Etron Technology, Inc.
- Etron Technology, Inc. ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · NYT · WP Library)
Article about a company which does not seem to meet the requirements of WP:NCORP. The sources used in the article are standard business coverage, press releases and business listings. McMatter (talk)/(contrib) 12:55, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Business, Technology, and
China. McMatter (talk)/(contrib) 12:55, 14 June 2022 (UTC) - Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Taiwan-related deletion discussions. McMatter (talk)/(contrib) 13:00, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
Jinmyeong Girls' High School
- Jinmyeong Girls' High School ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · NYT · WP Library)
Article gives no indication of notability. A WP:BEFORE does not turn up anything relevant, so fails WP:GNG. The Banner talk 12:49, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
Claires Court School
- Claires Court School ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · NYT · WP Library)
Fails WP:GNG The Banner talk 12:37, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
Nanjing No. 3 High School
- Nanjing No. 3 High School ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · NYT · WP Library)
Fails WP:GNG. Only source gave a virus warning. Hardly any content. A WP:BEFORE gave mainly listings and social media The Banner talk 12:35, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
Peter Beveridge (diver)
- Peter Beveridge (diver) ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · NYT · WP Library)
This article lacks any sources, and my search of google and google books turned up no addtional sources about this person. John Pack Lambert (talk) 12:23, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
Alatau (sanatorium)
- Alatau (sanatorium) ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · NYT · WP Library)
Former sanatorium currently a Swissotel. No indication of notability, fails WP:NBUILD, "may be notable as a result of their historic, social, economic, or architectural importance, but they require significant in-depth coverage by reliable, third-party sources to establish notability." Alexandermcnabb (talk) 10:38, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Architecture and Kazakhstan. Alexandermcnabb (talk) 10:38, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
- Keep - This does look like its considered a significant cultural property, especially with the government status. The coverage looks significant - one independent source calls it "famous" - even from Forbes.[1][2] Oakshade (talk) 03:12, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 12:02, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
Lighthouse Christian School
- Lighthouse Christian School ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · NYT · WP Library)
Fails WP:GNG. Mainly listings available, no in-depth sources The Banner talk 11:52, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education, Schools, and Idaho. Shellwood (talk) 12:10, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
British silent horror
- British silent horror ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · NYT · WP Library)
Not a real, recognized cinematic sub-category, just a description. Clarityfiend (talk) 11:16, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film and United Kingdom. Shellwood (talk) 12:12, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
Christopher I. Chalokwu
- Christopher I. Chalokwu ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · NYT · WP Library)
Non-notable Geologist who fails WP:SIGCOV and WP:GNG. Written as an advert and have survived for the past years without improvement. Jamiebuba (talk) 10:48, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Nigeria, and United States of America. Jamiebuba (talk) 10:48, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
Yamata Amasung Keibu Keioiba
- Yamata Amasung Keibu Keioiba ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · NYT · WP Library)
Theatre play of unclear notability. The two sources cited throughout are not independent; they appear to be copies of the handbill or similar. A Google search finds one source that might or might not be reliable, [3] which summarizes the plot in one paragraph. That isn't enough third-party coverage for an article. Sandstein 10:27, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Theatre-related deletion discussions. Sandstein 10:27, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
Toufiq Kreidieh
- Toufiq Kreidieh ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · NYT · WP Library)
Non-notable entrepreneur who fails WP:GNG and WP:SIGCOV. Possible WP:PROMO as it was created in Draftspace here and declined. See more here, requesting it to be WP:SALTED. Jamiebuba (talk) 08:56, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Lebanon. Jamiebuba (talk) 08:56, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. --Baggaet (talk) 09:46, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
Dr. ajay prakash
- Dr. ajay prakash ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · NYT · WP Library)
No evidence of notability, minor politician (not a member of an assembly, but a member of party committees only, as far as I can tell) Fram (talk) 08:34, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians and India. Fram (talk) 08:34, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete: per nomination. Fails WP:NPOL. --Baggaet (talk) 09:52, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
- Speedy delete A7.
OGAE Song Contest 2019
- OGAE Song Contest 2019 ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · NYT · WP Library)
Fan contest that fails several notability guidelines, including WP:GNG. A standalone article is not required, the winner is already covered on OGAE and the remaining songs and places are not notable and could be considered WP:FANCRUFT. Sims2aholic8 (talk) 07:54, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. Sims2aholic8 (talk) 07:54, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 08:15, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete. The fan club itself is notable, however this "alternative to Eurovision" contest appears to be just a fun yearly event for them. Neither the event nor its outcome receive substantial coverage in independent secondary sources. Grk1011 (talk) 13:09, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
Paule Desjardins
- Paule Desjardins ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · NYT · WP Library)
Very little information about the subject appear to be available. Article fails WP:GNG and WP:MUSICBIO and the subject falls under WP:ONEEVENT. Sims2aholic8 (talk) 07:47, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Music. Sims2aholic8 (talk) 07:47, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of France-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 08:16, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
- Redirect to Eurovision Song Contest 1957. Nearly every search result using the "find sources" tool above is related to their Eurovision appearance, which is covered in greater detail in that article. The target also includes additional context. Appears to be a WP:ONEEVENT subject. Grk1011 (talk) 13:06, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
Mony Marc
- Mony Marc ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · NYT · WP Library)
Very little information about the subject appear to be available. Article fails WP:GNG and WP:MUSICBIO and the subject falls under WP:ONEEVENT. Sims2aholic8 (talk) 07:46, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Belgium. Shellwood (talk) 08:15, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
- Redirect to Eurovision Song Contest 1956. Nearly every search result using the "find sources" tool above is related to their Eurovision appearance. Appears to be a WP:ONEEVENT subject. Grk1011 (talk) 13:03, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
Aaron Blanton
- Aaron Blanton ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · NYT · WP Library)
This article is about a film producer and director that fails WP:NCREATIVE and WP:SIGCOV. The sources in the article are passing mentions and nothing in-depth. A search on G-NEWS bring barely 3 sources all of which are mentions. At best, it is WP:TOOSOON. Jamiebuba (talk) 07:44, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers and United States of America. Jamiebuba (talk) 07:44, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
Gavin Turner
- Gavin Turner ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · NYT · WP Library)
No evidence of notability found, only passing mentions or posts from related sources (like "Black and Red United"). Prod was removed because he "meets WP:NFOOTBALL", but NFOOTBALL is no longer an accepted guideline, players need to show significant coverage, not just having played. Fram (talk) 06:39, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Virginia. Fram (talk) 06:39, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete per nom; even if he meets WP:NFOOTBALL as a current guideline, all sections under basic criteria are suggestions regarding sourcing, not a bright line. Iseult Δx parlez moi 07:29, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete we do not have the level of coverage needed to pass GNG.John Pack Lambert (talk) 12:59, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
Mayor Max I
- Mayor Max I ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · NYT · WP Library)
I redirected this to Mayor Max II for lack of notability, but was reverted because somehow the "official" mayor max site establishes that notability. While "2" got probably enough attention to warrant an article, I don't see the same for "1" and a mention or short paragraph in the "2" article seems sufficient, so I again propose redirecting this. Fram (talk) 06:36, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Animal, Politics, and California. Fram (talk) 06:36, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
- Comment: note sourcing for Max I in articles [4] and [5]. Iseult Δx parlez moi 07:33, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete the place has no government, so essentially the opening of the article is false. This is a publicity stunt, it has no encyclopedic value. This dog was not a mayor.John Pack Lambert (talk) 13:04, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
Arrestandis bonis ne dissipentur
- Arrestandis bonis ne dissipentur ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · NYT · WP Library)
Yet another longstanding dicdef on a legal phrase, which should either be merged into a list of ancient/obsolete writs, or moved to Wiktionary. It should not be a freestanding article. BD2412 T 06:04, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. BD2412 T 06:04, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 08:59, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
Merge and redirect to Glossary of law.These writs seem to be included in more or less every book ever published on the subject. Their full names are not always used. Sometimes their names are abbreviated by books, and sometimes by the fact that Google Books' OCR has difficulty with double column pages etc. James500 (talk) 02:21, 8 June 2022 (UTC) Merge and redirect to Writ. On second thoughts, I think that, in this case, Writ is a better target than the glossary. James500 (talk) 23:06, 8 June 2022 (UTC)- @James500: I appreciate what you are aiming for with the Glossary of law, but given that the latest Black's Law Dictionary is well over a thousand pages, I do not think that this is conceptually manageable. Feel free to prove me wrong, though. BD2412 T 02:30, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
- The merger of five very short articles into a 15kB list is not in any way comparable to a thousand page book. Our glossary of law has not so far attempted to reproduce the whole of Black's or anything close to that. Howell's glossary, which was been used as the starting point for our glossary, is 51 pages of fairly large and widely spaced type. In any event, we have glossaries with a similar scope and organisation in Category:Wikipedia glossaries. We also have lists with tens or hundreds of thousands of entries. Compared to those, our glossary of law is presently extremely small. Even if, for the sake of argument, we later considered it necessary to remove these five writs from the glossary, I could create a List of writs to house them and other suitable writs. And I would take care of that personally. James500 (talk) 03:23, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
- I'm just saying that the title, "Glossary of law", is not limited to any specific source, and if it were to end up being a complete collection reflecting that title, it would either be enormous or subdivided into a great many parts. BD2412 T 03:32, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
- The glossary is limited by the judgment and discretion of the editor(s) who maintain it. What you refer to as a "complete collection" has not been attempted. I do not understand why you suggest that it might be attempted in the future. I see no reason to worry about hypothetical theoretical imaginary scenarios. James500 (talk) 04:40, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
- That sounds arbitrary. I would suggest putting some limiting principles in writing to describe what should be included or excluded. BD2412 T 04:46, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
- Why are you not concerned about the other glossaries that have a similar scope and similar approach, such as Glossary of agriculture, amongst others? Why are you not concerned that the corresponding article Law does not have "limiting principles in writing"? Are you asking for "limiting principles in writing" that would prevent the merger of the five articles you have nominated? James500 (talk) 04:55, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
- If you don't like the idea of merging these five articles to the glossary, how about merging and redirecting them to the article Writ? That article is about 20kB and could easily take the content from these five articles. That article already includes a partial list of writs for the US, and it would be easy enough to add a similar list for England. James500 (talk) 05:27, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
- It would have to be done in a way (for most of them) that avoids the impression that these are not ancient and obsolete. BD2412 T 13:10, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
- So far as these articles are based on a book from 1728, that can dealt with that by writing the words "As of 1728", or a cognate expression, or by finding a more recent source. (There are better sources available). If you want to say these writs are obsolete, you would need to actually produce a reliable source that shows that these writs are obsolete. Have these writs been abolished by legislation? Is there a binding or persuasive judicial precedent that says they can no longer be used? In the absence of authority, is there a treatise or periodical article etc that expresses doubt that the courts would allow these writs to be used today? I can tell you, for example, that the writ "Auxilium ad filium militem . . . " is said to be abolished by the Tenures Abolition Act 1660 (12 Car 2 c 24): [6]. Desuetude is often said to be unknown to English law. Conversely, I see no evidence that it is automatically applied in English law (if it is applied at all). Sources discussing this include, for example, [7] [8][9] [10].Ashford v Thornton would be an extreme example of the failure of English law to apply desuetude. Another example is the following source specifically dealing with (and denying) the alleged obsolesence of the writ ne exeat regno: [11]. James500 (talk) 23:04, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
- It would have to be done in a way (for most of them) that avoids the impression that these are not ancient and obsolete. BD2412 T 13:10, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
- That sounds arbitrary. I would suggest putting some limiting principles in writing to describe what should be included or excluded. BD2412 T 04:46, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
- The glossary is limited by the judgment and discretion of the editor(s) who maintain it. What you refer to as a "complete collection" has not been attempted. I do not understand why you suggest that it might be attempted in the future. I see no reason to worry about hypothetical theoretical imaginary scenarios. James500 (talk) 04:40, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
- I'm just saying that the title, "Glossary of law", is not limited to any specific source, and if it were to end up being a complete collection reflecting that title, it would either be enormous or subdivided into a great many parts. BD2412 T 03:32, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
- The merger of five very short articles into a 15kB list is not in any way comparable to a thousand page book. Our glossary of law has not so far attempted to reproduce the whole of Black's or anything close to that. Howell's glossary, which was been used as the starting point for our glossary, is 51 pages of fairly large and widely spaced type. In any event, we have glossaries with a similar scope and organisation in Category:Wikipedia glossaries. We also have lists with tens or hundreds of thousands of entries. Compared to those, our glossary of law is presently extremely small. Even if, for the sake of argument, we later considered it necessary to remove these five writs from the glossary, I could create a List of writs to house them and other suitable writs. And I would take care of that personally. James500 (talk) 03:23, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
- @James500: I appreciate what you are aiming for with the Glossary of law, but given that the latest Black's Law Dictionary is well over a thousand pages, I do not think that this is conceptually manageable. Feel free to prove me wrong, though. BD2412 T 02:30, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 06:18, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
- Merge to Writ per above. This, as a dicdef without sufficient context (what does it mean? what are its implications?) cannot stand on its own, but merge-redirecting to the glossary might be unsustainable. Writ is fine, as per the def, it's a subcategory. That said, I do think that we need some better guidance/notability criteria on how to handle dicdefs; I think that, sooner or later, we're going to end up either with a lot of redirects or a lot of unbalanced merges. Iseult Δx parlez moi 07:44, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
Atturnato faciendo vel recipiendo
- Atturnato faciendo vel recipiendo ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · NYT · WP Library)
Another longstanding dicdef on a legal phrase, that should either be merged into a list of ancient/obsolete writs, or moved to Wiktionary. It does not belong here as a freestanding article. BD2412 T 06:02, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. BD2412 T 06:02, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 08:59, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
Merge and redirect to Glossary of law.These writs seem to be included in more or less every book ever published on the subject. Their full names are not always used. Sometimes their names are abbreviated by books, and sometimes by the fact that Google Books' OCR has difficulty with double column pages etc. James500 (talk) 02:22, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 06:18, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
- Merge and redirect to Writ per [12]; class of identical AfDs. Iseult Δx parlez moi 07:45, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
Auxilium ad filium militem faciendum et filiam maritandam
- Auxilium ad filium militem faciendum et filiam maritandam ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · NYT · WP Library)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · NYT · WP Library)
Another longstanding dicdef. Perhaps several of these can be merged together into a list of ancient/defunct writs, or moved to Wiktionary. This is not encyclopedia material, however. BD2412 T 05:57, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. BD2412 T 05:57, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. Best 09:00, 7 June 2022 (UTC)Alexandermcnabb (talk)
Merge and redirect to Glossary of law.These writs seem to be included in more or less every book ever published on the subject. Their full names are not always used. Sometimes their names are abbreviated by books, and sometimes by the fact that Google Books' OCR has difficulty with double column pages etc. James500 (talk) 02:23, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 06:18, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
- Merge and redirect to Writ per [13]; class of identical AfDs. Iseult Δx parlez moi 07:46, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
Arresto facto super bonis mercatorum alienigenorum
- Arresto facto super bonis mercatorum alienigenorum ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · NYT · WP Library)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · NYT · WP Library)
Another longstanding dicdef for a legal term. If not deleted, this should be merged somewhere or moved to Wiktionary. BD2412 T 05:55, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. BD2412 T 05:55, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. Best 09:00, 7 June 2022 (UTC)Alexandermcnabb (talk)
Merge and redirect to Glossary of law.These writs seem to be included in more or less every book ever published on the subject. Their full names are not always used. Sometimes their names are abbreviated by books, and sometimes by the fact that Google Books' OCR has difficulty with double column pages etc. James500 (talk) 02:24, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 06:17, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
- Merge and redirect to Writ per [14]; class of identical AfDs. Iseult Δx parlez moi 07:46, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
Arrestando ipsum qui pecuniam recepit
- Arrestando ipsum qui pecuniam recepit ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · NYT · WP Library)
For over fifteen years, this has been nothing more than a dicdef. Perhaps it could be merged somewhere (I can't think of where, offhand) or moved to Wiktionary, but it is not something that belongs here. BD2412 T 05:53, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. BD2412 T 05:53, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 09:00, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
Merge and redirect to Glossary of law.These writs seem to be included in more or less every book ever published on the subject. Their full names are not always used. Sometimes their names are abbreviated by books, and sometimes by the fact that Google Books' OCR has difficulty with double column pages etc. James500 (talk) 02:25, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 06:17, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
- Merge and redirect to Writ per [15]; class of identical AfDs. Iseult Δx parlez moi 07:47, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
Missing Presence
- Missing Presence ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · NYT · WP Library)
Appears to fail WP:NFILM. No notable awards, some coverage in Farsi [16] (primary source?) and [17] KH-1 (talk) 04:28, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film and Iran. KH-1 (talk) 04:28, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
- Comment: the only English-language review of the film I can find is at https://asianmoviepulse.com/2020/11/documentary-review-khatemeh-2020-by-hadi-zarei-and-mehdi-zarei/. Not sure if this qualifies as a reliable source; they do promote some film distribution / production sponsors on the site although I don't necessarily know if this film is one such example. /wiae /tlk 12:13, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 06:15, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
Danny Birt
- Danny Birt ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · NYT · WP Library)
Promotional article. Doesn't pass WP:NMUSIC or WP:NAUTHOR. Dr. Swag Lord (talk) 05:19, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Authors, and Bands and musicians. Dr. Swag Lord (talk) 05:19, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete. I thought that it might pass basic criteria despite not meeting NMUSIC or NAUTHOR, as these are guidelines, not bright lines, but we have issues with sourcing. First, I can't find reliable significant independent coverage in my WP:BEFORE checks. Second, the majority of sourcing in the article is either not independent (1, 3, 11), not significant (5-7, 12-14, 16), not reliable (6, 10), or unverifiable due to link rot (all remainder but 2). Source 2 is a short bio in a local news outlet, which might fulfill appropriate criteria, but we need multiple such sources. Iseult Δx parlez moi 08:01, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
Summit Daily News
- Summit Daily News ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · NYT · WP Library)
Fails WP:ORG and WP:GNG. References are from the subject's own website. No WP:SIGCOV. Geoff | Who, me? 17:52, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: News media and Colorado. Shellwood (talk) 17:53, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- Redirect to The Denver Post or Ogden Newspapers#Colorado. No independent sourcing to establish notability. TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 03:04, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 03:46, 7 June 2022 (UTC)Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 04:59, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
- Redirect to Ogden Newspapers#Colorado per nom; also can't find sources despite filtered searches. Closest thing found is a press release. Iseult Δx parlez moi 08:04, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
Meri Life Mein Uski Wife
- Meri Life Mein Uski Wife ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · NYT · WP Library)
Unreferenced stub about a non-notable film. Search finds nothing that would come even close to RS sigcov. Moved back to drafts a few times, but instead of adding sources, contributors just move it straight back, so here we are at AfD. Fails WP:GNG. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 04:59, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film and India. DoubleGrazing (talk) 04:59, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete per nom; no good online sources under either the Hindi or Bengali names. Iseult Δx parlez moi 08:08, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
Jalen Smeins
- Jalen Smeins ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · NYT · WP Library)
Fails WP:GNG; lack of WP:SIGCOV from reliable third-party sources. JTtheOG (talk) 04:31, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and United Kingdom. JTtheOG (talk) 04:31, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. Iseult Δx parlez moi 08:09, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
Tarik Prentice
- Tarik Prentice ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · NYT · WP Library)
Fails WP:GNG; lack of WP:SIGCOV from third-party sources. JTtheOG (talk) 04:26, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and United Kingdom. JTtheOG (talk) 04:26, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
Mollydooker Wines
- Mollydooker Wines ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · NYT · WP Library)
I don't believe this meets WP:NCORP based on the minimal level of coverage I located. Disregarding the primary sourcing, all we're left with here is lists of wines, which don't constitute WP:SIGCOV of the company. I found nothing more substantive on a search. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 04:24, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Wine, Companies, and Australia. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 04:24, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
Phasing and Recoverability
- Phasing and Recoverability ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · NYT · WP Library)
No reliable secondary independent articles about the book. The two reviews in the article are on user-generated sites so do not meet the reliability standard. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 03:37, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 03:37, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 08:12, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
Soeli Fakahafua
- Soeli Fakahafua ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · NYT · WP Library)
Fails WP:GNG. No WP:SIGCOV exists. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 03:11, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Oceania. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 03:11, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 18:52, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 03:22, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
Brad Glenn (American football coach)
- Brad Glenn (American football coach) ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · NYT · WP Library)
fails WP:NCOLLATH Troutfarm27 (Talk) 03:09, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, American football, and South Carolina. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 06:01, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
- Comment, SIGCOV here. BeanieFan11 (talk) 14:20, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
- This is probably SIGCOV. BeanieFan11 (talk) 14:21, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
- If reliable, this is probably SIGCOV as well. BeanieFan11 (talk) 14:28, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
- This is probably SIGCOV. BeanieFan11 (talk) 14:21, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 03:22, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
Little Fish, Strange Pond
- Little Fish, Strange Pond ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · NYT · WP Library)
Fails WP:SIGCOV, WP:NFO and WP:NFSOURCES. I found no suitable or reliable sources or reviews to pass WP:NEXIST in a WP:BEFORE and no reviews on Rotten Tomatoes. The Film Creator (talk) 18:25, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 18:46, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete Zero hits on the movie, some scattered hits on the use of the phrase. Some come up with Galafinakis who starred in the movie. Oaktree b (talk) 20:14, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
- Comment Should actually be at Frenemy (film), which is the reason for zero hits (the title here ended up being changed after a failed theatrical run, which it did have as it came out before Zach Galifianakis's spike after The Hangover to use him on the cover to drive rentals). Will investigate further because I know there were more. Nate • (chatter) 20:38, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
- Comment Found this review in the Austin American-Statesman [18] DonaldD23 talk to me 20:54, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: We now have the proper name. Giving it some more time
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 03:09, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete even with the correct title I found very few hits. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 03:55, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
List of sexual orientations
- List of sexual orientations ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · NYT · WP Library)
My PROD was challenged, so coming over here. I put in the prod Same reason as List of gender identities Prod reason:
in Special:Diff/1089462404. It was also PROD endorsed by {{tq|Unreferenced and appears to peter out half way through. . . (proposed by Mean as custard)}}
Courtesy ping: TenPoundHammer. Happy Editing--IAmChaos 01:48, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete as redundant to Sexual identity#Identities. Anything covered in RS and not listed there can be added. The list here is unsourced and includes terms that are not sexual orientations, like "polyamorous", which is a type of relationship and not a sexual orientation any more than "monogamous", and "queer", which is an umbrella term. Crossroads -talk- 01:56, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
- I do prefer deletion as it seems an implausible search term, but I would also support redirection to another article, preferably Sexual identity#Identities, as a secondary choice. Crossroads -talk- 04:00, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sexuality and gender and Lists. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 06:00, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
- Keep I would say the list is useful for someone in our part of the world who don't have much info on this front. Sure references are missing but they can be sourced and added. Amitized (talk) 03:59, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
- See WP:ITSUSEFUL. Crossroads -talk- 05:43, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
There are some pages within Wikipedia that are supposed to be useful navigation tools and nothing more—disambiguation pages, categories, and redirects, for instance—so usefulness is the basis of their inclusion; for these types of pages, usefulness is a valid argument.
While lists aren't explicitly mentioned here, WP:NLIST supports the idea that lists can be kept because they are useful:Lists that fulfill recognized informational, navigation, or development purposes often are kept regardless of any demonstrated notability.
. Elli (talk | contribs) 16:41, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
- See WP:ITSUSEFUL. Crossroads -talk- 05:43, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete. I fail to see how this list could be justified. Not only does it not have reliable sources to support it, but the term "Sexual orientation" means "A person's identity in relation to the gender or genders to which they are sexually attracted; the fact of being heterosexual, homosexual, etc.". According to Wikipedia's article on sexual orientation: "Sexual orientation is an enduring pattern of romantic or sexual attraction (or a combination of these) to persons of the opposite sex or gender, the same sex or gender, or to both sexes or more than one gender. These attractions are generally subsumed under heterosexuality, homosexuality, and bisexuality, while asexuality (the lack of sexual attraction to others) is sometimes identified as the fourth category.... Sexual preference may also suggest a degree of voluntary choice, whereas sexual orientation is not a choice." (emphasis mine)
Also, according to this list, "Queer" is a sexual orientation -- but it is not. "Queer" is an umbrella term used today for anything that isn't related to heterosexuality and biological male and female humans. "Bicurious" (which is correctly written as "Bi-curious") is not a sexual orientation -- it's a curiosity (otherwise known as being interested in learning about something).
Wikipedia already has an article about Sexual identity, with a bunch of them described and sourced. Furthermore, Wikipedia is not a dictionary. Pyxis Solitary (yak). L not Q. 08:51, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
- Redirect to Sexual identity#Identities as preferred WP:ATD ~Kvng (talk) 13:00, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
- Redirect to Sexual identity#Identities. It does seem rather redundant when we already have a page that covers such material with sources. Maxx-♥ talk and coffee ☕ 13:27, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
- Sexual identity has a hatnote that states
Not to be confused with sexual orientation or gender identity
, so a redirect to that article does not appear to be a reasonable WP:ATD. I suggest a redirect to the Sexual orientation article, to preserve the editing history and so a list with navigational, developmental and/or informational purposes can be created when someone has time to conduct a WP:BEFORE for this notable topic. Beccaynr (talk) 23:15, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
- Regardless of the hatnote, it is clear from the text that the concepts are closely related. And really, it's more that this article is mistitled - what is listed here are sexual identities, as evidenced by "gay" and "lesbian" being separate and in addition to "homosexual" when these are all the same sexual orientation (homosexuality). Crossroads -talk- 04:00, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
- But the article title is List of sexual orientations, it is a notable topic (a basic WP:BEFORE seems to confirm this) and there is a plausible redirect based on the title. It appears to create an original research or at least an accuracy issue to try to redirect a Sexual orientation topic to the Sexual identity article when the Sexual identity article specifically disclaims this. I do not think the unsourced items in the current article should guide what to do with this list, and I think we should use the article title as a guide, and allow further development after there is time for research. Redirecting to the Sexual orientation article could also help guide future development of the list article. For example, when I revised the List of gender identities, I removed unsourced items and added sourced items, and a similar process would appear to be needed here. Beccaynr (talk) 04:40, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
- Sexual orientations and sexual identities are not one and the same. Sexual orientation is inborn. You're born heterosexual, homosexual, or bisexual (with bi presenting in many forms: a little, a lot, infrequently, regularly, with preferences for male or female, without preferences for either sex). Pyxis Solitary (yak). L not Q. 09:39, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
- According to Youth Sexualities: Public Feelings and Contemporary Cultural Politics at 272 "Whereas the list of sexual orientations is long, including graysexual, asexual, scoliosexual, demisexual, pansexual, polysexual, and all of the mentioned prefixes with the suffix "-romantic", the vocabulary for gender...", and there is discussion in the chapter about how various ideas about gender identity can inform the list of sexual orientations. Something similar appears to be discussed here: We're Here and We're Queer: Sexual Orientation and Sexual Fluidity Differences Between Bisexual and Queer Women ("Although early definitions of bisexuality may have been predominantly binary (i.e., attracted to women and men), in recent years there has been a move toward a more “queer” understanding of bisexuality (e.g., attraction to more than one gender beyond women and men).") Similarly, in a chapter of Critical Disability Theory: Essays in Philosophy, Politics, Policy, and Law at 117 ("Given the initiative's specific list of sexual orientations that would no longer be covered by the ordinance and the societal assumption that there are only two sexes, it is relatively safe to conclude that the creators of the initiative did not intend this outcome.") Based on my initial WP:BEFORE, this seems to be a clearly notable but obviously complicated topic that should be handled with care; I just do not have the time and focus right now to try to research and develop this list beyond trying to advocate for a redirect that appears to make the most sense based on the article title. But I do think a well-developed introduction could help this list have a navigational, development and informational purpose, including because even based on the previous research from the List of gender identities article, social media companies have been creating such lists, so it appears to be a viable search term. Beccaynr (talk) 13:28, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
- Sexual orientations and sexual identities are not one and the same. Sexual orientation is inborn. You're born heterosexual, homosexual, or bisexual (with bi presenting in many forms: a little, a lot, infrequently, regularly, with preferences for male or female, without preferences for either sex). Pyxis Solitary (yak). L not Q. 09:39, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
- But the article title is List of sexual orientations, it is a notable topic (a basic WP:BEFORE seems to confirm this) and there is a plausible redirect based on the title. It appears to create an original research or at least an accuracy issue to try to redirect a Sexual orientation topic to the Sexual identity article when the Sexual identity article specifically disclaims this. I do not think the unsourced items in the current article should guide what to do with this list, and I think we should use the article title as a guide, and allow further development after there is time for research. Redirecting to the Sexual orientation article could also help guide future development of the list article. For example, when I revised the List of gender identities, I removed unsourced items and added sourced items, and a similar process would appear to be needed here. Beccaynr (talk) 04:40, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
- Regardless of the hatnote, it is clear from the text that the concepts are closely related. And really, it's more that this article is mistitled - what is listed here are sexual identities, as evidenced by "gay" and "lesbian" being separate and in addition to "homosexual" when these are all the same sexual orientation (homosexuality). Crossroads -talk- 04:00, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete or redirect per Pyxis Solitary's statement. Sahaib (talk) 16:20, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
- Redirect to Sexual orientation. It's trivial to find sources that handle this subject as a grouping, but the status quo is not right for mainspace. I would change my vote to keep if someone put in some WP:HEY. I can find sources about the difference between orientation and identity, but I can also find sources that treat the two as synonymous. As long as we have articles on both and have them defined as different, we shouldn't surprise readers by redirecting them to pages that immediately contradict they link they took to get there. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 18:56, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
- The article is about a notable subject but you want it deleted unless it is improved before this AfD closes. What policy justify such a deletion? ~Kvng (talk) 04:00, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
- I don't want it deleted. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 12:18, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
- The article is about a notable subject but you want it deleted unless it is improved before this AfD closes. What policy justify such a deletion? ~Kvng (talk) 04:00, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
- Redirect as suggested. Oaktree b (talk) 00:51, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
- Redirect to Sexual orientation. Apart from the sourcing issues some of the terms mentioned are arguably not sexual orientations, or at least aren't described as such in their article (e.g. Queer, Polyamory, Aromantic). Of the ones which are sexual orientations the Sexual orientation discusses all of them in more depth, so the list doesn't add much anyway. Sexual orientation and Sexual identity aren't the same thing, so I don't think it would be a good idea to redirect to Sexual identity. Hut 8.5 12:04, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
- In light of the below comment I think the title is a reasonable search term, which means a redirect is appropriate even if there is no useful edit history. Hut 8.5 18:09, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete (without a redirect) per Pyxis's excellent statement. A list of four entries which are discussed at the actual article on the topic is utterly pointless. There is no editing history worthy of preservation of content of salvaging. A redirect would be pointless and ATD doesn't apply. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 23:28, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
- 'Redirect as per. scope_creepTalk 01:41, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete or redirect to Sexual orientation. TolWol56 (talk) 21:55, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Along with Keep and Delete, a redirect has been strongly suggested, either to Sexual orientation or to Sexual identity#Identities. Is there a strong argument for one redirect over another?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 02:57, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
- A redirect to the Sexual orientation article seems supported by the WP:R#ASTONISH guideline, i.e.
Wikipedia follows the "principle of least astonishment"; after following a redirect, the reader's first question is likely to be: "Hang on ... I wanted to read about this. Why has the link taken me to that?" Make it clear to the reader that they have arrived in the right place.
Redirecting to another topic, such as Sexual identity, appears to be contrary to this guideline, including due to the hatnote on the Sexual identity article. Beccaynr (talk) 03:13, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
Cement and its applications
- Cement and its applications ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · NYT · WP Library)
Unsourced article about seemingly insignificant Russian trade magazine {{u|Squeeps10}} {Talk} Please ping when replying. 02:42, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Business and Companies. {{u|Squeeps10}} {Talk} Please ping when replying. 02:42, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
Too Lost
- Too Lost ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · NYT · WP Library)
Fails WP:GNG. No significant independent secondary coverage. The one review of the business that I could find was on a site blacklisted by Wikipedia, which means that that article must not be used to help establish notability. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 02:15, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Music, Business, and United States of America. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 02:15, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
- Hello, I believe this page should not be deleted and here's why. Too Lost is a music distribution company that has became very popular in the music music distribution community having over 75.000 artist using it. I created the page since the company did not have a wikipedia page and wanted to contribute to publish more info about the company. I provided all the necessary credit and did research on the company to verify all information. I'm very passionate about music and believe everything posted is credible and plan to publish more information about the company. Also for the first article I posted that was blacklisted was made by mistake and corrected the error once I found out it was blacklisted. There were no outlandish claims being made in those news articles and merlin has confirmed that Too Lost is a partner WrightyTighty (talk) 02:38, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete; fails WP:GNG. Veracity of information does not imply notability. No significant independent secondary sources. Iseult Δx parlez moi 08:49, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
Action in the North Atlantic (video game)
- Action in the North Atlantic (video game) ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · NYT · WP Library)
Fails WP:GNG. Seemingly lacks any coverage outside of sole passing review in Computer Gaming World. benǝʇᴉɯ 01:59, 14 June 2022 (UTC) Co-nominating Battleship Bismarck: Operation Rhine - May 1941 for the same reasons. benǝʇᴉɯ 02:01, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. benǝʇᴉɯ 01:59, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete Being an old game, it's entirely possible we are missing old print sources. However, we can't assume they exist. Mobygames (itself unreliable, but a good source for finding reviews that may be reliable) has one the only CGW review listed, where many old games often have several print magazines listed. There's unsurprisingly no hits in WP:VG/S's search engine. -- ferret (talk) 02:30, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete Nothing on Newspapers.com either. Timur9008 (talk) 15:09 ,14 June 2022 (UTC)
Abracadabra! (video game)
- Abracadabra! (video game) ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · NYT · WP Library)
Fails WP:GNG and WP:NVG. Only one source, an ostensibly self-published blog, discusses it in depth; the other two are an ad made by the game's publisher, which is also self-published and only briefly mentions the game, and its entry in a database for Atari games that merely lists stats about the game. benǝʇᴉɯ 01:52, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements, Science fiction and fantasy, and Video games. benǝʇᴉɯ 01:52, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete Being an old game, it's entirely possible we are missing old print sources. However, we can't assume they exist. Mobygames (itself unreliable, but a good source for finding reviews that may be reliable) has zero reviews listed, where many old games have several print magazines generally listed. There's unsurprisingly no hits in WP:VG/S's search engine. -- ferret (talk) 01:56, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
- Merge and redirect to, presumably, Tutankham#Legacy, where it is mentioned. While I don't see enough coverage for an article in what is present now (I did not search myself for more), I think the commentary we have should be WP:PRESERVEd in the spirit of WP:AtD. Daranios (talk) 10:41, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
L'Desh Fresh
- L'Desh Fresh ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · NYT · WP Library)
I initially PRODed this with the following rationale: "Non-notable fictional product created as part of an awareness campaign. The only included sources are either primary, or are not about the fictional product. Searches brought up no substantial coverage." It was later de-proded with the rationale to "consider merge to Water.org". I, however, disagree with this alternative. The lack of reliably sourced content in the article means that there is nothing currently that should be merged, and the lack of any kind of significant coverage in searches means that it is too non-notable to be covered in the water.org article. Rorshacma (talk) 01:29, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Products-related deletion discussions. AllyD (talk) 11:11, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete: An article on a 2009 advertising campaign by WaterPartners (which shortly afterwards merged into what became Water.org). As the nominator says, there seems to be a dearth of coverage to demonstrate that the campaign achieved notability. The suggested WP:ATD is a merge into the Water.org article; however there is no mention of this campaign on the water.org website, probably because it was a campaign by a predecessor organisation. A merge/redirect to WaterPartners would be more appropriate, though I still feel that the lack of coverage makes that WP:UNDUE. AllyD (talk) 11:11, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
Jackson Bay, British Columbia
- Jackson Bay, British Columbia ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · NYT · WP Library)
I can not find any evidence of population settled in the area or anything of significance beyond a data point in databases. Fails WP:GNG Slywriter (talk) 01:26, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Canada and British Columbia. Slywriter (talk) 01:26, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
- Keep. It was a human settlement, at least in the 20th century. I quote:
"Mrs. Patterson from Shaw's Landing similarly wrote in 1923, "I cannot teach them properly. Every moment of my time is overworked and it breaks my heart to see them growing up in ignorance." Like Mrs. Patterson, Mrs. Connor Regan from Jackson Bay, BC, wrote in 1925, "I will take on the fourth year work when you send it although I feel incompetent. ... But will do the best I can in dictating at all times"
from: Gleason, M. (2017). Families without schools: Rurality, correspondence education, and the promise of schooling in interwar western canada. History of Education Quarterly, 57(3), 305-330. doi:https://doi.org/10.1017/heq.2017.14- Additionally it is listed on page LXI of the following book as a port: The Foreign Commerce and Navigation of the United States Calendar Year 1946. United States: U.S. Government Printing Office. (free to read in full on Google Books)
- So that's multiple mentions, therefore I think gets a pass at WP:GEOLAND CT55555 (talk) 01:55, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
- Redirect to Strathcona Regional District; see also Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Canada-related articles#Article or redirect?. Mindmatrix 01:52, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
Wollo Kombolcha
- Wollo Kombolcha ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · NYT · WP Library)
Lacking significant media coverage; thus, it might not meet notability guidelines. – 333-blue at 11:46, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. – 333-blue at 11:46, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ethiopia-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 15:06, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 19:32, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- Delete - no evidence of notability. GiantSnowman 19:36, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- Keep some sources can be found if you search the Amharic name, such as this.--Ortizesp (talk) 18:04, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 13:09, 6 June 2022 (UTC)Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 00:44, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
Enayet Karim (director)
- Enayet Karim (director) ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · NYT · WP Library)
The majority of the sources used are obituaries and do not show that he passes notability guidelines. Significant coverage not found. Vinegarymass911 (talk) 18:39, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers and Bangladesh. [ ]] (talk) 18:39, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- Keep - Most of the leading newspapers have covered his death news. I don’t think there should be any argument regarding his notability. Abbasulu (talk) 20:34, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:46, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete Aside from a dead link (which judging from similar pages on the site probably never supported the content where cited) and a passing mention, the only reliable sources are several minor variations on a bare bones obituary. Obituaries are poor indicators of notability because the information is often supplied by the family (so not independent) and sometimes published for a fee. Searches of the usual types, in English and Bengali, found no better sources. --Worldbruce (talk) 05:51, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
Delete Per nom. Sebastien1118 (talk) 21:05, 12 June 2022 (UTC)(strike off sock — DaxServer (t · m · c) 09:53, 14 June 2022 (UTC))