably or pick sides. My word still stands per Wikipedia article guideline.--Gabriel (talk to me ) 19:57, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. Star Mississippi 02:43, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Manish Doshi

AfDs for this article:

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

Article is a WP:PROMO, fails WP:GNG, WP:BASIC and WP:BIO. Renomination reason: sock puppet activity in the prior AfD discussion, also six months have passed since the last AfD. Charlie (talk) 04:02, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Businesspeople, and India. Charlie (talk) 04:02, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Medicine, Technology, Gujarat, and Florida. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:49, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Fails WP:GNG even WP:BASIC. Youknow? (talk) 16:16, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:39, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hatim Zaghloul

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

Fails Wikipedia:Notability (academics), and the article is written in a promotional and advertising tone, and lacks neutrality. فيصل (talk) 19:14, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Science, and Internet. فيصل (talk) 19:14, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Egypt-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 19:31, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators and Canada. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:58, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Lacks the independent sourcing required to demonstrate notability. - MrOllie (talk) 13:01, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete. This engineer has done nice work, but has not attracted enough attention to his work through citations to meet WP:NPROF. There is press coverage, though - is there enough for general notabilty? If so, I'll change my recommendation. Qflib (talk) 18:40, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I see the person lacks Sigcov to establish GNG. --LusikSnusik (talk) 10:29, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. – Joe (talk) 17:19, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jeffrey Ventrella

AfDs for this article:

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

Fails WP: N. The sourcing on the article is almost entirely primary, and what secondary sources do exist are either not independent or do not cover the subject in depth. I also couldn't find any sources to establish notability either, unfortunately. HyperAccelerated (talk) 15:29, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Video games, and California. Shellwood (talk) 15:46, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Artists, and Authors. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:06, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete. There are a lot of almost but not quite bits here. I found this on the academic deletion sorting list but he appears not to be primarily an academic and although he has one workshop publication with triple-digit citations [35] the rest do not give him a strong enough citation record for WP:PROF#C1. He has one book, Virtual Body Language, for which I didn't find any reviews; I would need multiple reviews of multiple books to consider notability through WP:AUTHOR. The article as nominated contains no WP:GNG-passing sources. The best I found in my searches was [36], a local newspaper story from 2015 about a startup he founded with some depth of coverage of Ventrella himself. I did also find one group work in MoMA that he contributed to, not enough by itself for WP:ARTIST. We could consider a redirect, if we had a viable redirect target, but neither There (virtual world) nor Gene Pool (software) currently look viable to me. —David Eppstein (talk) 20:19, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: The AfD from 2007 actually got it (mostly) right, there was no coverage about the individual despite hundreds of hits... In the almost 20 yrs since, I can only find primary sourcing or a few social media sites. Source 21 in the article is the only RS, the rest aren't anything we'd use to build an article with. Oaktree b (talk) 22:39, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Fails WP:GNG. As per the nominator, the article is almost entirely primary references. After a (fairly thorough, I'd say) search, I'm able to find very little published in reliable secondary sources. GhostOfNoMeme 09:35, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. While this page Fails [[WP:GNG], Jeffrey Ventrella is a renowned researcher and artist in both the Artificial Life and Virtual Worlds fields. As the conference organizer of the first and second International Conference on Virtual Worlds, I have invited him to present his works as invited lectures and keynotes. I recommend to keep his profile, but ask for modifications in order to add reliable secondary sources. Jean-Claude Heudin (talk) 10:49, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I've been invited to speak at international conferences too, but none of them were prestigious enough to count towards WP:NPROF. In order for your conference invitations to meet the standards we have, we would need to know that the ICVW is itself a well-covered and important conference. Since it's very new that might be hard to establish, but if you can provide some links to coverage of the ICVWs he appeared at that appeared in reliable, primary, independent news sources, that might help. Qflib (talk) 13:57, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"While this page Fails [[WP:GNG]" -- that's all I needed to hear. Thanks for disclosing your conflict of interest too. HyperAccelerated (talk) 16:20, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

Khan Sir

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

This stub about an Internet personality whose channel is education based was recently accepted at AFC. I believe it to be a borderline acceptance, which is fine of itself. AFC reviewers role is to accept drafts which they believe have a better than 50% chance of surviving an immediate deletion process. As a fellow AFC reviewer I believe that the subject is not verified to pass WP:BIO, and that the draft was below the acceptance threshold. On that basis I would not have accepted it. The referencing is independent, yes, but the content of the references is gossip column-like trivia, which simulates significant coverage, but which is not. I see the only way of resolving this is for the community to discuss it, hence AfD 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 13:36, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Education, Internet, and India. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 13:36, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I am not going to vote here since my stance is clear, as I accepted the draft. At the time I saw the draft, it was not passing GNG, but I know the personality well and thought he might already have a Wikipedia article. When I found out he did not, I started to find significant coverages and added many that are currently cited. I respect Timtrent’s judgment, and we already discussed it on my talk page. We would like to get the community's views on the article. Lastly, I want to add that if the article can’t be kept, we can draftify it, as it has good sourcing, and the subject may gain more coverage to establish notability in the future. Happy editing. GrabUp - Talk 13:58, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Draftification is a perfectly acceptable outcome to me as nominator. I ought to have said that in the nomination. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 16:38, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Keep per WP:DONOTDEMOLISH - Subject has a reasonable claim to notability, and I don't see what draftifying would accomplish. ~Politicdude (About me, talk, contribs) 18:30, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I have done some research to find Hindi sources and interestingly found many that may establish notability.
*BBC Hindi | *News18 Hindi | *NewsNation | *AmarUjala | *News18 Hindi and *Dainik Jagran Hindi
In my opinion, the BBC Hindi one is a very powerful source with significant coverage. I will leave it to the community. Thanks. GrabUp - Talk 08:14, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think its the time for voting Keep. GrabUp - Talk 08:22, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – Joe (talk) 17:17, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: I can only find coverage about "criminal" activities [37], [38], but they don't seem notable and rather tabloidey... I don't find coverage of his streaming career, so there just isn't enough for notability. Oaktree b (talk) 23:14, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Oaktree b: Hey, can you comment on these Hindi sources I mentioned above, especially BBC Hindi? GrabUp - Talk 00:43, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tolu Okojie

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

Non notable chef that fails WP:GNG and WP:Basic. Has received minimal media coverage in reliable media. Only three notable media articles about him exist and of the three, one is interview [39] which does not count for notability leaving only two which is still below minimum requirement for WP:BLP. Ednabrenze (talk) 06:45, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Nigeria. Ednabrenze (talk) 06:45, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and Food and drink. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:58, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:55, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

del insufficient independent coverage for GNG. - Altenmann >talk 16:48, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Just not enough coverage for this person. [40], somewhat RS, this is an interview [41] and this in a local newspaper [42]. I don't think have sufficient coverage. Oaktree b (talk) 17:02, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keemokazi

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

Nothing here to meet WP:GNG. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 15:14, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Lists of people, Entertainment, Syria, and United States of America. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 15:16, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Video games, Internet, and California. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:07, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:50, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Does not meet the general notability criteria (WP:GNG). The only sources I could find were interviews and press releases, which do not confer any notability. ArcticSeeress (talk) 12:37, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dr. Bro

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

I had double thoughts before finally agreeing that the notability of this article is very questionable. Firstly having many subscribers or views on YouTube doesnt credibly means the article is notable. There is nothing whatsoever credible about this article. There are some promotional contents in the article. For me, it doesnt meet WP:GNG, and such, I may decline in an AFC review. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 15:11, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Lists of people, Entertainment, and India. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 15:12, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep It looks like there are some decent references and he has over 2 million subscribers, but I think cleanup is needed to solidify notability here. Royal Autumn Crest (talk) 15:28, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Amassing a large number of YouTube subscribers is not a criteria of finding how notable a YouTuber is. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 10:13, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- How common is it to have that amount of subscribers? I suppose some of the subscriber numbers could be inflated. Royal Autumn Crest (talk) 21:30, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Travel and tourism, Internet, and Karnataka. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:08, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Draftify Frankly, article looks like promotional content and should be wholly rewritten. I do also have some doubts about notability of the individual, but, given the followers count, I guess it could fit WP:GNG or WP:ENT Vorann Gencov (talk) 14:32, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I disagree with the decision that the count of followers of a particular YouTuber can help meet WP:ENT. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 21:21, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:08, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Sources 7-8 are interviews, so primary. Source 9 is a photo essay, 10 is a PR item. 12 and 13 appear brief photo essays. I can only find similar things, this [https://www.news9live.com/state/karnataka/karnataka-vlogger-dr-bro-kannada-speaks-to-somalian-pirate-2313620, where he interviews someone. Not much of any real coverage in RS, nothing we can use to build an article. Oaktree b (talk) 01:20, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Otherwise, his youtube channel, a video about having a viral video... The Asian Newstable doesn't seem like a RS. I'm not sure there are any sources we can use in the article. Oaktree b (talk) 01:22, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete notability of the youtuber is not granted by the sources (mainly interviews or not reliable media). LusikSnusik (talk) 10:36, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dokibird

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

All the coverage in the article is from February 2024 when she left the entertainment company Nijisanji. Beyond that, I've found two reliable sources that do not cover this topic (Siliconera 1, Siliconera 2). Wikipedia's notability criteria discourages articles on people notable for only one event, which this article seems to cover. Most of the content featured in the article also seems to be a content fork of the article Nijisanji. I suggest deleting the article or turning it into a redirect to the Nijisanji article. ArcticSeeress (talk) 08:47, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Women, Entertainment, and Internet. ArcticSeeress (talk) 08:47, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 09:21, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:47, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Indians in Luxembourg

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

Fails GNG, 2 of the 3 sources are dead. The estimated population is very small at around 1000, and no significant coverage of their contribution to Luxembourg society. LibStar (talk) 06:00, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Bilateral relations, India, and Luxembourg. LibStar (talk) 06:00, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ethnic groups-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:54, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think we should consider renaming this to the Indian Association of Luxembourg.

There appears to be significant sourcing for that at least.

[43] [44] [45] Bluethricecreamman (talk) 03:55, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

K added a few sources, but still not convinced its quite notable. This article still has massive amounts of texts that are unsourced. As far as I can tell, its mostly been anon IPs adding random bits of info. Bluethricecreamman (talk) 04:06, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If nobody else can find useful sourcing, i'll vote Delete Bluethricecreamman (talk) 06:02, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think it’s confusing and poorly written. Not sure what to do with it. Bearian (talk) 02:17, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 11:19, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Otherwize

AfDs for this article:

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

Article about a non-notable rapper. Sources are passing mentions and nothing indepth on the subject. I don't see it satisfies WP:NMUSICBIO or WP:GNG. Jamiebuba (talk) 07:50, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Bands and musicians. Jamiebuba (talk) 07:50, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 08:47, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per both WP:NOTINHERITED and WP:NMUSIC. His only claim to fame is attached to Eminem, and that was 27 years ago. No notable discography or chart activity, and the titles of the citations in the article don't even mention the subject, but other rappers. 💥Casualty ^{• Hop along. •} 20:29, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per WP:NMUSIC. WP:NMUSIC states "Musicians ... may be notable if they meet at least one of the following criteria." Otherwize clearly meets 3 of the criteria: #1, #7, and #9.
1. He has been featured in multiple documentaries (Where We're From and Freestyle: The Art of Rhyme), books (Words from Wize, The Come Up, The Way I Am, King Khule, Born a Villain), and articles (HipHopDX, Eminem.Pro, etc.). His prominence in the documentaries have nothing to do with Eminem, so they are not inherited notability.

7. In Where We're From, Otherwize is cited as the most prominent battle rapper in his region (LA) during this era. That has nothing to do with Eminem, so it's not inherited notability.

9. Otherwize won 1st Place and 3rd Place in major national music competitions (Rap Olympics '97 and Scribble Jam '99). Granted, one of those was defeating Eminem, but the other one was not, and they are still placings in national music competitions regardless of who he defeated. So this is not inherited notability.
He is also part of a notable crew called Project Blowed, which is also a subject of documentaries (This is the Life and Hip-Hop Evolution). He featured on the important Los Angeles underground albums Beneath the Surface and Cater to the DJ. Hierarchitectitiptitoploftical (talk) 20:45, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep in mind that the general guidelines regarding notability and verifiability must still be met. To address your points:
1. For the sake of being thorough, I had a look at a selection of these references. I find fault with a number of them.
Words from Wize is a non-independent work.

The Come Up, as best I can tell, mentions Otherwize by name only once outside of a footnote. Am I wrong? This is a WP:TRIVIALMENTION.

In The Way I Am, I again find his name mentioned only once. (In fairness, I'm dealing with a non-searchable PDF, so I may have missed something; the reference lacks page number(s) — are you able to provide any?)

Three of the books you cite — King Khule, Born a Villain and Words from Wize — appear to be published by the same obscure, 'indie' publisher (Parker Pubs). None of the three books have ISBNs, and Parker Pubs doesn't even have a website. A Google search for "Words from Wize" Parker Pubs returns only 4 results, and one of them is this Wikipedia article. Looking at Parker Pubs's Linktree, it appears the only platform Parker Pubs makes these books available on is Lulu.com, which is a self-publishing house. Note WP:SELFPUBLISH says: "Never use self-published sources as third-party sources about living people, even if the author is an expert, well-known professional researcher, or writer." Now, in fairness, it may be inaccurate to label these works as 'self-published'. But regardless, I can't help but somewhat question their value as sources in light of the above, even ignoring the fact Words from Wize is a non-independent work.

HipHopDX would appear to be a reliable source; I'm not particularly confident in saying the same of Eminem.Pro.
7. Can you find any other reliable sources that describe him in similar terms, e.g. "most prominent rapper (in LA)" or similar? Was this level of status sustained? If it were true (that he's "the most prominent battle rapper in [LA] during this era"), it's hard to imagine this fact wouldn't make its way into other reliable sources.

9. Fair enough. I accept those events meet criteria #9.

Overall, I still feel WP:NMUSICBIO and WP:GNG are not sufficiently met. GhostOfNoMeme 07:35, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 11:17, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per HopalongCasualty. Looking at the article's existing references, and searching for others, I don't believe this figure meets WP:NOTABILITY. Many of the references, some from sources that do not seem reliable, are good examples of WP:NOTINHERITED — his attachment to Eminem does not establish his own notability, and almost enters WP:BLP1E territory as well. GhostOfNoMeme 14:51, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Would you be willing to address the fact that he meets 3 of the criteria in WP:NMUSIC? Hierarchitectitiptitoploftical (talk) 02:28, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sure. I replied to your original message above re WP:NMUSIC. GhostOfNoMeme 07:40, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Gsearch goes to a Reddit thread, then Discogs, neither of which is a good sign. Defeating Eminem is fine, but that's more of a trivial item than notable to get an entire article. Oaktree b (talk) 23:10, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Would you be willing to address the fact that he meets 3 of the criteria in WP:NMUSIC? Hierarchitectitiptitoploftical (talk) 02:29, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Alexander Heid

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

References, when reliable, do not provide significant coverage of the subject to meet WP:BASIC.

Rolling Stone primarily covers HackMiami, mentions Heid in passing as an organizer of the event.
Financial Times quotes Heid in relation to the 2017 Equifax data breach.
Ars Technica doesn't mention Heid in the article at all. Brandon (talk) 05:15, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Computing, and Florida. Brandon (talk) 05:15, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, seems to meet WP:GNG per these two sources [46][47] which give sigcov but are not cited in the article. The RollingStone could also be of support because the subject is mentioned in at least three paragraphs. But almost all sources cited in the page fail notability requirement as the subject received zero mentions. Ednabrenze (talk) 07:48, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: This needs more participation from editors.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:18, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, seems to meet WP:GNG per the above referenced sources [1][2] which give significant coverage, the subject was the lead involved in all media interations for the content of the articles. The RollingStone article was coordinated by Heid as he is the founder of the HackMiami organization and the lead media liaison, and assisted in the entire process all the way through fact checking with RollingStone editors - additionally, as reverenced above the subject is mentioned in at least three paragraphs in the RS article.

Re: Financial Times - Heid was not only quoted in Financial Times but his discoveries were published in Forbes and referenced by a Senate Commission which names his employer at the time, and he was also the lead PR liaison with that as well - disclosing his discoveries directly to the press.

The Ars Technica article's content was based on a cybersecurity publication authored by Heid during his tenure at Prolexic, which received significant coverage. Infosecwiki (talk) 12:14, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You've added Youtube videos to the article but those are not considered reliable sources. I had removed the ones previously in the article. Please do not continue to add these. Lamona (talk) 00:52, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to HackMiami. The sources in the article are WP:TRIVIALMENTIONS of Heid, or else WP:PRIMARYSOURCES like patents or official bios and WP:PROMO fluff like "top 1000-cited papers on blockchain" (look closer: his paper on this list was cited just twice). The sources identified by Ednabrenze do not qualify. The Russ Banham article is self-published. (While it might otherwise count as WP:EXPERTSPS, given his reputation, the policy is very clear to "Never use self-published sources as third-party sources about living people, even if the author is an expert, well-known professional researcher, or writer.") The Caplin News article is published by Heid's alma mater FIU and written to spotlight him as an alumnus; it fails the test of independence. The sources not holding up to standalone notability, a redirect is an appropriate AtD. Dclemens1971 (talk) 14:16, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Reference the JSTOR, the Blockchain paper was cited over 38 times and has been circulating for over 11 years. Infosecwiki (talk) 16:05, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Vote to Keep: The Caplain News article is not an article highlighting alumni, as Heid never graduated from FIU and only attended for a few years in the early 2000s. The Caplain News Article was written by an independent journalist, Antonio Gimenez has authored numerous pieces on cybersecurity luminaries such as YTCracker, his interview subjects have no affiliateion to FIU unless it is coincidence. FIU will not claim the subject as a graduate, hence proof this is not an alumni fluff piece.

The Russ Banham article is not self published, as the self publishing requirement would dictate that the subject need write the article on their own - Russ Banham is a third party journalist who interviewed the subject and the article was synicated on various outlets. Infosecwiki (talk) 16:12, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No, please read WP:SPS. It doesn't only refer to material by the subject, it refers to any self-published source and Banham is publishing the article on his own site like a blog. I agree, he's an expert reporter, but the policy explicitly restricts self-published sources from being used on BLPs. As for the FIU piece, it specifically describes Heid as a former student (alumnus does not necessarily mean graduate) and it's thus not independent. Finally, please stop !voting "keep" with every comment. You've !voted three times and it appears that you are trying to throw off the conversation. One !vote is enough. Dclemens1971 (talk) 16:53, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the feedback. I will put it into practice. I updated the reference to include more than just the Caplain article. Infosecwiki (talk) 22:25, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Sourcing in the article is patents, and articles that mention the person in passing. Nothing found for notability otherwise, some PR items. Oaktree b (talk) 14:28, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Patent links removed, replaced with relevant notable content such as documented association with John McAfee. Citations updated for missing citation on conferences. Infosecwiki (talk) 16:02, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
In regards to above, i vote for Keep Infosecwiki (talk) 16:03, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Infosecwiki, do you have a WP:CONFLICTOFINTEREST that you need to disclose? Above you state that Heid is "the lead media liaison, and assisted in the entire process all the way through fact checking with RollingStone editors." You also state that "he was also the lead PR liaison" on the Financial Times piece. Neither the Rolling Stone nor FT pieces say that Heid coordinated the PR process, and the HackMiami site does not say that either. That's the kind of information that, if true, could only be obtained by someone affiliated with or otherwise close to Heid and HackMiami. That plus the fact that you have only edited on these two topics raises concern that you may have an undisclosed conflict of interest. Can you address this? (P.S. If Heid was involved, as you say, in the production of these articles, that would argue against them being able to meet the independence standard required for notability.) Dclemens1971 (talk) 20:45, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I am referring to old Twitter discussions that I remember observing from years ago when the articles were released, I do not have any proof of these claims in present day 2024. I openly disclose I not only edited this article, but I created it over a decade ago. I am fully willing to disclose that I am the original author of this article as well as the HackMiami article. The subject of this piece has had notable accomplishments outside the realm of HackMiami and had a page created, and for the last decade it has stood the test until recent inquiries. I fully support the regular review of this article for continued inclusion, as such diligence is what makes Wikipedia the global standard of information. Infosecwiki (talk) 22:07, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mohamed Ashmalee

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

This subject fails WP:GNG, WP:ANYBIO, and WP:Notability (people)/Subnational politicians for the Maldives. Generally, ministers (and subordinates) there are not presumed notable. Otherwise, independent sources lack in-depth coverage on which to base an encyclopedic biography. JFHJr (㊟) 03:02, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Politicians, and Maldives. JFHJr (㊟) 03:02, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Cabinet ministers are generally presumed notable via WP:NPOL as national officeholder; is this ministerial position a cabinet position or is it a civil service one? Curbon7 (talk) 04:35, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Looks to be civil service (appointed bureaucrat, no mention of cabinet or the like). A presumption of notability does not apply here per the subnational politicians country listing for the Maldives. JFHJr (㊟) 15:51, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:39, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Haliey Welch

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

Latest viral meme, very WP:BIO1E. WP:TOOSOON to tell if this is lasting. - UtherSRG (talk) 13:01, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Women, Language, Entertainment, and United States of America. UtherSRG (talk) 13:01, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 16:30, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: there are several internet celebrities and personalities with their own articles. Ben76266 (talk) 18:47, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Draft: I guess, this is likely TOOSOON, but it's got decent enough sourcing. Time will tell if it's notable or not. Oaktree b (talk) 16:43, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I am amenable to this WP:ATD. - UtherSRG (talk) 16:47, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Why did you copy my draft? I created this page first User:UtherSRG Comintell (talk) 18:57, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry confused you with User:BullDawg2021 Comintell (talk) 19:06, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I created the draft first Comintell (talk) 19:11, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry about that. I had no idea that you also created a draft. BullDawg2021 (talk) 19:20, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or Draftify per nom - WP:BIO1E, but possible WP:TOOSOON. KylieTastic (talk) 18:40, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I created this article first and it's already in drafts and was submitted to AfC. Edit history proves I created the draft first. It's current in draft space. user basically copied my draft Comintell (talk) 19:12, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As Comintell did create first at the article is now a copy-paste of that draft Draftify no longer makes any sense. Also I agree if kept it should be as "Hawk Tuah" not Hailey/Haliey Welch, and as BullDawg2021 has accepted Comintell as the creator it would be best to delete this as move Draft:Hailey Welch to Hawk Tuah to keep creator attribution. KylieTastic (talk) 09:49, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. Her name is Hailey Welch, and I created this page fitst and submitted through AfC. Draft:Hailey Welch

The user paraphrased much of my draft, and changed the name because my draft already existed. THIS is incredibly disingenuous.

To clarify. If you read my draft, I think you will see that Welch DOES qualify for notability, specifically because of sustained significant coverage over the last month, and her pivioting into a career and getting mentored by Shaq. I can't believe this UtherSRG basically copied my draft and moved it to mainspace with a spelling error in the name Comintell (talk) 18:57, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Super suspicious that this article says "Often misspelled as Hailey Welch" When All reliable sources cite her name to be Hailey Welch Comintell (talk) 19:03, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please go to her social medias. Her name is Haliey Welch. BullDawg2021 (talk) 19:22, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rdirect or merge: to Draft:Hailey_Welch: I created this page first. Technically this qualifies as speedy delete under WP:A10 Comintell (talk) 19:00, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
As can be seen by the edit history on this article here: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Haliey_Welch&action=history the page was created 13 minutes after I created the inital draft:

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Draft:Hailey_Welch&action=history Comintell (talk) 19:10, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Please assume good faith. I had no idea you created a draft. Also, you spelt her name wrong. BullDawg2021 (talk) 19:21, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Where is your source for this? My article was much more detailed. You literally copied the same flow of facts as I did. What source spells her name this way. Every single reliable source says her name is Hailey. Sure I will assume good faith, but you shouldn't have been permitted to create this article Comintell (talk) 19:28, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Please calm down. Her name is Haliey Welch. You are blowing this way out of proportion. I did not copy you. BullDawg2021 (talk) 19:31, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
To the both of you: there are established procedures in place to preserve the page histories and authorial credits. If this article is kept and you continue the article improvement process, both of you should receive the appropriate credits for things like DYK, etc. I suggest you put aside your differences and work together, not against each other. Viriditas (talk) 20:46, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- @Comintell and BullDawg2021: Both of you need to stop edit-warring on this article. jp×g 🗯️ 06:38, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Absurd as it may seem, the phenomenon has started to gather coverage in reliable sources and move from mere Tiktok gag into a Let's Go Brandon-style cultural moment. Here's eg Slate, 7News, Rolling Stone. That said, this likely belongs under Hawk Tuah, not under Ms Welch's name. Jpatokal (talk) 21:31, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Keep per Jpatokal, or redirect to either Zach Bryan or Shaquille O'Neal. --Jax 0677 (talk) 21:43, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Please see my comment in the discussion Comintell (talk) 22:47, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Reply - @Comintell:, come again? --Jax 0677 (talk) 17:05, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Even if the meme is receiving media coverage, one single TikTok meme is hardly enough to provide notability for a person. WP:1E comes to mind as this person really has no other claims to notability. Di (they-them) (talk) 04:30, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or Draftify: There is not only the fact that the nominator is correct, there are two "competing" drafts, both containing overlapping information. Since it is WP:TOOSOON both draft creators should work together in Draft space to create one draft which may become appropriate to accept when the subject meets WP:BIO which I am not persuaded thsat it does currently 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 06:12, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I wouldn't be opposed to that. BullDawg2021 (talk) 06:17, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yea, @BullDawg2021 I'm sorry that I got so protective and frustrated. Even assuming good faith, this was a frustrating experience for me and I'm sorry if I came off as aggressive or un collaborative. Comintell (talk) 06:44, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment on the purely clerical issue here: there seem to be two pages here, Draft:Hailey Welch (created 2024-07-02T20:47:03) and Haliey Welch (created 2024-07-02T21:54:54‎). The overlap between both articles is fairly significant. I don't know to what extent one was copied from the other, but it seems like this may be worthy of later consideration in some other venue (assuming this is kept, otherwise there is no point). jp×g 🗯️ 06:35, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Notable for making a joke on a street interview? This is the epitome of people notable for only one event. It's possible the event (the joke itself (Hawk Tuah)) is notable, though even that is too soon to tell imo. ato—mic 06:59, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Reminder: There are two issues at play here, whether the "Hawk Tuah" event meets WP:GNG (based on the amount of reliable sources garnered, probably yes) and whether Ms. Welch herself is notable (probably no, it's hard to dispute that this is WP:BIO1E). If you're suggesting that this article be deleted entirely, please clarify your stance on both these points. Jpatokal (talk) 09:16, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:BIO1E Celjski Grad (talk) 09:52, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Creating an article for the notable controversy or Hawk Tuah event will solve this problem. Clearly, this is a problem of WP:TOOSOON for the subject, as well as WP:BIO1E. In such a situation, there is only one way out–having an article about the popular word, "Hawk Tuah", and the influencer (not yet meeting WP:ENT) will redirect to the article. We don't need to argue on an article and a existing draft; it isn't necessary here. Who can/will create the event's article, and save us this stress? Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 11:55, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with this. The person herself obviously falls under WP:TOOSOON (WP:1E), but an article about the phenomenon/trend is much more suitable. There's definitely enough coverage in WP:RS for this. I think a lot of people voting delete here are simply saying WP:IDONTLIKEIT. Many TikTok trends (no exception here) do receive lots of reliable media coverage and do meet WP:NEVENT/GNG. I hope editors start to realize this — it's not 2010 anymore. C F A 💬 01:10, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
2010? Hilarious. "Every generation thinks they invented sex". I created the article on Pinky the Cat a viral video from 1992. Viriditas (talk) 01:36, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Comintell, why not create the event with this energy of dragging having your draft and a post mainspace move by another editor? Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 11:57, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Of course it is notable. Publish the story, under EITHER title to eventually be personalized if she becomes more famous. Thank you, either way likely a Hawk Tuah page is indeed coming to Wikipedia, especially if this story expands further. Thanks again, can't wait to see the page that IS coming. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.241.137.161 (talk) 13:47, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Article is well-cited, subject is notable. I get that memes are not the most encyclopedic topic, but this one definitely meets the criteria at WP:SIGCOV. 162 etc. (talk) 19:46, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. There is nothing notable about this subject. I watched the original video, the interview, and read the sources. There is literally nothing there. Her entire claim to fame consists of expressing her enthusiasm for fellatio. That's it, nothing else. I watched her entire interview that was published the other day, hoping for something, anything, that I could glom onto and say, that's something we should have an article about. There's nothing. She likes to use saliva as lubrication during oral sex. That's the entirety of her notability. Now, I'm not saying there's anything wrong with that, and she seems like a very sweet young lady, but how do we write a biography about this? We can't. Viriditas (talk) 21:29, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The criteria for deciding notability is WP:GNG, not WP:IDONTLIKEIT. Jpatokal (talk) 21:35, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't say I didn't like it. I said there's nothing encyclopedic about the subject. The entire article is a promotional advertising campaign for Welch by her management team who are trying to capitalize on a five second joke she told on social media. This has the longevity of a mayfly. She isn't notable for doing anything. Yes, the video went viral, but Welch was only one of a dozen random subjects interviewed by Tim & Dee TV, which itself isn't even notable. There's nothing here. Nobody will know who she is next week. Viriditas (talk) 21:40, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The articles written about her by The Guardian, Vanity Fair, People, Forbes, etc. etc., will certainly still be there next week. A topic is presumed to be suitable for a stand-alone article or list when it has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. 162 etc. (talk) 22:15, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Warhol was right: "In the future, everyone will be world-famous for 15 minutes." Welch even alludes to that in the Guardian article. There's nothing here to write about. "Haliey Welch is a young woman who was randomly interviewed in the middle of the street and made a joke about fellatio. A video of her went viral, and she was soon approached by an agent who sought to capitalize upon her sexual-themed joke by making clothing with her name on it." That's what we're doing now? Viriditas (talk) 22:22, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

All of this coverage calls her 'Hawk Tuah Girl'. Unless she starts a show, becomes a musician, etc, and receives coverage unrelated to Hawk Tuah, this is WP:1E ato—mic 23:18, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Viriditas's prediction "Nobody will know who she is next week" (above) is commendably free of hedging, obscurantism, waffle. Let this AfD run on until next week, and then reconsider. The article will then live or die; either way, this AfD (with its miscellaneous expressions of indignation) will survive "for ever". -- Hoary (talk) 22:32, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I want a "like" button, @Hoary!!! 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 16:46, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The early filmmakers of the 20th century and the former journalists of MTV News would like a word. The topic of media preservation is one of the most depressing ever. Nothing lasts, everything fades away. Consider, if you will, the Silurian hypothesis. In the far future, nobody will ever know you or I existed. People like to think they are making their lasting mark on the world, but it's a bedtime story we tell ourselves to keep the terror of the dark at bay. Viriditas (talk) 21:09, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. We've kind of got two subjects there: 1) Haliey Welch and 2) the Hawk Tuah meme. There's already a lot of good coverage and it's highly likely coverage of one or both will be lasting. There's something notable here. Similar memes and figures that come to mind are The Crazy Nastyass Honey Badger and Jenn Sterger. Tiffany Gomes, aka the "Crazy Plane Lady", is still getting coverage a year after her initial internet meme moment. Surprised there isn't an article about her. Probably should be. Jweiss11 (talk) 07:36, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jenn Sterger's article is a biographical page discussing her successful careers in television, modeling, and writing. Where is the comparison? Vanilla Wizard 💙 03:30, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Read the article.

"Sterger and Catherine Perry (who later gained fame in WWE under the ringname Lana) were among a group of friends called the FSU Cowgirls, known for wearing skimpy clothing and cowboy hats to football games. She first came to attention when she was shown during a 2005 Florida State–Miami football game televised on ABC Sports. On seeing the shot, announcer Brent Musburger commented on-air that "1,500 red-blooded Americans just decided to apply to Florida State.""

She gained fame in a similar manner to Haliey Welch. RTredwell (talk) 14:06, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Point being? Jenn Sterger actually went on to become a notable person in her own right. If she and her friend were only known as "the FSU cowgirls", a subject that has no article on the encyclopedia, neither she nor her friend would have articles either. Sterger has an article because she gained further notability as a journalist, television personality, and model, enough to justify a BLP page. This article is just the short story of how someone's impromptu joke became a viral moment and she quickly cashed in and got to hang out with a few celebrities as a result. Vanilla Wizard 💙 15:13, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You asked what the comparison is, I explained it to you. RTredwell (talk) 18:40, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
RTredwell, yeah, thanks for your explanation. That was my thinking. Obviously Sterger has had something of sustained notable career, and it's too early to tell if Welch will. But it's worth noting that the article for Sterger was created on February 11, 2006, before she had had much of that career, and after she was known almost entirely for being a memetic hot chick who happened to get on national TV at a football game. Jweiss11 (talk) 07:01, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Too soon; for now, likely fleeting WP:BLP1E. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 13:07, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Draftify and move to the incident rather then the person to comply with WP:BIO1E -1ctinus📝🗨 21:37, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and adding that if this page is kept in any form, it should be exclusively about the meme, not the person. The person is not a suitable subject for a biographical article. This is a textbook example of WP:BLP1E. The meme itself is highly unlikely to have any enduring notability. Vanilla Wizard 💙 02:54, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

also feel like it's worth noting this may be a rare example of a situation where WP:NOTNEWS (WP:ENDURING) is actually potentially applicable in a deletion discussion. A significant percent of what's here is just a description of the subject's fifteen minutes of fame, just listing out every time the subject has appeared near another celebrity in the last few weeks. There's not exactly a lot of encyclopedic material to salvage here. Should also mention that not all of the sources in the article are quality sources. There's a handful of reliable ones, but TMZ, Times of India, Dexerto, and Distractify are not. I'm not convinced a page about the meme itself is justified. Vanilla Wizard 💙 04:22, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Why do you think the meme is unlikely to have any enduring notability? What makes you think you can predict what will be popular in the future? It's impossible to predict the future. RTredwell (talk) 04:32, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's WP:TOOSOON to properly assess if it meets the criteria on enduring notability, too soon for this to be a mainspace article. Vanilla Wizard 💙 04:57, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That said, I agree with LilianaUwU's comments below that draftifying can be an acceptable outcome, too. I don't think this page is ready to be in mainspace. But it is not impossible that the meme/catchphrase could be article-worthy at some point in the future, and there's no harm in incubating it in draftspace as a work-in-progress. The page will need a lot of reworking, anyways; there seems to be little disagreement that the page should just be about the "hawk tuah" phrase — this cannot exist as a BLP page about Haliey Welch. Consider this a delete as first preference, draftify as second preference !vote. Vanilla Wizard 💙 00:39, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. or merge into an article about the meme itself if it does not meet notability guidelines for a biography. The meme has gained massive coverage and notability, and this article cites numerous reliable secondary sources. Thousands of people are looking up Hawk Tuah Girl daily looking for a Wikipedia article on the subject, they should be provided with one. RTredwell (talk) 03:44, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete : Definitely the case of WP:BLP1E and may be WP:TOOSOON at best. So I'd suggest to delete this and see this notability is sustained, but definitely delete for now. Coderzombie (talk) 06:08, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Whether we like it or not, she is notable per WP:GNG and WP:SIGCOV. Extensive and continued media coverage as well.BabbaQ (talk) 21:01, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete (or draftify, see below) per common sense, and the ten-year test. No one will remember this in 10 years. LilianaUwU ^{(talk / contributions)} 21:57, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
With that said... I'd be down with the idea of having an article on the meme rather than the woman behind it, considering BLP1E and all that. The meme has gotten loads of coverage and will be remembered. So... perhaps draftify, maybe? LilianaUwU ^{(talk / contributions)} 00:03, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - We are not here to judge worthiness; we are here to judge whether a topic has been the object of multiple, independently-published, instances of significant coverage in sources which are presumably reliable. This fits the bill. GNG pass from sources showing in the footnotes. Carrite (talk) 22:51, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Extensive media coverage. Too soon to delete; nominator's argument that this will not have lasting notability is WP:CRYSTALBALL. —Lowellian (reply) 00:40, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Move to Hawk-Tuah I think it's pretty clear that WP:BLP1E applies to Hailey Welch's article since well they are famous for one thing and one thing only as of the present day, most of the coverage is in the context of the meme not the person itself and I think we should have a article about the meme rather than the person themselves. Sohom (talk) 13:57, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Anyone considering whether to keep or delete this page, should look at the original draft, Draft:Hailey Welch which has been expanded is formatted properly.

Comintell (talk) 19:45, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Come on. The problem isn't with the formatting, it's with the article being about the person rather than the event. LilianaUwU ^{(talk / contributions)} 23:37, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As my draft was updated to note, she is in talks to get a reality TV show about her life, and further, the Hawk Tuah phrase origins are disputed, with many sources citing that Welch is garnering interest as an individual and public figure. I was just saying. Comintell (talk) 00:59, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Maybe recreate this if the news is somehow still obsessed with her in a few months. I'm pretty sure there's just going to be a deluge of articles for the next few days and then none at all. HadesTTW (he/him • talk) 01:32, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep This girl is essentially Bhad Bhabie/"Cash Me Outside Girl" (who unfortunately also recently made tragic news) for Zoomers instead of Millennials. She is more notable than some other articles.--~Sıgehelmus♗_(Tøk) 02:03, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:BIO1E. Zinderboff(talk) 06:49, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Hailey has a fair amount of coverage in reliable sources (see USA Today, Rolling Stone & The Guardian) and has already collaborated with Shaq and Zach Bryan. She gained online virality in a similar fashion to Gorilla Glue Girl, Bhad Bhabie, and Jenn Sterger - with Sterger also discovered from a passing comment made in a vox pop. While WP:CRYSTALBALL is always a fair argument to suggest she won't forever be notable, it can also be used on the contrary, as this may just not die down any time soon. If there is still not enough supporting evidence for Welch to have her own article, then the video should be the subject instead, e.g. "Looking for a Man in Finance" and Chewbacca Mask Lady. But not delete. --Mechanical Elephant (talk) 23:16, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep there are plenty of reliable sources and flash-in-the-pan memes get articles due to proper sourcing all the time, such as rizz or gyatt XanderK09 (talk) 20:47, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@XanderK09: The problem here is that the article is about the person, not the meme. Since the person is only notable for the meme, she falls under WP:1E. C F A 💬 03:18, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Worst case scenario, move the article to Hawk Tuah and redirect Haliey Welch to it. But I think it's pretty clear that we're at the point where Welch herself is notable. See Tay Zonday / Chocolate Rain. 162 etc. (talk) 19:20, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I feel like this might be of some importance as we have articles on stuff like "your mom jokes" and stuff Thehistorianisaac (talk) 04:49, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Please note that WP:BLP1E lists three criteria, all of which are required for deletion. Please address the actual criteria rather than merely WP:VAGUEWAVE "per BLP1E".
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 14:22, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. This is a clear BLP1E situation. The coverage of the individual is because of the video, the person absolutely is still a low-profile individual (assuming she's going to successfully parlay this into wider fame is impossible to say at this point), and point three doesn't particularly apply to this (if it's about the meme, she would be a footnote in the article.) "Subsequent" developments like her finding representation or starting her own company are still in relation to being the "Hawk Tuah Girl". The best you could argue is the meme should have its own page, but this bio ain't it. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^talk 20:19, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I think at this point there's clearly enough references and global news articles defining her as a notable person, and just based on the interviews she's done over the past week or so, she's clearly got plans to stay in the public eye. I would suggest a cleanup however. Thief-River-Faller (talk) 18:03, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Draftify the page until enough time has passed to assess whether sustained notability exists beyond the initial viral meme phase. The focus should be on documenting the Hawk Tuah meme rather than emphasizing Hailey Welch, unless she achieves broader recognition and is demonstrated to be notable through continued media coverage. Ynsfial (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 19:23, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep // Gargaj (talk) 23:08, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Could you please explain why you think this should be kept? ato—mic 00:58, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:BLP1E. Reliable sources cover the person only in the context of a single event, the person is likely to remain a low-profile individual, and the event (a TikTok interview that went viral) is not significant. Zacwill (talk) 02:07, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Echoing what other users have pointed out, the subject of the article is known only for one thing. Unless the subject gains notability in the future for something else, this article should be deleted as opposed to draftified, as there already exists an article for this subject in draftspace. (Discuss 0nshore's contributions!!!) 06:19, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Not only was she known for her catchphrase, but she also received over a million followers on TikTok insanely quickly. Especially with her capitalizing on the meme. As the other "Keep" votes noted, she is like Bhad Bhabie in which she became known for her catchphrase. Yoshiman6464 ^♫🥚 14:08, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Follower counts aren't relevant in notability discussions, and Bhad Babie's bio article is primarily about her musical career. Maybe we can revisit this discussion if Welch becomes a successful musician or something. But it seems like Hawk Tuah's time in the media spotlight has already come to an end (at least for now, who knows if she'll be relevant again in the future). That the deletion discussion lasted longer than her fifteen minutes of fame should give us some pause. Vanilla Wizard 💙 18:18, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Not true. A quick Google search will review she is still being covered, with multiple articles per day. RTredwell (talk) 16:47, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
But which outlets are still pumping out multiple articles about her per day? The Daily Mail? TMZ? It's been roughly a week since any reliable outlet mentioned her, and even then, there's only been a handful published in the last two weeks. Her day in the sun is over. That doesn't mean she'll never be article-worthy, but she certainly isn't yet. Vanilla Wizard 💙 17:54, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

For WP:TOOSOON, some articles about disasters or events that are recent I haven't seen a notice about this.

For WP:SINGLEEVENT, (this may not count) articles about the Super Bowl, the event only happens on those days pacifically. And the players involved in the football game may not return to the Super Bowl.

Turning it into a draft probably would be a good idea if the article doesn't apply to the rules. Tonkarooson (discuss). 22:32, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Periodically, an article like this comes along that illustrates the absurdity of the WP "notability via sources" idea, by which I mean the idea that the existence of sources is a sufficient condition for an article. The growing corpus of non-encylcopedic content across WP should convince all of us that sources are instead a necessary (but not sufficient) condition and that editors' jobs require added judgements of things like accomplishment to assess the encyclopedic value of the articles that should appear here. (Otherwise, going forward, we should just let AI slurp-in all sources and auto-create articles.) I think it should be clear that there's no encyclopedic content here and, that at a minimum, we would look to WP:ONEEVENT for a softer delete that would not rule-out recreation if this person actually makes notable contributions in the future, as opposed to being forgotten about, once the novelty of her comment runs its course. 128.252.210.3 (talk) 18:02, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
We're evaluating this particular deletion against WP:GNG, not your desire to have an editorial bar for "accomplishment". Jpatokal (talk) 03:27, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Prashanth Venkataramanujam

AfDs for this article:

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

Non-notable BLP. Sources relate either to Patriot Act or Hasan Minhaj. – Broccoli & Coffee ^{(Oh hai)} 21:11, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Patriot Act with Hasan Minhaj, you mean? And he might mean WP:CREATIVE as creator/writer of this series... -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 13:07, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Television. – Broccoli & Coffee ^{(Oh hai)} 21:11, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Illinois-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 22:04, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 19:59, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Not eligible for Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:19, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:25, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Faris Mannekkara

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

Likely to fail WP:NBIO - sourced to PR/puff pieces.
Earlier draft: Draft:Muhammed Faris Mannekkara KH-1 (talk) 00:50, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. KH-1 (talk) 00:50, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and Kerala. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:16, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete The editor who wrote this article made a Draft:Muhammed Faris Mannekkara on 08:13, 22 June 2024 and kept it and later made a new article with a slight change in the title, which is a wrong trend and does not prove WP:NBIO. ~ Spworld2 (talk) 04:00, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Although the editor who made this page did a mistake by creating a draft and then again creating it into the main space, maybe he is a newbie that's why....but if we look at the person's page, he was awarded the community Leader Award from the Kerala State Women's Development Corporation which is a state award from the person's home state which is in Kerala and the Fulbright Foundation’s Global Changemaker Award in 2023 which is a International award given by the US Government which i believe at least qualify the award category of the people's notability guidelines according to the guidelines written in Wikipedia. This guy also has a significant coverage in The Times of India, Economics Times , Ahmedabad Mirror which i believe is considered reliable in Wikipedia. So we have 2 of the 3 basic criteria except the national dictionary thing ....also While reading the content of these articles i don't see any kind of sponsored post written or a disclaimer in the news coverage these are just my analysis. SATavr (talk) 16:19, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It may be ignorance / new editor who wrote the draft and then made a new page, but destroyed the first edits in the first draft and deleted it in a completely unrecognizable form, added another person to it and added it to his date of birth and created a misunderstanding because of lack of knowledge?? Draft:Muhammed Faris Mannekkara Difference between revisions [48], Draft:Muhammed Faris Mannekkara 2nd Difference between revisions[49] Spworld2 (talk) 06:03, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I do agree with you. It was a stupid mistake done by this new editor and i think he lacks the patience for it and just wanted to go directly with a shortcut way for publication. Thats why he change the draft content to a different person and he thought we would'nt know lol..... I believe he has learned a lesson not to do it again and i hope he has got to know that things doesnt workout like this. SATavr (talk) 09:10, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep A before search comes up with many sources. (e.g. [1] [2]. Numerous articles featuring the names appear, the most of them in Hindi and English. Tiger-in-Action (talk) 08:13, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

PR/churnalism doesn’t count. Both articles are just advertorials for his car company.-KH-1 (talk) 10:37, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

These articles discuss his side automobile firm, yet his Wikipedia biography hardly ever mentions this information. The autogenerated nature of these stories is not disclaimed, as is typically the case. The name of the publisher, Sunil Chaurasia, is also mentioned in The Economic Times. His social work is the subject of major pieces that don't appear to be PR or churnalism. They include original research, such as his participation in and thorough coverage of the Sankesh Foundation and the Smiles Foundation. - [3] which is covered in the Ahmedabad Mirror. Another example is his relationship with Shyalash C, his mentor, which isn't mentioned on his Wikipedia page but is confirmed as original research in Punjab Kesari - [4]. Tiger-in-Action (talk) 09:09, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. It would be nice to hear from some more experienced editors about whether sourcing is sufficient to establish notability.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:04, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The person is currently serving as a Global Peace Ambassador under UN75. He has been awarded the Fulbright Award and a State Government Award from Kerala. He meets the basic criteria of WP:GNG and WP:BIO. With regards to his sources the news articles on his social work looks fine but the same cannot be said for some of his articles written about his second-hand car business found in google but considering that his Wikipedia page does not cover his car business, overall, it looks fine to me. Master rollo (talk) 11:29, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I am seriously asking for experienced editors who frequent AFD discussions to review this article.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:39, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: I only get two pages of Gnews results, most are by "staff" or puff pieces/advertorials. The Fullbright sounds promising, but without sourcing we can't confirm, nor do we have enough for notability. Oaktree b (talk) 00:51, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Best I could find was this [50]; GTranslate seems to say it's a staff piece, so likely about as unreliable as the rest of what's already in the article. Oaktree b (talk) 00:52, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Joe Phillips (English cricketer, born 2003)

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

Subject person played only 1 List-A and 2 First class match. Does WP:GNG surpasses WP:NCRICK? Twinkle1990 (talk) 15:42, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sports and Cricket. Twinkle1990 (talk) 15:42, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and England. Twinkle1990 (talk) 17:13, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:59, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Twinkle1990: - can I just point out NSPORT states that "Failing to meet the criteria in this guideline means that notability will need to be established in other ways (for example, the general notability guideline...) - so all NSPORT is saying that people who meet those criteria are considered notable, but not meeting those criteria doesn't automatically make them non-notable. Mdann52 (talk) 20:50, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - meets GNG. Mdann52 (talk) 20:50, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Doesn't appear on the cricket delsort - tryingto add that again first Blue Square Thing (talk) 05:53, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Cricket-related deletion discussions. Blue Square Thing (talk) 05:53, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
At worst this is an obvious redirect to List of Gloucestershire County Cricket Club players where his name needs to be added. A note should also be added, as has been done for others. Beyond that I have no particular view here - there are some sources, but not so many. I suspect he is likely to be covered in others as well fwiw Blue Square Thing (talk) 05:56, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to List of Gloucestershire County Cricket Club players. He does not meet GNG - this is the one qualifying source. Gloscricket is obviously not independent coverage. -- asilvering (talk) 18:13, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Given the delsort issues, more eyes won't hurt.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 18:13, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, but he may be notable in the future, i.e. WP:NOTNOW. SWinxy (talk) 01:14, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@SWinxy, in this case, wouldn't a redirect be more appropriate? That way, if he becomes notable in the future, someone won't have to start the article from scratch. -- asilvering (talk) 18:27, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, borderline decision but given the rhythms and vagaries of the English county cricket season we are approaching the part where younger players are used to a greater extent, precisely the time this page will be useful to people who follow the game to refer to. Hildreth Gazzard (talk) 06:47, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to List of Gloucestershire County Cricket Club players. References are currently insufficient for GNG. Frank Anchor 18:04, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep. Passes WP:NCRIC as a cricketer who has played at the highest domestic level. I would add [51] and maybe [52] to the references. Tau Corvi (talk) 14:18, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: No clear consensus yet.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 19:26, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Moruf Oseni

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

Procedural nom following the discussion at Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2024 June 19 where consensus was that the speedy wasn't the right outcome, but did not necessarily find support for retention and the outcome was for an AfD to establish consensus. Note I have dropped the protection to ECP to allow established editors to improve the article if they feel so inclined as it didn't feel right to have a fully protected article at AfD. However if p-blocks or other solutions are needed, feel free to implement them. I have not protected the AfD out of hope that all editors will work productively. Star Mississippi 13:29, 28 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Businesspeople, and Nigeria. Star Mississippi 13:29, 28 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Pinging @BoraVoro:, who has been fighting the relentless efforts from COI/SPAs to prematurely undraftify this page. Owen× ☎ 14:39, 28 June 2024 (UTC) [reply]

What is the main issue with the page? Are other editors citing any apart from the G11 on the Achievements and Awards section mentioned in the deletion review? @Star Mississippi Michael Ugbodu (talk) 23:01, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have no opinion on the merit @Michael Ugbodu, I just nominated it as the outcome of the DRV. Star Mississippi 01:35, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tentative cautious keep. It appears this article has a history of ping-ponging between draft space and mainspace, with promotional tone, COI/UPE(?) editing issues, and initially unclear claims of significance/notability. As such it deserves scrutiny. (As an aside, it sounded from DRV there might be information about this on the article's talk page, but this has not been undeleted). That said, earlier this month Michael Ugbodu (who I understand may be an involved editor?) added additional sources which point to achievements and awards that present a credible assertion of significance. In such cases, there are sometimes concerns if the sourcing (and awards) themselves are sufficiently independent, i.e. editorially independent vs regurgitating primary sources only. I'm not familiar with Nigerian sourcing, so don't have a good opinion on this. However, while the process followed with this article has been irregular and far from good practice, absent credible assertions to the contrary, it does seem there is adequate 3rd party coverage, sourcing, and notability to warrant an article. Martinp (talk) 11:08, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for flagging the lack of talk page @Martinp. Oversight on my part. It's now undeleted Star Mississippi 12:34, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Now that I've reviewed the talk page, and read the DRV in more detail, I'm changing to delete, send back to draft and enforce requiring using WP:AFC to recreate by any COI editors. I applaud @Michael Ugbodu for their clear statement of COI on the talk page, and for hunting up promising sources. However, paid editing COI should also be listed on the editor's user talk page, and paid-COI article drafts are indeed supposed to go through WP:AFC, not be promoted into mainspace by a COI editor. This is not just bureaucracy, it is exactly there where independence of sources, article bias, etc can be reviewed best, insulating from the fact that a paid-COI editor has much more energy to argue than uncompensated volunteers if there is any debate. We've now had (at least) multiple days at DRV and now 2.5 days here where no-one independent has truly investigated notability and independence of the secondary sources used. Given the COI, this is a must, and while it may be frustrating to a paid editor and their client to have to wait, it would equally be unfair to keep this article in mainspace absent someone independent, experienced with local (Nigerian) sourcing, to verify, jumping the queue vs other paid articles that are going through the (admittedly clogged) AFC pipeline. I'm happy to change my vote if someone independent does investigate those sources during the rest of this AFD. Martinp (talk) 22:36, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

We need to come to a consensus on the main issues with the page. The sources for the awards section are all newspaper sources and not primary sources, so can be considered credible. However, I think the second paragraph on the achievements section can be better written or scrapped as it sounds promotional.

Let's hear what others think as well. Michael Ugbodu (talk) 22:22, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's trickier, Michael. We have a lot of trouble with CV-like COI articles which do use secondary (newspaper) sources, but they are not sufficiently independent of the article subject. I'm (probably) not notable in wikispeak, but would not become so just because I persuaded a newspaper (or two) to run an article where they just parroted what I told them. That's why we need someone who doesn't have a COI to look into that (I can't, since I know nothing about Nigerian newspaper writing habits!) Martinp (talk) 22:39, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 10:22, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 18:36, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Generally lack GNG and the reliable sources has no significant coverage

DXdy FX (talk) 22:33, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Seriously? 1 has no coverage of the man. 2 and 4 are copies of the same press release, also appearing e.g. here and here. 3 is entirely a quoted press release. 5 is another unmarked press release, as also seen for example here, here, and here. 6 also has no biographical coverage, merely a few quotes.
If you think these constitute GNG-satisfying coverage, I have to ask: are you, like every other editor who has taken an interest in this page, being paid to do so, or are you merely incompetent? —Cryptic 22:10, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I checked very they are all press releases. The subject generally has no notability. I think I’ll change my vote to delete right now. DXdy FX (talk) 21:27, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete not ready, lacks notability. --BoraVoro (talk) 13:08, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Strictly Ballroom (band) (3rd nomination)

People proposed deletions