Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Middle East

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

Adding a new AfD discussion

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

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 as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Middle East|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.

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

Removing a closed AfD discussion

Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.

Other types of discussions

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

Further information

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

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

WikiProject Deletion sorting/Middle East/archive

Purge page cache

watch

Middle East

Country deletion sorting

Bahrain

Bahrain Proposed deletions

Egypt

FXOpen

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

Doesn't meet WP:NCORP. Forex-related references are not useful per WP:TRADES. Gheus (talk) 14:01, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Finance, Companies, Egypt, Cyprus, United Kingdom, and Australia. Skynxnex (talk) 14:15, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Abdullah Hashem

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

BLP of the founder of a religious sect. The sect itself appears to be notable but it does not seem that the leader himself is. I think a redirect to Ahmadi Religion of Peace and Light would probably be best. Mccapra (talk) 22:12, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Religion. Mccapra (talk) 22:12, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Egypt, and United States of America. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:17, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Google searches easily turn up hundreds of high-profile mentions. There are articles from Amnesty International, the UN, and various governments, and dozens of major newspapers that all mention him. Easily meets WP:BIO and WP:SIGCOV criteria. For sects with that many media mentions, their founders and leaders would usually also be notable enough. There is also plenty of information about Hashem that would fit well into a standalone article. DjembeDrums (talk) 17:46, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ok which three of these do you think provide the best in-depth coverage? Mccapra (talk) 21:49, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mohamed Tharwat

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

Egyptian actor of dubious notability. Sole provided reference does not cover subject in depth, nothing better found in English, but better references may be available in Arabic. Possibly eligible for a G5 speedy because author has been blocked as a suspected sockpuppet, but taking to AfD on the off chance that evidence of notability can be found. --Finngall ^talk 22:14, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers and Egypt. --Finngall ^talk 22:14, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Theatre. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:10, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep the subject appears to pass WP:ENT because he “has had significant roles in multiple notable films, television shows, stage performances, or other productions.” On the other hand sourcing isn’t great. There are a couple of other Mohamed Tharwats (not actors) and some of the sources about this one are chatty interviews but I found 1, 2 and 3 after a non-intensive search. Mccapra (talk) 08:29, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Article is an unreferenced list of productions that he may or may not have acted in. Nothing would be lost be deleting, and if anyone ever wanted to write a real article about him with, y'know, sources, they could do that at any time. -- Ssilvers (talk) 17:30, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:07, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Esraa Owis

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

Fails WP:SPORTCRIT. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 09:28, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Women, Olympics, Sport of athletics, and Egypt. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:48, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, many sources exist under her Arabic name "اسراء عويس". Multiple-time major international championship gold medallist so clearly meets WP:NATH. I added the first two to the article. --Habst (talk) 13:22, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Note that it could be difficult to find sources in English language media. She may be notable as an Arab woman athlete winning medals in African championships and qualifying for the Summer Olympics. Nnev66 (talk) 15:59, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, has sources and the nomination does not indicate that any effort was put behind it. I.e. effort might have been put behind it, but it isn't shown. Geschichte (talk) 16:19, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. A search in Arabic on Arabic news sites only returned routine, trivial event announcements (e.g. 0–3-sentence lightly-refactored boilerplate text announcing results 1 2 3 4 5 6). Nothing approaching the in-depth secondary independent commentary required to be cited in all sportsperson articles. There is explicitly no carve-out for athletes that allows us to assume IRS SIGCOV exists when no such sources have been identified. The whole point of SPORTCRIT #5 is to ensure that athlete bios are not based on achievements or participation, as those criteria were deprecated by global consensus. JoelleJay (talk) 03:42, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@JoelleJay, thanks for doing the research and finding those sources. I think that if we combine the paragraphs to establish notability (which is allowed per WP:NBASIC), we have a good case to be made here. The consensus you're referring to established by WP:NSPORTS2022 actually supports keeping this article, because it says to keep sports notability criteria as long as it's not participation based (i.e. simply attending a meet). But in Owis' case, she has won multiple major international medals which goes beyond simply participating. I think you are conflating achievements with participation. --Habst (talk) 17:52, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
NSPORTS2022 established global consensus that, regardless of achievements and regardless of meeting a sport-specific guideline, all athletes must cite a source with IRS SIGCOV. Trivial and routine coverage does not establish notability, and that is the extent of what can be found on this athlete. JoelleJay (talk) 18:27, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@JoelleJay, thanks, the NSPORTS2022 closure actually does not say anything about IRS, and it in fact says, There is a general consensus that the NSPORTS guideline still has broad community support. At the time that statement was made, this is what NSPORTS looked like: Special:Diff/1076787937.

Regardless, if we combine the found articles from multiple independent organizations (not just the Koora sources) we can certainly say the coverage is significant in this case fulfilling WP:SPORTCRIT prong #5. Coverage about a hometown athlete qualifying for the Olympics is not routine -- there are strict qualifying standards and there is no guarantee or schedule of such an event occurring. --Habst (talk) 13:05, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That sentence is in the context of deprecating NSPORT entirely, it is obviously not stating that NSPORT as it was is supported in toto. SPORTCRIT #5 requires a source providing significant coverage, it does not say "a combination of sources adding up to SIGCOV". And I've literally never seen anyone attempt the argument that this clause doesn't require the SIGCOV to be IRS.
Coverage of people in non-routine events can absolutely still be routine. NOTNEWS does not limit this in any way. What has been found so far is not even personalized "hometown coverage", it's churnalized results announcements with no more than three boilerplate sentences apiece originating from the same news source. That is not GNG and is not even an indication of GNG. JoelleJay (talk) 20:35, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@JoelleJay, yes the sentence argues for the opposite of deprecating NSPORT -- it says to keep it in place, which it currently is. SPORTCRIT prong 5 could certainly be filled by combining sources as NBASIC allows for, however it's important to note that has no bearing on whether or not WP:NATH is fulfilled (which it clearly is in this case via criterion 2, multiple gold medals at major competitions).

Using a search for "اسراء عويس", I see four different news stories on just the first page of Google results (Paris Olympics - Israa Owais finishes her competitions in the qualifiers, Who is Israa Awis? | Profile, The Pharaohs in Paris.. Israa Owais bids farewell to the Olympic Games competitions, Israa Owais, the track and field athlete, officially qualifies for the Olympics). If you consider all of these "churnalism", then surely the series of at least three in-person interview clips conducted by ONTime Sports ([1] [2] [3]) would count as sufficiently journalistic sources? One of them looks to be a 26-minute news segment all about the subject.

There are more on page 2: Egypt's champion Israa Owais, Israa Owais wins gold in triathlon in athletics at the..., After 3 successful attempts, jumper Israa Awis fails in..., Israa Owais wins gold in long jump at Arab Games, “A golden heroine”... Israa Owais, the owner of historical achievements in, Israa Owais wins gold in triathlon at Arab Games, Israa Awis, Israa Owais after saying goodbye to the Olympics: Enough negative talk, it's making me nervous, Israa Owais ranks 15th in the long jump competition, Sports News: Israa Owais bids farewell to the Games in.... These are all from different sources.

There's also a 30-minute TV interview with her here from Al Ahly TV: Full interview | Israa Owais.. Al-Ahly player and Egypt national team star

This is all just in the first 2 pages of results. I really don't think there's a question that the notability guideline is met, it's just that the sources are mostly in Arabic so we'll need to translate them for inclusion in the article. Honestly, I have yet to find a recent Olympian in athletics who doesn't meet the bar with some digging; the Olympics still have significant cultural purchase and athletics is the marquee sport so typically if someone qualifies, the coverage is there. --Habst (talk) 20:21, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
SPORTCRIT prong 5 could certainly be filled by combining sources as NBASIC allows for This is absolutely not true. There is no logical reading of at least one reference to a source providing significant coverage that supports your claim that multiple non-SIGCOV sources can constitute "a source providing SIGCOV". The community !voted to override NBASIC in the case of sportspeople in an RfC that was much more recent and global; that takes precedence.
You are refbombing more routine trivial announcementsd. No number of functionally identical three-sentence results updates can amount to SIGCOV. 1: Israa Awis ended her competitions in the high jump qualifiers without qualifying for the final stage. Israa Owais is participating in the Olympics for the first time in her career. Israa Awis achieved a record of 6.20 metres after three successful attempts. This is on a site with no evidence of editorial control, attributed to someone with only two articles total, and identical to pieces on other sites that each also claim a byline. 2: This is a trash webscraper/UGS. 3: Israa Owais, the national team player and strongman, bid farewell to the long jump competitions, within the Olympic Games competitions hosted by Paris. Israa managed to jump to a height of 6.20 meters, coming in fifteenth place in the first group. Essentially the same announcement as 1. 4: This is the same 3-sentence article I linked earlier. 5: This is literally just a picture of her on a government website (not independent, not SIGCOV).
In-person interviews are primary and non-independent. Per policy: The University of Nevada, Reno Libraries define primary sources as providing "an inside view of a particular event". They offer as examples: original documents, such as autobiographies, diaries, e-mail, interviews,
Al Ahly TV is her own sports organization, so that interview obviously fails as primary and non-independent in multiple ways.
If this is the extent of the coverage you're finding on her, then we are severely lacking in anything approaching SPORTCRIT. JoelleJay (talk) 22:19, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@JoelleJay, thanks for your response.

Re: paragraph 1, The community !voted to override NBASIC in the case of sportspeople -- Can you please link to the not-vote where this happened? From my read this isn't what happened in NSPORTS2022. Reading WP:NSPORTS2022, NBASIC is only mentioned once and it's not in the context of overriding it. They are separate policies and broad over-arching guidelines like WP:GNG and WP:NBASIC still apply even where more subject-specific guidelines exist.

Re: WP:REFBOMBing -- As an English speaker, I simply can't read all of the sources I am finding in Arabic, so I pasted the plausible ones here so that someone who does speak Arabic can look them over. Also, WP:REFBOMB only refers to putting unnecessary citations in an article. There's nothing wrong with linking many sources in an AfD discussion. In fact, I think they should all be addressed -- I see you left comments on five of the sources, but there are still 13 on just the first two pages of results that need to be looked at.

Re: In-person interviews are primary and non-independent -- This simply isn't supported by Wikipedia policy. I recently had a discussion about an unrelated article with an admin just this week about this, and this is what they said this week at Special:Diff/1245933378:

I think what will help with precedent is getting the interview issue settled. It has come up more and more often and I think it's unsettled. My personal (editor, not admin) POV is that if X media outlet chooses to interview someone, there's something there.

The quote that you're citing and have cited in past discussions is not directly from any Wikipedia policy, but is from a sub-bullet of a footnote of a section of WP:PRIMARY. The word "interview" is in fact never mentioned in the Wikipedia-voice text on that page other than to say that interviews depend on context. So, taking context into consideration, what can we say about the 26-minute ONTime Sports news segment (plus various clips) and the 30-minute Al Ahly TV news segment, both of which seem to be solely about Owis?

Quoting the admin comment on this issue, Is Ojala (or anyone in comparable position) being interviewed as a matter of post match interviews, or is it more substantive? We would expect post-match interviews to be only five or six minutes and only focusing on the game -- instead, these interviews are much longer and were conducted in what seems to be an in-studio news segment setting. I want to emphasize clearly that we need the assistance of an Arabic speaker to say much more, but it seems like a lot exists here for Arabic speakers.

I think the pieces for meeting SPORTCRIT and GNG have been presented. Can you explain why all 15 sources are "severely lacking"? --Habst (talk) 12:57, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You found one closer who holds the idiosyncratic opinion that interviews can somehow count towards GNG based on "the fact that they chose to interview them" rather than anything about the interview content being IRS SIGCOV. But you can't just claim that their close reflects any sort of consensus or even suggests broader disagreement while simultaneously ignoring the far more prevalent examples of closes supporting the view that only the secondary, independent material in an interview may count toward GNG. How could content that someone says about themselves ever be secondary and independent, anyway? And I know you're aware of these examples since I've linked them to you in the past, so why are you only now accepting admin AfD judgments as evidence of consensus? 1: The result was delete. Interviews are primary sources so the delete argument is the policy based one. 2: admin nom statement This article on a tattoo artist is sourced mainly from interviews. Being primary sources, they don't help us establish his notability. 3: admin nom: There are interviews, and a number of performance listings but nothing independent, or significant enough. 4: The result was delete. I am more persuaded by the delete arguments around the necessity of independent sourcing for a BLP then keep arguments that articles that are basically interviews are independent. 5: The "keeps" are largely based on the slew of references provided early on in the discussion; however, nobody arguing to keep has presented evidence here as to how these sources constitute WP:SIGCOV. The argument that interviews are admissible is an oversimplification; interviews may count toward GNG when they have intellectually independent content; that has not been demonstrated here. 6: admin nom: referenced entirely to WP:PRIMARYSOURCES and Q&A interviews that cannot support notability with no evidence of reliable source coverage shown at all.
The WP:OR treatment of interviews is still policy. Just because specific examples of primary sources are listed in the footnotes does not mean they "aren't policy".
It is absolutely acceptable to characterize someone's behavior at AfD as "refbombing". It is breathtakingly entitled for you to dump a bunch of sources that you haven't even read and insist that other editors must prove each of them to be insufficient. JoelleJay (talk) 21:32, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@JoelleJay, thanks for finding these links.

I was actually having an unrelated discussion with the administrator when they opined on interviews unprompted -- I wasn't looking to find a point of view one way or the other and I'm trying to enter discussions with an open mind. It seems intuitive to me that if a reputable news organization conducts a long-form interview, that speaks to the notability of the subject, and I haven't been able to find any Wikipedia policy contradicting that practice here.

I am still curious about the justification for discounting interviews. The only mention you cited earlier, in WP:PRIMARY, doesn't mention interviews in the policy text, and the only mention in a footnote says, other opinion pieces, including (depending on context) reviews and interviews as examples of what could be a primary source. Surely a lengthy news segment interview on a subject would fall under "depending on context" and could be used to establish notability? Also, the way the footnote is written, it makes it seem like only opinion-piece interviews are discussed and not news interviews.

Looking at the links, 1) doesn't contain any news interviews, 2) only comments that the particular interviews used were primary and does not make a sweeping claim about all interviews, 3) doesn't seem to contain any news interviews but instead promotional interviews for his books (?), 4) makes no comment about interviews in general, 5) actually says interviews may count toward GNG when they have intellectually independent content which I think should be met in this case, and 6) only speaks to specific "Q&A interviews" but not news interviews nor interviews in general.

Re: Refbombing, I don't think it's productive to say that other editors are providing too many citations in AfD discussions where the point of the discussion is to evaluate sources. I plan on making a best effort at translation, but the reason why I linked and will continue to link sources in AfDs without being excessive is to see what the community thinks about them even if neither of us can read Arabic natively. I greatly respect your encyclopedic contributions and hope you can extend the same respect to me and can refrain from making personal comments.

Acknowledging that "interviews may count towards GNG" if conditions are met, can we discuss the substance of the news interviews found so far, or if not them, then the other undiscussed sources linked? --Habst (talk) 14:17, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The "wikipedia [guideline] contradicting this practice" is the one that requires the coverage to be substantial, independent, and secondary. An org's choice to interview someone is not any of that.
Seriously, what can you possibly consider independent and secondary in any of those interviews? The subject speaking about herself is, by definition, non-independent and primary, thus it is absolutely ineligible for GNG consideration.
You think bombarding editors with a bunch of links you haven't even read and demanding they prove that each one of them fails GNG is acceptable behavior?? JoelleJay (talk) 01:19, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@JoelleJay, yes, I do think that interviews can be substantial and secondary depending on how they are conducted, particularly if they are conducted as part of news segments as appears to be the case here.

Because neither of us knows Arabic, I'm not sure we can say for sure that about the content of the interviews. Maybe we should discuss the interview issues not pertaining to this specific case in a separate venue to not clutter this discussion? Either way, I think we should temper the language and behavioral accusations and focus on the article. With respect, --Habst (talk) 17:46, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Live interviews are 100% primary. JoelleJay (talk) 23:41, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No comment on this specific case, but in response to your claim: [That notability can be established through NBASIC for sportspeople] is absolutely not true ... The community !voted to override NBASIC in the case of sportspeople in an RfC that was much more recent and global; that takes precedence. – No, the community absolutely did not !vote to override the notability guideline for people, as said by the user who established SPORTCRIT in the first place: this provision was intended to aid us in expunging the plethora of sub-stubs sourced to databases and lacking any significant coverage that would allow us to write a well-rounded biography ... SPORTBASIC #5 was never intended, nor should it be misused, to trump or overrule the more general, overarching rule. BeanieFan11 (talk) 23:41, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Just for everyone else's clarity, right after your quoted sentences Cbl62 noted that he has only seen one instance in two years where NBASIC was sufficient in the absence of a SPORTCRIT #5 source. That is hardly an endorsement of using scattered three-sentence announcements for NBASIC. JoelleJay (talk) 23:39, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not necessarily saying that this article passes NBASIC. I'm saying that the statement of the community !vot[ing] to override NBASIC in the case of sportspeople is incorrect. BeanieFan11 (talk) 00:01, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 13:09, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: The sources added by Habst appear to be good enough (via reading a rough translation) for meeting the WP:GNG and WP:BASIC. Let'srun (talk) 13:09, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Let'srun, the first link has three brief sentences announcing her event results. That is routine news coverage on its own, but it's also clearly lacking in any secondary analysis as the specifics are just substituted into the boilerplate announcements put out by Kooora and Kas News for every athlete at every competition. You can look at the links I provided to see the identical formatting, and also compare to the contemporaneous announcements put out for others in her cohort. They are pure fluff.
Kooora:
Israa Owais, the Egyptian track and field player, won the gold medal in the long jump competition at the Arab Games held in Algeria. Israa Owais succeeded in winning the gold medal after achieving a distance of 6.54 meters in the competitions held on Tuesday evening in the Algerian city of Oran.
Kooora:
Mostafa Amr, a player in the Egyptian track and field team, won the gold medal in the shot put competition at the Arab Games held in Algeria from July 5 to 15. Amr succeeded in winning the gold medal at the Arab Games after achieving a distance of 20.52 meters in the competitions held today in the city of Oran, Algeria.
Run-of-the-mill sports announcements are not enough to demonstrate notability, and athletes are required to have a source of IRS SIGCOV cited in the article. A 3-sentence blurb that contains nothing beyond the results of an event is certainly not enough to meet SPORTSCRIT. The second piece is by the same news agency as the first (the Kooora piece is functionally identical to a Kas News piece) and so these definitely don't even constitute "multiple" sources of coverage.
Kas News:
Israa Owais, a player in the Egyptian track and field team, won the gold medal in the long jump competition at the Arab Games currently being held in Algeria. Israa Awis succeeded in winning the gold medal in the Arab Games after achieving a distance of 6.54 meters in the competitions held today in the city of Oran, Algeria.
Per policy: For example, routine news coverage of announcements, events, sports, or celebrities, while sometimes useful, is not by itself a sufficient basis for inclusion of the subject of that coverage
Per WP:N: It is common for multiple newspapers or journals to publish the same story, sometimes with minor alterations or different headlines, but one story does not constitute multiple works. Several journals simultaneously publishing different articles does not always constitute multiple works, especially when the authors are relying on the same sources, and merely restating the same information. Similarly, a series of publications by the same author or in the same periodical is normally counted as one source. JoelleJay (talk) 19:44, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Have none of the keep !voters actually read any of the proposed sources...? JoelleJay (talk) 21:45, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 18:34, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep as easily meets WP:BASIC and WP:NATH and WP:HEY. Winner of multiple medals at major international competitions, including 2 gold medals (both long jump and triple jump) at the 2023 Arab Games; silver medal at the 2022 Mediterranean Games; bronze medal at the 2022 African Championships in Athletics. Many pieces of secondary coverage focused on Esraa Owis and her accomplishments identified by Habst above, a few of which have been added to the article, which has been expanded. For English speakers, have also added the 2022 article in The National, which discusses how she overcame an ankle injury that nearly ruined her career to become the first woman representing Egypt to win a silver medal in the long jump in the Mediterranean Games. Cielquiparle (talk) 03:19, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Egypt Proposed deletions

Iran

Seyed Ali Mousavi Nour

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

Fails notability, the whole article is about trying to sell his achievements as something important. never won a major senior medal. never even participated in a major event. his medal (if true) is just in youth level. Sports2021 (talk) 01:29, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and Iran. Sports2021 (talk) 01:29, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Martial arts-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:14, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hadi Kiani

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

Fails notability, never achieved anything important. the article tries to show him as a two time Asian Championship medalist but that's not in senior level. Sports2021 (talk) 01:26, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and Iran. Sports2021 (talk) 01:26, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Martial arts-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:14, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Amirreza Borzooei

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

Fails notability, never won a major medal. the article shows he won 2 Asian Championships bronze medals but they were in youth and junior level, no senior medal yet. Sports2021 (talk) 01:21, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and Iran. Sports2021 (talk) 01:21, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Martial arts-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:14, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Darya Dadvar

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

Tagged for notability since 2019. Relies largely on self published sources. Not clear the subject passes WP:GNG. 4meter4 (talk) 14:40, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Women, and Iran. Hey man im josh (talk) 15:07, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of France-related deletion discussions. Hey man im josh (talk) 15:07, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Nothing turns up in an online search. It's possible that there may be good sources in Farsi that establish notability, but I'm unable to determine that for myself. —CurryTime7-24 (talk) 21:23, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Davood Noroozi

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

No inherent notability, fails WP:GNG, WP:NPOL or WP:ANYBIO. BEFORE was not productive. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 14:57, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians, Journalism, and Iran. Hey man im josh (talk) 15:07, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Act to confronting the hostile actions of the Zionist regime against peace and security

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

The article could simply fit into a section at Iran-Israel relations. Several primary sources, including Parliament and at least two others, are no longer functioning. Only sources focusing on Iran are available. The article mainly consists of quotes from the law. EpicAdventurer (talk) 11:22, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politics, Iran, and Israel. EpicAdventurer (talk) 11:22, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as there is no indication of WP:SUSTAINED notability and entirely lacking WP:DIVERSE sources. - Amigao (talk) 00:23, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Telecommunication & Computer Industries Consortium

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

Fails WP:NORG. No significant coverage. C F A 💬 23:24, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Computing, and Iran. C F A 💬 23:24, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. The article says almost nothing, the Google search results are all Wikipedia mirrors, and the listed website is defunct. It is not impossible that there are Farsi-language references; it seems unlikely at best and I don't know what to search for. Walsh90210 (talk) 01:19, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:SNOW - no coverage. Bearian (talk) 21:41, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: per nomination, fails WP:GNG. Sir MemeGod  22:13, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nima Asgari

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

Disputed draftification. I would have returned to draft, but WP:DRAFTIFY dictates that cannot happen, so here we are. Fails WP:NFILMMAKER. References are passing mentions that they have made such and such a film 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 13:58, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, and Iran. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 13:58, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Dear @Timtrent, Thank you for your review. I would like to highlight that Nima Asgari is a well-known documentary filmmaker in Iran, recognized for his significant contributions to environmental and wildlife documentaries. He has won several prestigious awards at international festivals, such as the Jackson Hole Wildlife Film Festival in the USA and the Green Screen Film Festival in Germany. Additionally, he has served as a jury member at events like the Matsalu Nature Film Festival in Estonia. I have updated the article with reliable sources and references that showcase his notable achievements and contributions to the field.

I hope this additional information helps in reconsidering the decision regarding the article. Siavakhsh (talk) 17:46, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Despite the statement above, the additional references aren't at all useful. This is not a review. Reviews are different. This is a discussion leading to potential deletion. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 17:57, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 08:06, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Caspian Airlines Flight 6936

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

Failure of WP:CONTINUEDCOVERAGE incident seems to have had a fairly short news cycle, additionally no fatalities and only a total loss of the plane. Lolzer3000 (talk) 14:43, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Aviation, and Iran. Lolzer3000 (talk) 14:43, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. A total loss of an aircraft is a significant event and I don't think accident articles need to be deleted just because there were no fatalities. Many aircraft accidents have a "fairly short news cycle" and once a final investigation report has been issued, they usually disappear altogether. Articles about aircraft accidents are useful as they elucidate what the causes were. This one could easily have ended with hundreds dead. Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 14:58, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment while i do support some of your causes, just because it could've left hundreds dead doesnt mean it should justify as an article. At the least this should be merged, near tragedy doesnt warrant nor neccesitate an article, the accident is just a simple hull loss wrapped into a near tragedy. Thanks for your time. Lolzer3000 (talk) 15:48, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Martinevans123 Lolzer3000 (talk) 15:49, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I fully understand the pertinence of not imagining what coulda, woulda, shoulda happened. But the improvement of aviation safety relies on the investigation and analysis of all accidents and incidents. I realise Wikipedia is not an aircraft safety site, but I wanted to explain my perspective here. I'm not sure how this article could be successfully merged without losing a lot of relevant info. Let's see what other editors say. Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 16:22, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep This seems to be a serious enough crash, with the aircraft being judged destroyed, and the page and event is well sourced. Absurdum4242 (talk) 17:39, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Significant accident that resulted in a hull loss and injuries, not a simple runway overrun. SignorPignolini (talk) 19:10, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Per WP:EVENTCRIT: Per criterion #4 of the event criteria, "routine kinds of news events including most accidents – whether or not tragic or widely reported at the time – are usually not notable unless something further gives them additional enduring significance." There isn't much that would give this event enduring significance. There is no continued nor in-depth coverage since news coverage either happened in the aftermath of the accident or after the release of the final report, with most news coverage in persian rehashing what the Civil Aviation Authority of Iran wrote in its final report. None of the sources are secondary, in nature, since none of them contain "analysis, evaluation or interpretation", with the sources being primary. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 10:40, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 18:36, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rouzbeh Rafie

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

Fails WP:COMPOSER. None of the sources here establish WP:GNG notability, either on account of not being independent (personal website, profile at Ulysses platform, which appears to allow self published pages, Ermes 404 a publisher of his music, an interview with Rafie), reliable (wordpress blog) or significant (pretty much all the other sources).

Criterion 3 of COMPOSER states that those who have written a composition that has won (or in some cases been given a second or other place) in a major music competition not established expressly for newcomers. may be notable, but none of the competitions he has won appear to be "major" (at the very least, they don't have Wikipedia articles) Mach61 23:25, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Iran, and Italy. Mach61 23:25, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I added a few more reliable independent sources (e.g. Association of Iranian Contemporary Music Composers (ACIMC)).

In my opinion, Rafie meets criteria for Wikipedia:NMUSICOTHER, saying "Composers and performers outside mass media traditions may be notable if they meet at least one of the following criteria: Has composed a number of notable melodies, tunes, or standards used in a notable music genre."

The competitions are notable from my point of view, especially considering the small world of contemporary experimental (classical) music. E.G. a festival like MUSEQUAL https://www.kokonainenfestival.fi/?lang=en has a very good reputation, even without a wiki article Klaviermusikfan1972 (talk) 08:28, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Klaviermusikfan1972 None of the sources you added move the needle with regard to being independent and in-depth. (for example this is a profile on the website of an organization Rafie is a member of).

Rafie does not meet that criterion of NMUSICOTHER, because a "notable" composition is one that qualifies for an article, by having sources cover it. None of Rafie's originals have gotten that. Mach61 17:46, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, we need more participation here.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:10, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:31, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I added another independen reliable source from the "Bach&Now Festival", where Rafie was chosen Artist-in-Residence. https://bachandnow.de/en/composer-in-residence/ Hopefully this will help to keep the article! Klaviermusikfan1972 (talk) 15:38, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Klaviermusikfan1972 This profile is written by Rafie (As “Composer in Residence” of the Bach & now! festival, I am thrilled to share my musical journey and artistic vision with you. Mach61 19:03, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

From my point of view, the fact that he was chosen artist in residence by the festival including three commissioned world premiere compositions, proofs that he is a notable composer. I checked the imprint, and Rafie is not a member of the festival board, festival founder or anything else. So it's at least an independent source. Klaviermusikfan1972 (talk) 20:24, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tanha Dar Mazrae

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

No reliable sources (a.k.a. no wiki links) and no reliable reviews. This may fail Wikipedia:Notability (films). This article about a short film is short because no other sources exist.

See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sayeye Penhan. I am also nominating the following related page because it is also is sourced by a similar website (akhbarrasmi, is it notable?):

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film and Iran. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 11:52, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, no participation so far.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:53, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:57, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I saw this movie in Iranian cinema.

Khosli is attractive and spectacular and this movie has found many fans.

In our opinion, Iranians, this is the best movie in the Middle East, and if there is a little source now, it is because this movie has just been waiting and the article will gradually mature and grow, and I ask you not to show too much sensitivity on this issue and let it remain an article to avoid wiki law. 5.233.227.181 (talk) 17:43, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This article should stay in English Wikipedia 5.233.231.50 (talk) 20:36, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Iran Proposed deletions

Standardized Patient (via WP:PROD on 29 January 2024)

Iraq

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. ✗plicit 10:36, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2024–25 Iraq Stars League squads

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

This type of squad overview for a league in a specific season isn't really a thing Wikipedia does. It therefore fails WP:NOT. Geschichte (talk) 09:47, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Lists of people, Football, and Iraq. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 10:36, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per consensus at a very similar AfD Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2023 Myanmar National League squads Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 10:37, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:45, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 18:47, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Per above. Svartner (talk) 00:31, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom, this is overkill, does WP:NOSTATS apply to this? Govvy (talk) 14:54, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep will be updated constantly, more sources will be available as the league commences (clubs will announce squads etc.) as evidence of notability, although I understand that Wikipedia doesn't have such pages A1lfcIRQ (talk) 22:01, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as per previous consensuses not to have these sort of squad articles for football seasons. Joseph2302 (talk) 16:35, 18 September 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.

Shwan Attoof

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

Doesn't meet WP:ACTOR, as there were few or no sources showing notability. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 22:25, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, Authors, and Entertainment. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 22:27, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 23:00, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Iraq-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 23:00, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Shwan is well known film actor/director in Kurdistan/Iraq, the article could be stay. I added serval new references. Kushared (talk) 06:23, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Which references? Those aren't reliable per WP:RS. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 05:31, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, please assess new additions to the article.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:52, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:14, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Israel

Battle at Tel al-Hawa

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

WP:SYNTH: No source evidence that a series of engagements in the vicinity actually constitute a battle as such and the term is not a Wikipedia artifice. Tagged for notability last month but no evidence of any discussion. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 16:40, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Military, Israel, and Palestine. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:01, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If I were a Palestinian, I would fight those who occupied my land

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

No claim to notability, and was clearly created with a political slant. Kingsmasher678 (talk) 20:33, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Kingsmasher678 (talk) 20:33, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Might make sense if this was a super well-known phrase that had been analyzed as such in multiple outlets. Instead, the article is about the various times Ayalon expressed this kind of sentiment and notability is very much in doubt. It's also true that the article has serious NPOV problems. Pichpich (talk) 21:04, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Military, Politics, Israel, and Palestine. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:12, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete seems not to be coherent as a standalone article. I think for a quotation like this to have an article it would have to rise to the level of Ich bin ein Berliner or similar. Other than that it probably belongs as part of the biography.Andre🚐 01:14, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Ami Ayalon could be expanded with material about this, but this standalone page is excessive and slanted. Not sure what the deal with all the italics and quotation marks is either. Reywas92^Talk 02:07, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep This is about interviews and human right that says all people have a right to defend their land, Whatever race they are and whatever status they have. This article has an implicit reference to human rights and human equality and is compiled based on clarified documents. championmin^Talk 02:19, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
And I don't disagree with what your saying. This just isn't the place to make the point.

Kingsmasher678 (talk) 02:21, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Random quote. No encyclopedic notability. NOTNEWS and NOTRANDOM apply. gidonb (talk) 13:42, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete No credible claim of notability. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 08:17, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. This is not a phrase like Sí se puede, with a longstanding legacy/impact. It is likely too soon for an article on this. Given developments and Ami Ayalon's prominence, that COULD change, but I don't see this passing a ten-year test as of today.--Mpen320 (talk) 14:41, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete due to lack of significant coverage. I understand the sentiment, but it’s just not notable. Cf. Palestinian law. Bearian (talk) 15:27, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Any chance we could WP:SNOW this? Seems fairly decided. Kingsmasher678 (talk) 18:18, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Broaden scope and retitle: The encyclopedic topic here is something like Israeli politician statements of empathy with Palestinians or Israeli acceptance of Palestinian right to resist, and should cover the examples in this source: Massad, Joseph (2024-09-16). "Why Israeli leaders admit if they were Palestinian they would fight for freedom". Middle East Eye., among others:

Onceinawhile (talk) 08:19, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kfir Tsafrir

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

I can't find any significant coverage in independent, reliable sources. Fails our general notability guideline as well as our our subject-specific guideline Monophile (talk) 19:07, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2024 September 18. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 16:29, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Israel. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:51, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy keep. This is a malformed AfD. The relevant guideline, which the article subject easily meets, is WP:SINGER, not WP:WEB, and just looking at the page shows more than enough WP:SIGCOV in WP:RS to meet WP:GNG. Nom also inexplicably added a paid editing tag to the article, with no evidence. Longhornsg (talk) 19:04, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Connecteam

AfDs for this article:

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

The first AfD was... somewhat disrupted, but the rationale is substantially the same as that one, I just kinda forgot to renominate after the DRV (oops). In my judgement, there is no way in hell the subject in question meets ORGCRIT, whether in english or non-english sources, and nothing I've seen since the aforementioned discussions move the needle in the slightest. Here's hoping if anyone brings up new sources that they're at least vaguely plausible in therms of meeting WP:SIRS? Alpha3031 (t • c) 14:32, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Technology, and Israel. Alpha3031 (t • c) 14:32, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Management and Software. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:08, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Significant and persistent coverage in reliable secondary sources independent of the company, such as Globes Calcalist Geektime Jerusalem Post Globes 2 Globes 3 Whizkin (talk) 18:25, 21 September 2024 (UTC).[reply]
@Whizkin, are you aware that funding announcements are explicitly listed at WP:ORGTRIV? They are neither significant coverage, nor independent. Alpha3031 (t • c) 09:05, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I might be wrong, but I don't think that's a correct interpretation of the policy, which says 'standard notices, brief announcements, and routine coverage ... of a capital transaction, such as raised capital.' These are not standard notices, brief announcements, or routine coverage based merely on a press release. In my opinion, these are full-blown articles about the company, containing analysis beyond the capital event. Whizkin (talk) 09:13, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Routine coverage of capital raises includes the marketing material companies put out and the churn directly derived from it. Alpha3031 (t • c) 09:20, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
A large fraction of business press coverage is initiated as a result of public relations work by companies. Dismissing any coverage that results from a funding press release as "trivial" seems excessive. Is that written somewhere, or is it your interpretation?

And, there are plenty of other sources about the company unrelated to funding, for example:

Calcalist

Geektime

Ice

Ynet Whizkin (talk) 09:57, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Whizkin... The whole point of NCORP is to avoid hosting articles purely composed of PR from the companies being written about. What did you think WP:ORGIND was for? Are you sure you want to assert the second article has any semblance of meeting ORGIND? Alpha3031 (t • c) 10:42, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2024 Melbourne Land Forces Expo protests

AfDs for this article:

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

Fails WP:EVENT. The event is not notable enough outside of Israel–Hamas war protests. Coverage of the protest has been WP:ROUTINE, similar to any other protest that has occurred in Melbourne. GMH Melbourne (talk) 07:03, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Police, Politics, Israel, Palestine, and Australia. GMH Melbourne (talk) 07:03, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - the coverage of this specific event, in my view, goes beyond what’s outlined in WP:ROUTINE as well as beyond what can be described as “similar to any other protest that has occurred in Melbourne”. There’s been loads of mainstream media coverage, both national and international^[1], in the weeks and days leading up^[2]^[3]^[4]^[5]^[6]^[7]^[8]^[9], during the days of protest itself^[10]^[11]^[12]^[13]^[14]^[15]^[16]^[17]^[18]^[19]^[20]^[21]^[22] with all sides chiming in/being quoted with their perspectives, and even in the days following^[23], coverage of these protests is still trickling in. In short, there’s pages and pages of coverage, news articles, interviews with mainstream media outlets, etc. This isn’t just once off circumstantial coverage - it’s been sustained and consistent. Geelongite (talk) 08:01, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
GMH Melbourne: procedural query, did you mean to nominate this twice? Other AfD here — ClaudineChionh (she/her · talk · contribs · email) 08:10, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@ClaudineChionh: Hello, No I didn't mean to, my internet cut out halfway between twinkle processing the AfD and the popup box said to process it again. Should I close the first one? GMH Melbourne (talk) 08:14, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
GMH Melbourne: thought it might have been a computer hiccup. I think it's best to close the other one as there isn't any discussion there yet. — ClaudineChionh (she/her · talk · contribs · email) 08:17, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Done GMH Melbourne (talk) 08:21, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: coverage of the protests was hardly routine - live coverage throughout the events, multiple heated responses from politicians and other public figures, significant debate over the role played by police. Also consider the fact that coverage was unusually extensive even in the days and weeks prior to the event. It has significance then beyond the fact that it was a protest about Palestine but also as regards questions of civil liberties and politics in Melbourne and Australia.

These protests were compared in multiple sources to the S11 protests which have had an article of similar length on Wikipedia since 2004. That article mentions the use of pepper spray against protesters, pointing out that at the time this was unheard of and supposedly banned. The use of rubber bullets and other weaponry by Victoria Police against anti-war protesters is similarly unprecedented today and I think another indication of notability. All that is solid melts into air (talk) 10:16, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The article could certainly do with some expansion to provide a more complete picture, but I think it demonstrably has received significant coverage in reliable sources. The fact that the prime minister saw fit to respond certainly makes it stand out from other, more routine protests. --Grnrchst (talk) 11:13, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete doesnt meet notability guidelines. DeadlyRampage26 (talk) 02:47, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: the userpage of this contributer should be taken into consideration. Though it’s definitely possible for people with differing political perspectives to have an objective view point - it’s clear that this doesn’t apply for this contributor and their input into this discussion should, in my view, be disregarded. Geelongite (talk) 05:46, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Extended content

Comment: I would not be opposed to a move to Israel–Hamas war protests in the Australia. Similar to Israel–Hamas war protests in the United States. GMH Melbourne (talk) 00:25, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There’s an argument for such an article in its own right given the extent of this protest movement - however as mentioned above, the extensive coverage by a range of sources warrants the existence of an article on the Land Forces protests as its own article (and the Land Forces protests weren’t specifically Palestine - though there’s significant crossover). In short - both articles should exist. Geelongite (talk) 13:41, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Act to confronting the hostile actions of the Zionist regime against peace and security

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

The article could simply fit into a section at Iran-Israel relations. Several primary sources, including Parliament and at least two others, are no longer functioning. Only sources focusing on Iran are available. The article mainly consists of quotes from the law. EpicAdventurer (talk) 11:22, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politics, Iran, and Israel. EpicAdventurer (talk) 11:22, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as there is no indication of WP:SUSTAINED notability and entirely lacking WP:DIVERSE sources. - Amigao (talk) 00:23, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Amit Ulman

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

Not yet ready for mainspace as it doesn't meet WP:NACTOR, WP:ANYBIO and WP:MUSICBIO. May have been covered in his native language which I also checked, yet couldn't find any WP:SIGCOV also in English language. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 11:48, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, Artists, Bands and musicians, and Israel. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 11:49, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, for several reasons:

(WP:NACTOR) The person has made unique, prolific or innovative contributions to a field of entertainment. - At least in Israel it was defined as an innovative film in that the entire script is one long song, with almost all the dialogue written in rhymes and accompanied by musical instruments. ^[1]
WP:MUSICBIO Has had a single or album on any country's national music chart. - (If I understand correctly), one of his songs won tenth place in one of the Hebrew song charts in 2016.^[2]
WP:MUSICBIO Has become one of the most prominent representatives of a notable style or the most prominent of the local scene of a city; note that the subject must still meet all ordinary Wikipedia standards, including verifiability. - One of the leading rappers in Israel, certainly in the field of Poetry slam (he founded Poetry slam Israel).^[3]
WP:MUSICBIO Has performed music for a work of media that is notable, such as a theme for a network television show, performance in a television show or notable film, inclusion on a notable compilation album. - Appeared and created the movie "This City"', appeared in "Plaot" (2013), "HaMora LeAnglit" (2019) and also appeared in the series "HaHanut SheYesh Ba Hakol" (2020-2021)^[4].

There is more, but I think this is enough. Eladkarmel (talk) 18:41, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

References

That's fine, but you still need sources that talk about the person. We don't have these. Oaktree b (talk) 23:09, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Hardly any sources that talk about this person. This was all I could find [4]. Just not enough for an article. Oaktree b (talk) 23:10, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - or possible redirect/merge to This City film which is the actual subject of the Jerusalem Post article that Oaktree b found. A BEFORE search found the same source, and a bunch of social media stuff, YouTube, Spotify, SoundCloud and other user-submitted content, a couple primary sources that don't confer notability, but nothing else. The sources above brought by the creator seem like churnalism and an unreliable source (IMDB.) I think he probably is quite talented, but that it is WP:TOOSOON for an encyclopedia entry. Maybe in a few more years... Netherzone (talk) 23:33, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm ok with a redirect to the film Oaktree b (talk) 14:55, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Although I am afraid of this article being retrieved after redirecting, I agree with redirecting to This City (film) as there is nothing to merge. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 06:37, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep or Merge - Hebrew article seems well-sourced, and includes coverage from Walla, Haaretz, and Mako, all significant sources for Israeli topics + bonus of authority control for extra reference. Article may need to be expanded upon to prove its SIGCOV but it definitely exists if someone wants to add it, or it can be draftified and all content remaining merged. EytanMelech (talk) 22:32, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I went to the Hebrew Wikipedia and all I could see are citations to a non notable award and few citations to his role in the film, This City (film). What independent sources are you talking about? It should be better if you would identify them and list them here. Cheers! Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 04:43, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@EytanMelech, what content are you proposing to be merged and to which target? If you meant This City (film), I would also want to know any relevant information in the article that needs merging. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 04:45, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 10:02, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Significant coverage in reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject, including Haaretz, Jerusalem Post, Kan, Calcalist Whizkin (talk) 17:36, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Aqua Security

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

Does not meet WP:NORG: the article is entirely a list of acquisitions and funding rounds, referenced to trivial coverage ("inclusion in lists of similar organizations" and "of the expansions, acquisitions, mergers, sale, or closure of the business"). No significant coverage. Dan • ✉ 22:13, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Article really is littered with funding rounds. No coverage exclusively to the company in sources. Niashervin (talk) 22:56, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and Israel. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 23:35, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:10, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The company is a notable player in the cybersecurity industry, particularly in cloud-native security. Aqua Security has significant media coverage from reputable sources like Bloomberg, TechCrunch, and The Wall Street Journal --Loewstisch (talk) 10:53, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment The citations to Bloomberg are directory information. They do not indicate a WP:CORP that is distinguishable from all other cyber security firms worldwide. Being a financially successful corporation does not a notable one maketh. Ventric (talk) 13:39, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! I totally agree about Bloomberg, as it is just a directory. Loewstisch (talk) 08:21, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As to the other references you mentioned - the Techcrunch articles are regurgitated PR on funding rounds with no "Independent Content" as required by ORGIND. The WSJ articles - one has a quote from a company exec, no in-depth information about the company as required by CORPDEPTH, the other is another rehash of a funding announcement, fails ORGIND. None meet GNG/WP:NCORP criteria for establishing notability.

Keep as the company is well-covered in specific business and security literature (per my additional WP before search), such as books on DevOps, Kubernetes, containerized applications, and cloud security. The page and its sources are also about software. Some security-industry guidebooks also heavily analyze various Aqua software tools, including Trivy and Kube-hunter. --美しい歌 (talk) 10:01, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your edit simply added three book titles to a new section, and did not connect these references to the prose or explain their relevance. Of the three, Rice (2020) is partially written by company representatives and is not a reliable source: "this work is part of a collaboration between O'Reilly and Aqua Security" (p. ii), Binnie & McCune (2021) is unavailable on Google Books so I can't confirm a reference to the article subject, and Aversa (2023) simply makes passing references for how to use Aqua Security products, but does not demonstrate any notability whatsoever. Dan • ✉ 12:42, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I was not solely referring to those books, as there are many more. I agree that Rice (2020) is not an independent source. However, Cloud Native Security devotes a significant portion to the software, while Aversa's book covers the software side of Aqua Security in depth, including descriptions of various software structures, acquisitions, and principles. 美しい歌 (talk) 15:22, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete because the majority of coverage is comprised of trivial mentions. If it were kept, it would require a sharp reduction in content because it reads as WP:ADS - it is largely self-promo content. However, the lack of specific coverage and the inclusion in "who-to-watch" lists and whatnot does not comprise notability. CapnPhantasm (talk) 15:18, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep the sources are mainly about routine investment rounds, but not all of them. Some Hebrew sources, as well as a few U.S. ones, offer sufficient and independent coverage. The company passes ORG notability threshold ג'ימיהחיה (talk) 11:42, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Which sources specifically? Also, the *content* has to be in-depth and Independent, it isn't just the fact that the publisher is independent of the company. HighKing⁺⁺ 13:05, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per reliable coverage in many sources - both books, Israel tech media and industry focused news sites. --Mind-blowing blow (talk) 07:45, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Can you give an example? The only non-trivial reference in the article appears to be that of the The New Stack article; the rest of the references are completely trivial funding drivel. A Google News search likewise finds no relevant reliable sources. Dan • ✉ 00:30, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep as meeting NCORP. All deletes claim that the article is imperfect: this is true however AFDISNOTCLEANUP. So weak arguments for deletion. gidonb (talk) 22:59, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete/move to draft space, the article was almost certainly created by the company itself and is almost entirely based on poor quality sources. I've removed the most egregious claims/sources and what remains is "a list of acquisitions and funding rounds" as stated by the nominator. While a stub article could probably be created from reliable sources, it does not seem fair to allow a "$1 billion dollar" company's marketing department to create work for volunteers. The article should be created via the WP:AFC process instead of allowing a COI article to be created directly in mainspace without repercussions. Brandon (talk) 14:20, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Per nom, clearly fails WP:GNG, WP:NCORP Youknow? (talk) 06:27, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 23:02, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete None of the sources meets GNG/WP:NCORP criteria for establishing notability. HighKing⁺⁺ 13:05, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fails WP:NCORP,WP:CORPDEPTH, WP:ORGIND and WP:SIRS. Its looks and reads like UPE advert article and still has an acquisitions list like its 2008 and consists of funding news and hosting requirements. I can go through the references, the first block if need be. scope_creep^Talk 18:54, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Insillaciv (talk) 16:54, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Review of references yields many tech blogs and VC funding reports, and no significant, independent, reliable secondary sources. Jtwhetten (talk) 19:44, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I'll spare everyone the meta-commentary so as to avoid sounding like a paranoiac but the sources available is truly the trivial-ist of WP:ORGTRIV it is possible to get. By design, a pain to get through. Got up to page 10, nothing that contributes to NCORP in the slightest. Binnie and McCune (2021) does briefly mention Aqua in the context of how to use some software, but there is insufficient content about the software for it to contribute to the notability of even the software. Aversa (2023) is published by BPB Publishing which is a predatory publisher, so unless someone gives me a good reason, I am inclined to decline to review it beyond that. Best, Alpha3031 (t • c) 11:50, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. An Israeli unicorn with multiple reliable sources and a minimum but significant level of coverage in reputable independent media. In addition, the topic of the discussion is also a set of various software apps that have also received significant media attention even in the industry focused papers and books.

Hib Al Gibol (talk) 15:01, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I see the sources in Hebrew, some books, and at least Calcalistech have required deep coverage with analysis, brief overivew, etc that allows for anyone to "to write more than a very brief, incomplete stub about the organization" - as WP:ORGDEPTH says --Jiaoriballisse (talk) 10:53, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Calcalistech is similar to Techcrunch. It almost the same format and its junk. scope_creep^Talk 09:02, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Lets have a look at the first block of references:

Ref 1 [5] Inteview with founder. Fails WP:ORGIND.

Ref 2 [6] Paid for profile.

Ref 3 [7] Paid for profile

Ref 4 [8] An X of Y article. This is a paid-for profile and is not independent. Fails WP:SIRS.

Ref 5 [9] Funding news. Fails WP:CORPTRIV

Ref 6 [10] Funding news. Fails WP:CORPTRIV

Ref 7 [11] This is PR profile with interview material. It fails WP:SIRS. Its not independent.

Ref 8 [12] Another list of unicorns. A profile. Fails WP:SIRS

Ref 9 [13] This is the passing mention. Context is wrong. Fails WP:SIRS.

Ref 10 [14] Passing mention. Context is wrong. Fails WP:SIRS.

Ref 11 [15] This details Aquas own security report. Its a WP:SPS source.

Ref 12 [16] Discusses the report above.

So in the first 12 reference not a single reference passed either WP:SIRS, WP:ORGIND, WP:CORPTRIV. All the information like most startups comes from Aqua itelf. It is a complete failure of WP:NCORP. Its another UPE advertisement. scope_creep^Talk 09:02, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jordan

Kuwait

Lebanon

Gold Apollo AR924

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

Doesn't seem to pass WP:NPRODUCT. Seems only notable within the context of the 2024 Lebanon pager explosions, and doesn't appear to warrant a standalone article. Article did not exist prior to the explosions, nor seemingly any reliable sources covering it, failing the "sustained coverage" requirement of NPRODUCT. Hemiauchenia (talk) 00:00, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Products, Technology, Taiwan, Lebanon, and Hungary. Hemiauchenia (talk) 00:00, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Copying here what I wrote when I WP:PRODded this article yesterday:

This particular model of pager seems to be notable only in the context of the 2024 Lebanon pager explosions. I can find no mention of "Gold Apollo AR-924," "Gold Apollo AR924" or "Gold Apollo AR" outside of news sources reporting the Israeli bombings. "Gold Apollo pager" returns only results for these news articles, the company's website, patent documents, and similar. The sources currently cited at the article fail the criteria for addressing the article topic "directly," as in the "significant coverage" criteria of WP:GNG.

While the particular model of pager is likely to receive a good amount of (temporary) media scrutiny from a few outlets, this will likely be only in the context of the above-mentioned bombings. Although WP:SUSTAINED does not apply to non-BLP articles, WP:NPRODUCT does, and although secondary sources refer to this particular device, there seems to be no claim to notability outside of this single event, for which we already have an article. Thus, I believe this article fails to establish notability for the topic, and our status as not an indiscriminate collection of information is applicable. Evan ^{(talk|contribs)} 00:06, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The model exists.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x50wwGjX2Ao

and

https://web.archive.org/web/20240917160632/https://www.apollosystemshk.com/product/42.html Mheretakis (talk) 23:06, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think it would be wise to wait as evidence unfolds, hiding the page ,may be misinterpreted as corruption even though it is not. 38.9.2.102 (talk) 11:46, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nobody here is suggesting this information should be hidden. Information about the attack has it's own article. The only information specific to this article is just the features of this device, which are not secret. This discussion is about if this article is notable enough to exist, not if it should be censored. Thank you 2603:6011:9440:D700:CC1F:F350:E9EB:5F48 (talk) 13:15, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete No other model of pager produced by the company exists on Wikipedia, information related to this product should be at most made a small section on the manufacturer's page. Beyond recent events, it is otherwise completely irrelevant to anything other than the company. JohnWarosa (talk) 01:21, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete was a completely non-notable model of pager until this recent news story. Andre🚐 01:24, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
~~Keep~~ → Speedy keep. This is a weapon used in an attack. With up to 4000 victims, the event can have multiple articles. Possibly move to BAC Consulting. The technical details of the pager are not important, but the supply chain is. Note, that other weapons (talkie-talkies) were also used in the attack. The key question the article needs to answer is who made the pagers and who is responsible for their safety, Gold Apollo or BAC Consulting. Protecting Gold Apollo from bad publicity is not a reason for deleting the article. If they go bankrupt because of this, they fully deserve it. They had a responsibility to protect their trade mark.

P.S. - Wikipedia has an article on Stuxnet, but no article on the attack itself or the damage it caused. The Stuxnet article focuses on the weapon and on how it was delivered. -- Petri Krohn (talk) 01:48, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is very flawed. The weapon was the explosives. Stuxnet was specific malware that exploited four zero day Windows vulnerabilities, and the article is about the engineered malware, and not about the model of USB drive it initially infected. But also that argument is off the point. The pager product is only notable if there are reliable independent secondary sources that significantly discuss the pager (not the attack, but the actual pager). Do we have any such sources? Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 07:34, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Petri Krohn; There is an article for the attack itself. Parham wiki (talk) 13:31, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am now changing my !vote to speedy keep. It is becoming evident that the AR924 was not just some random Gold Apollo pager intercepted by Mossad (presumedly), but it was designed and manufactured by the Israelis using the Hungarian company BAC Consulting as a front. This implies that this was a multi-year Israeli operation, started in 2022 at the latest. This covert operation is distinct from the bloodshed that happened in Lebanon this week. I am redirecting BAC Consulting, to the article, as evidently the fake company had no other purpose than to produce these killer pagers.

@Parham wiki; Thank you for the link to Operation Olympic Games. In the Stuxnet case the article on the weapon is ten times as long as the article on the attack itself. I believe we will see a similar trend here. -- Petri Krohn (talk) 19:41, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. - Someone has stated Draft:BAC Consulting. I have suggested that it be merged to Gold Apollo AR924. The company is a fake front, established solely to produce the AR924 killer pagers. -- Petri Krohn (talk) 20:11, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You should only bold one of your keeps. By convention at AfD we only bold our !votes once. Also you have not specified a speedy criterion. I don't think any are eligible. I think you mean you are moving from keep to keep. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 19:53, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Gold Apollo#2024 Israeli tampering and explosions in Lebanon per WP:REDUNDANTFORK, WP:SPINOUT, and WP:LENGTH. The parent article has existed since 2014 and has plenty of room to house this information, which is already there in its essential form. No need to delete this highly searchable term since it is a verified product which has been rendered notable by recent events. Havradim leaf a message 01:57, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Many thousands of these devices exploded the other day, injuring, maiming or killing nearly 3000 people. This device is now by far the most notable pager/beeper ever made. This device is at the very center of one of the most dramatic and historic espionage and irregular warfare operations in human history that is certain to be studied and analyzed for many years to come. Already, numerous reliable sources worldwide are discussing this device in great detail, and it boggles my mind that some editors think that this article should be summarily removed. Cullen328 (talk) 08:28, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The flaw in this argument is that the exact make and model of pager that was manipulated does not provide justification for an article. Similarly, we have Bulgarian umbrella that details how umbrellas have been rebuilt into a murder weapon - but without creating an article on the actual model of umbrella that was modified - exactly because the make and model of the modified implement does not in itself provide it with notability. Lklundin (talk) 11:45, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It seems that model may have only been made as a weapon by a covert manufacturer. Hungary denies involvement, says BAC was just a legal front. The page should be about AR924 the weapon. Keysersmoze (talk) 09:38, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The point is that the discussion of this device and the supply chain should be in the main explosion article, which is currently a small fraction of the size that would warrant a WP:SIZESPLIT. Hemiauchenia (talk) 13:25, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per arguments of Cullen328. PhotographyEdits (talk) 09:10, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Per the arguments of Cullen328 the information about the attack is highly important. A separate article on the pager that itself is notable only for the attack prevents a centralized and well organized presentation of the information on these explosions. Lklundin (talk) 09:14, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep or move to BAC page. Please count my vote. Flegozoff (talk) 12:04, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Votes are not counted, consensus is determined based on the strength of arguments. PhotographyEdits (talk) 12:47, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The event is a historical first time. This product became important, indeed people looked on Wikipedia for this article (and it is good that they found it).Sinucep (talk) 14:09, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The device is notable. Whether or not it was notable a week ago is irrelevant. —danhash (talk) 14:10, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Is it? What sources do we have? I asked this above and so far we have been presented with no sources to consider. We are looking for significant coverage of the product in multiple reliable independent secondary sources. No amount of saying it is notable is good enough. Where are the sources? Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 15:30, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There are currently 19 sources on the article —danhash (talk) 16:32, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Which of these meet WP:NPRODUCT and WP:SIRS? Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 16:44, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

keep I am a deletionist when it comes to mobiles, and similar devices. But as this device was a centre/key point in a major attack, many reliable sources have covered the device significantly (thus meeting WP:significant coverage) making it pass the WP:GNG, so it doesn't have to pass WP:NPRODUCT specifically. —usernamekiran (talk) 19:58, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. There are already articles for both the attack and the company who had the pager manufactured. Some information could go there. There are a lot of sources mentioning the pager, but only in the context of the attack. Specific coverage is lacking. Cortador (talk) 21:06, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The alleged usage of this device in Lebanon makes this particular model of pager notable, regardless of whether similar models are on Wikipedia. Those similar models did not just explode in masse, killing and injuring people. 96.45.23.79 (talk) 15:19, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep If it was not notable before, the major attacks using this device make it notable now. Keeper of the Queen's Corgis (talk) 16:52, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Edited and updated, not deleted. It should be about the AR924 mass produced and used in conflict weapon, not an article about a pager model. The story is developing and it appears this model may have only been produced as a weapon and not in Hungary which was a shell front. As a page about a weapon, it should be kept for the same reason "Little Boy" has a page, even though no one heard about it until after it exploded over Hiroshima, and it was also only used once. I am sure there is a page about the Manhattan Project, and one about the Hiroshima bombing. Yet the bomb itself has its own page. Notable weapons, especially the first of their type, need their own page because weapons have a design, explosive type and mass, range and effect, delivery method, an assembly, a development process, country that developed it, countries that possess it, number produced, uses in war. The AR924 is clearly notable for reasons mentioned by others and some of the reasons Little Boy is notable. Keysersmoze (talk) 08:44, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per Keeper of the Queen's Corgis and Cullen328, but most of all per Keysersmoze's comment above. The first instance of an entirely new kind of weapon; mass-manufactured booby-trapped remote-detonated personal devices. — The Anome (talk) 07:56, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, if these are specifically manufactured as a booby trap device and are not a standard pager that was modified with a logic board and explosive, then it clearly becomes notable. But, what are the secondary sources that show this please? We have a lot of keeps, but still there is still no source discussion at all. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 11:36, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment given this article is not notable outside the attack on Hezbollah - and given half the article is about the attack, what if this page is deleted and a brief summary of the features of these pager's features is added to 2024 Lebanon pager explosions, as it could provide a little context as to why Hezbollah chose these pagers. Once deleted, this article and BAC Consulting should redirect to 2024 Lebanon pager explosions, as both are solely notable for that attack (BAC Consulting was created exclusively for the attack; it can't be notable for anything else). If these pagers were used in another completely separate attack, or were popular outside of Hezbollah/Lebanon and Syria prior to the attack, then I would keep. However, that is not the case. We don't have a crystal ball, but it seems unlikely very many people will buy this specific brand after this incident.2603:6011:9440:D700:CC1F:F350:E9EB:5F48 (talk) 13:09, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge with 2024 Lebanon pager explosions - the model was at the center of the attack, and outside of it is not notable. 三葉草 San Yeh Tsao 18:18, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep As the story behind the logistical “capture” of the Hezbollah supply chain get into the public domain, it will ensure the notability of the Gold Apollo AR924 as a weapon. Article is also already available in three other languages. Sobaka (talk) 10:13, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletions

April 2023 Israel rocket attacks (via WP:PROD on 12 September 2003)

Oman

Legends League Cricket

AfDs for this article:

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

Recreation of a deleted article following this AfD. Apparently because the wording and WP:REFBOMBS are different, it cannot be a G4 speedy... Non-notable, just as it was a month and a bit ago, with WP:REFBOMBS and no establishment of WP:GNG. Just because retired players are taking part, doesn't mean notability is inherited. Coverage within the refbombs is routine. AA (talk) 14:52, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sports and Cricket. AA (talk) 14:52, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep As I previously commented that the page should not be deleted because this is known cricket league. And In this all are international cricket players. And this is the main page of league not season page and also old league. I think it should be not be deleted because a lot of news references are available.
PQR01 (talk) 04:53, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You didn't actually contribute at the last AFD (at least not as this logged in user). But WP:NOTINHERITED applies- just because notable people compete, that doesn't make this event notable. If you didn't like that it was deleted, WP:Deletion review would have been the proper process, not re-creating the article and thus forcing another AFD. Joseph2302 (talk) 08:58, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
For the record, the previous comment PQR01 is referring to is on the talk page of the article. -- asilvering (talk) 20:23, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Oman, Qatar, and India. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 16:53, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and salt as per my rationale at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Legends League Cricket. Nothing has changed in the 1 month since the last AFD, and re-creating an article after a clear AFD consensus like this is just disruptive. Joseph2302 (talk) 08:56, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There is a sockpuppet investigation here, as I am sure many, if not all, of these accounts are linked. AA (talk) 20:05, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - As per above rationale. Simione001 (talk) 00:10, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I think the league is quite notable as it's the most watched league in India after IPL as per BARC with reference to the news. Also the league was started back in 2022 and from then, a total of 4 seasons have happened and the 5th season is about to start from 20th September. The league is approved by Oman & Qatar cricket associations & several state associations in India. Taplow45 (talk) 08:55, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
So that's a lot of personal opinion... where's the WP:GNG, WP:OFFCRIC, WP:EVENT pass? AA (talk) 10:46, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Among other things, let's see how that sock investigation goes.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 22:52, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep: Seems noteworthy [17] [18], covered in other news sources as well. Although, article should be improved to include a bit more info such as champions, scorecards, stats etc. Vestrian24Bio (TALK) 17:17, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Draftify: Move to mainspace once the article is complete and ready. Vestrian24Bio (TALK) 09:34, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Big Legends play and it has continuously grown in stature. Lot of media attention shows that fans want to know about the league thus i think it should be on Wiki — Preceding unsigned comment added by LegendaryFan88 (talk • contribs) 09:13, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thats a good point. Move the page to main space 103.70.152.141 (talk) 11:19, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment. The above and below keeps should be discarded as they are likely sockpuppets. I have added LegendaryFan88 to an ongoing sockpuppet investigation... curious isn't it, that LegendaryFan88 has made a handful of edits yet stumbles across this AfD. AA (talk) 12:08, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep It seems like someone has an agenda against the league for not having got a chance to work with them. One of the comments shows that an agency is supporting the author. This league is creating jobs for retired cricketers and other staff. And it is visible on top sports networks across the world. Thus i feel it should have a Wiki page for dissemination of information — Preceding unsigned comment added by 103.70.152.141 (talk) 09:23, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: SPI is hopelessly backlogged,but I've protected this discussion for some laundry free discussion as there's no consensus among established editors
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 02:05, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: The creator of the page, along with the associated pro-page IDs and IPs, clearly shows signs of WP:UPE. Also, the page focuses on a cricket league filled with retired players, making it seem more like a promotional one. Charlie (talk) 06:00, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Also, the so-called league is not run by a sports governing body or organization, but by a company named Absolute Legends Sports Pvt. Ltd. This highlights that it is not primarily a cricket league to begin with. This information should be taken into consideration until and unless it's proven otherwise. Charlie (talk) 05:26, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Palestine

Battle at Tel al-Hawa

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

WP:SYNTH: No source evidence that a series of engagements in the vicinity actually constitute a battle as such and the term is not a Wikipedia artifice. Tagged for notability last month but no evidence of any discussion. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 16:40, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Military, Israel, and Palestine. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:01, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If I were a Palestinian, I would fight those who occupied my land

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

No claim to notability, and was clearly created with a political slant. Kingsmasher678 (talk) 20:33, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Kingsmasher678 (talk) 20:33, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Might make sense if this was a super well-known phrase that had been analyzed as such in multiple outlets. Instead, the article is about the various times Ayalon expressed this kind of sentiment and notability is very much in doubt. It's also true that the article has serious NPOV problems. Pichpich (talk) 21:04, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Military, Politics, Israel, and Palestine. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:12, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete seems not to be coherent as a standalone article. I think for a quotation like this to have an article it would have to rise to the level of Ich bin ein Berliner or similar. Other than that it probably belongs as part of the biography.Andre🚐 01:14, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Ami Ayalon could be expanded with material about this, but this standalone page is excessive and slanted. Not sure what the deal with all the italics and quotation marks is either. Reywas92^Talk 02:07, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep This is about interviews and human right that says all people have a right to defend their land, Whatever race they are and whatever status they have. This article has an implicit reference to human rights and human equality and is compiled based on clarified documents. championmin^Talk 02:19, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
And I don't disagree with what your saying. This just isn't the place to make the point.

Kingsmasher678 (talk) 02:21, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Random quote. No encyclopedic notability. NOTNEWS and NOTRANDOM apply. gidonb (talk) 13:42, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete No credible claim of notability. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 08:17, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. This is not a phrase like Sí se puede, with a longstanding legacy/impact. It is likely too soon for an article on this. Given developments and Ami Ayalon's prominence, that COULD change, but I don't see this passing a ten-year test as of today.--Mpen320 (talk) 14:41, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete due to lack of significant coverage. I understand the sentiment, but it’s just not notable. Cf. Palestinian law. Bearian (talk) 15:27, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Any chance we could WP:SNOW this? Seems fairly decided. Kingsmasher678 (talk) 18:18, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Broaden scope and retitle: The encyclopedic topic here is something like Israeli politician statements of empathy with Palestinians or Israeli acceptance of Palestinian right to resist, and should cover the examples in this source: Massad, Joseph (2024-09-16). "Why Israeli leaders admit if they were Palestinian they would fight for freedom". Middle East Eye., among others:

Onceinawhile (talk) 08:19, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2024 Melbourne Land Forces Expo protests

AfDs for this article:

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

Fails WP:EVENT. The event is not notable enough outside of Israel–Hamas war protests. Coverage of the protest has been WP:ROUTINE, similar to any other protest that has occurred in Melbourne. GMH Melbourne (talk) 07:03, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Police, Politics, Israel, Palestine, and Australia. GMH Melbourne (talk) 07:03, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - the coverage of this specific event, in my view, goes beyond what’s outlined in WP:ROUTINE as well as beyond what can be described as “similar to any other protest that has occurred in Melbourne”. There’s been loads of mainstream media coverage, both national and international^[1], in the weeks and days leading up^[2]^[3]^[4]^[5]^[6]^[7]^[8]^[9], during the days of protest itself^[10]^[11]^[12]^[13]^[14]^[15]^[16]^[17]^[18]^[19]^[20]^[21]^[22] with all sides chiming in/being quoted with their perspectives, and even in the days following^[23], coverage of these protests is still trickling in. In short, there’s pages and pages of coverage, news articles, interviews with mainstream media outlets, etc. This isn’t just once off circumstantial coverage - it’s been sustained and consistent. Geelongite (talk) 08:01, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
GMH Melbourne: procedural query, did you mean to nominate this twice? Other AfD here — ClaudineChionh (she/her · talk · contribs · email) 08:10, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@ClaudineChionh: Hello, No I didn't mean to, my internet cut out halfway between twinkle processing the AfD and the popup box said to process it again. Should I close the first one? GMH Melbourne (talk) 08:14, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
GMH Melbourne: thought it might have been a computer hiccup. I think it's best to close the other one as there isn't any discussion there yet. — ClaudineChionh (she/her · talk · contribs · email) 08:17, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Done GMH Melbourne (talk) 08:21, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: coverage of the protests was hardly routine - live coverage throughout the events, multiple heated responses from politicians and other public figures, significant debate over the role played by police. Also consider the fact that coverage was unusually extensive even in the days and weeks prior to the event. It has significance then beyond the fact that it was a protest about Palestine but also as regards questions of civil liberties and politics in Melbourne and Australia.

These protests were compared in multiple sources to the S11 protests which have had an article of similar length on Wikipedia since 2004. That article mentions the use of pepper spray against protesters, pointing out that at the time this was unheard of and supposedly banned. The use of rubber bullets and other weaponry by Victoria Police against anti-war protesters is similarly unprecedented today and I think another indication of notability. All that is solid melts into air (talk) 10:16, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The article could certainly do with some expansion to provide a more complete picture, but I think it demonstrably has received significant coverage in reliable sources. The fact that the prime minister saw fit to respond certainly makes it stand out from other, more routine protests. --Grnrchst (talk) 11:13, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete doesnt meet notability guidelines. DeadlyRampage26 (talk) 02:47, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: the userpage of this contributer should be taken into consideration. Though it’s definitely possible for people with differing political perspectives to have an objective view point - it’s clear that this doesn’t apply for this contributor and their input into this discussion should, in my view, be disregarded. Geelongite (talk) 05:46, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Extended content

Comment: I would not be opposed to a move to Israel–Hamas war protests in the Australia. Similar to Israel–Hamas war protests in the United States. GMH Melbourne (talk) 00:25, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There’s an argument for such an article in its own right given the extent of this protest movement - however as mentioned above, the extensive coverage by a range of sources warrants the existence of an article on the Land Forces protests as its own article (and the Land Forces protests weren’t specifically Palestine - though there’s significant crossover). In short - both articles should exist. Geelongite (talk) 13:41, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion Review

Proposed deletions

Templates

Redirects

</noinclude>

Qatar

Jamal Abdi Hassan

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

Non-notable. Only sources are entries in tables showing the individual participated in the Olympics. Marcus Markup (talk) 19:18, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Olympics, Sport of athletics, and Qatar. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:27, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Unable to find any WP:SIGCOV that could be used to help this subject, one of the many WP:LUGSTUBS overfilling this site still, meet the WP:GNG. Unfortunately, I don't see a clear redirect target. Let'srun (talk) 13:31, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Runner is a multiple-time international gold medallist satisfying WP:NATH and he has been covered in print media under his Arabic name "جمال عبدي حسن". A lot of print media from his era hasn't been digitized, but there are some remnants of prose online i.e. from Al Jazeera. He also had a viral moment falling on the water jump at the '96 Olympics which caused him to not make the finals. I don't have the text yet (working on it), but I know for a fact that infamous fall was covered in a The Times issue (transcribed in a news stream here) so that's another avenue for sourcing. Based on WP:NEXISTS, I think enough breadcrumbs are here to justify keeping the article with some work. --Habst (talk) 17:19, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. WP:NATH is definitely not satisfied in the absence of any IRS SIGCOV sources. The Al Jazeera source above has all of one sentence on him in a list of event results, and categorically does not count towards notability. In the 5000m race, Qatari Jamal Abdi Hassan Abdullah came in seventh with a time of 13.04.65. Moroccans Salah Hissou and Abdel Rahim Al-Ghomri came in eleventh and sixteenth with a time of 13.16.87 and 13.36.08 respectively.
We have zero indication that anything in The Times is non-routine SIGCOV, or even anything beyond a photo caption. JoelleJay (talk) 23:22, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@JoelleJay, WP:NATH is definitely not satisfied in the absence of any IRS SIGCOV sources -- can you please provide a policy source that states this? It's definitely not supported by the text of NATH or the WP:NSPORTS2022 consensus on this issue. WP:NEXISTS is a valid policy to cite in this context while we work to comb through print media from the 1990s. --Habst (talk) 13:18, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
How many times do people have to explain to you that meeting SPORTCRIT is required for an athlete to meet NSPORT? You can meet a sport-specific sub-criterion via achievement, but you still have to meet NSPORT for any presumptions of coverage to apply. JoelleJay (talk) 20:38, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@JoelleJay, I greatly respect your contributions here and hope you can extend the same respect to me. I think that WP:NATH and WP:SPORTCRIT are two separate parts of NSPORT without a clearly defined relationship to each other. Prong 2 of NATH is clearly met here by the subject's multiple international medals in distance running. To say that NATH isn't satisfied despite that simply isn't supported by the policy.

Also, NSPORT is only a guideline along with other more established guidelines such as WP:NEXISTS. If we can determine together that coverage exists of this athlete meeting the bar for notability, a keep vote would be justified. --Habst (talk) 13:27, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I misread "NATH" as a synonym for "NSPORT". But regardless, all sport-specific criteria are subordinate to the overarching requirements at SPORTCRIT. Otherwise SPORTCRIT #5 would make no sense and the robust consensus at NSPORT2022 would be functionally ignored. JoelleJay (talk) 21:18, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@JoelleJay, if a consensus is functionally ignored, then that means it's not actually a consensus. I don't think your description of NSPORTS2022 matches the text of the summary, which says, There is a general consensus that the NSPORTS guideline still has broad community support, which includes WP:NATH as a part of NSPORTS. Speaking of subordination, all of NSPORTS is subordinate to broader guidelines like WP:GNG and WP:NEXISTS, so if we can fulfill those, there is no need to fulfill SPORTCRIT.

If we delete this article, my understanding is we would effectively be saying that Abdi Hassan is the only steeplechase Olympian since 1924 to have not met the notability guidelines. I'm not ruling out that it's possible, but it certainly deserves more effort than we have put in so far. For example, prompted by the below comment I looked at the page history and found several alternative names for the subject we can use as leads for name-searching. --Habst (talk) 13:30, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The consensus has been observed in literally thousands of AfDs by this point. Only a very small cohort of editors ignore it or are ignorant of it. Your understanding of PAGs is clearly at odds with the rest of the community's. JoelleJay (talk) 22:05, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@JoelleJay, my views are consistent with Wikipedia policies and guidelines which I strive to follow. If you have a particular issue, please cite the policy or guideline which you think I misinterpreted and we can discuss it. As I said before, I greatly respect your work and viewpoints here, and I hope that we can converse respectfully without resorting to personal comments. --Habst (talk) 23:57, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You are claiming that a recent strong global consensus to require citing a GNG-contributing source in all athlete biographies is invalid because the same discussion didn't find a consensus to deprecate the entirety of NSPORT, and therefore its pre-RfC guidance is still in effect. As if following (your misreading of) one of the sub-outcomes of that RfC moots all of the findings of consensus for change in the same closing statement, all the subsequent consensuses at NSPORT for implementing those changes, and all the thousands of AfDs and major followup RfCs like LUGSTUBS 1 & 2 enforcing those changes.
Stop wasting people's time with this trolling. JoelleJay (talk) 00:25, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@JoelleJay, I'm following my understanding of the consensus. a recent strong global consensus to require citing a GNG-contributing source in all athlete biographies -- that's not what the consensus was, per Special:Diff/1246440039, an athlete biography could still be kept even if it doesn't cite a GNG-contributing source as long as it fulfills broader policies like WP:NEXISTS. This is a direct quote from the person who established SPORTCRIT: SPORTBASIC #5 was never intended, nor should it be misused, to trump or overrule the more general, overarching rule.

I still appreciate your contributions to the encyclopedia which we are both here to build. Your last comment was unnecessary. --Habst (talk) 12:43, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
...You're quoting one of the editors who most vehemently opposed NSPORT2022, repeatedly tried to stifle its implementation, and was cautioned at ANI for enlisting others to ignore SPORTCRIT #5, as if his opinion reflects any kind of consensus. And anyway we have the creator of SPORTCRIT #5 also saying in the same discussion that Such circumstances are very rare, and I've only come across one circumstance in the past two years (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John Vehmeier) where I concluded that it was appropriately applied. That is far from the application of NBASIC you have been attempting so you should interpret #5 as overriding it.
If you're going to keep making utterly nonsensical claims about NSPORT I'm going to continue calling them out. JoelleJay (talk) 01:09, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@JoelleJay, thanks for this information. Can you please link to the ANI archive where Cbl62 was cautioned to for enlisting others to ignore SPORTCRIT prong 5? I tried searching and couldn't find it. I also searched for your quote ("Such circumstances...") at both WP:Articles for deletion/Esraa Owis and WP:Articles for deletion/John Vehmeier and couldn't find it.

Regardless, when I use WP:NEXISTS I assure you it's based in policy and made in good faith. If you disagree with the sources existing, please make claims to that effect. Broad guidelines like GNG and NEXISTS are not invalidated just because there is some smaller subject-specific guideline on Wikipedia. --Habst (talk) 13:08, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Not Cbl62. I guess "warning" isn't the right term given its more specific meanings here, but certainly cautioned: BeanieFan11 should still be well aware that that warning did enjoy significant support and the consensus may be more clear if this comes up again.
NEXISTS doesn't mean you can just assume coverage exists merely because the subject meets your arbitrary presumptive standards. JoelleJay (talk) 23:32, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You're quoting one of the editors who most vehemently opposed NSPORT2022 ... [who] was cautioned at ANI for enlisting others to ignore SPORTCRIT #5 – FWIW, there was no warning given at that ANI, which resulted in no consensus. You also enlisted that argument at the Vehmeier AFD; as an admin said there, There was no consensus to warn anyone at ANI and you should strike the comment as incorrect. BeanieFan11 (talk) 14:55, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Apologies, I should have used "cautioned". I forget "warning" has a specific meaning here. JoelleJay (talk) 23:33, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I am the son of Jamal Abdi. I keep editing this wiki page because of some information. It has come to my attention that the page is in threat of deletion, I would greatly appreciate it if we don’t decide to delete it. 78.101.160.239 (talk) 09:04, 18 September 2024 (UTC) Copied from talk page. Geschichte (talk) 09:29, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:23, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Legends League Cricket

AfDs for this article:

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

Recreation of a deleted article following this AfD. Apparently because the wording and WP:REFBOMBS are different, it cannot be a G4 speedy... Non-notable, just as it was a month and a bit ago, with WP:REFBOMBS and no establishment of WP:GNG. Just because retired players are taking part, doesn't mean notability is inherited. Coverage within the refbombs is routine. AA (talk) 14:52, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sports and Cricket. AA (talk) 14:52, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep As I previously commented that the page should not be deleted because this is known cricket league. And In this all are international cricket players. And this is the main page of league not season page and also old league. I think it should be not be deleted because a lot of news references are available.
PQR01 (talk) 04:53, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You didn't actually contribute at the last AFD (at least not as this logged in user). But WP:NOTINHERITED applies- just because notable people compete, that doesn't make this event notable. If you didn't like that it was deleted, WP:Deletion review would have been the proper process, not re-creating the article and thus forcing another AFD. Joseph2302 (talk) 08:58, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
For the record, the previous comment PQR01 is referring to is on the talk page of the article. -- asilvering (talk) 20:23, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Oman, Qatar, and India. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 16:53, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and salt as per my rationale at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Legends League Cricket. Nothing has changed in the 1 month since the last AFD, and re-creating an article after a clear AFD consensus like this is just disruptive. Joseph2302 (talk) 08:56, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There is a sockpuppet investigation here, as I am sure many, if not all, of these accounts are linked. AA (talk) 20:05, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - As per above rationale. Simione001 (talk) 00:10, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I think the league is quite notable as it's the most watched league in India after IPL as per BARC with reference to the news. Also the league was started back in 2022 and from then, a total of 4 seasons have happened and the 5th season is about to start from 20th September. The league is approved by Oman & Qatar cricket associations & several state associations in India. Taplow45 (talk) 08:55, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
So that's a lot of personal opinion... where's the WP:GNG, WP:OFFCRIC, WP:EVENT pass? AA (talk) 10:46, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Among other things, let's see how that sock investigation goes.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 22:52, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep: Seems noteworthy [19] [20], covered in other news sources as well. Although, article should be improved to include a bit more info such as champions, scorecards, stats etc. Vestrian24Bio (TALK) 17:17, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Draftify: Move to mainspace once the article is complete and ready. Vestrian24Bio (TALK) 09:34, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Big Legends play and it has continuously grown in stature. Lot of media attention shows that fans want to know about the league thus i think it should be on Wiki — Preceding unsigned comment added by LegendaryFan88 (talk • contribs) 09:13, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thats a good point. Move the page to main space 103.70.152.141 (talk) 11:19, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment. The above and below keeps should be discarded as they are likely sockpuppets. I have added LegendaryFan88 to an ongoing sockpuppet investigation... curious isn't it, that LegendaryFan88 has made a handful of edits yet stumbles across this AfD. AA (talk) 12:08, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep It seems like someone has an agenda against the league for not having got a chance to work with them. One of the comments shows that an agency is supporting the author. This league is creating jobs for retired cricketers and other staff. And it is visible on top sports networks across the world. Thus i feel it should have a Wiki page for dissemination of information — Preceding unsigned comment added by 103.70.152.141 (talk) 09:23, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: SPI is hopelessly backlogged,but I've protected this discussion for some laundry free discussion as there's no consensus among established editors
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 02:05, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: The creator of the page, along with the associated pro-page IDs and IPs, clearly shows signs of WP:UPE. Also, the page focuses on a cricket league filled with retired players, making it seem more like a promotional one. Charlie (talk) 06:00, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Also, the so-called league is not run by a sports governing body or organization, but by a company named Absolute Legends Sports Pvt. Ltd. This highlights that it is not primarily a cricket league to begin with. This information should be taken into consideration until and unless it's proven otherwise. Charlie (talk) 05:26, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Saudi Arabia

AfD debates

Fatoora Platform

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

The topic in question lacks sufficient notability to warrant a standalone article. It does not meet the necessary criteria for independently significant under Wikipedia's notability guidelines WP:GNG or WP:SNG. Either the article should be deleted or merge with with the relevant parent article, Zakat, Tax and Customs Authority. Charlie (talk) 13:37, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Business, Websites, and Saudi Arabia. Charlie (talk) 13:37, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I respectfully disagree with the proposal to delete the Fatoora Platform page, as it meets Wikipedia’s notability guidelines under both WP:GNG and subject-specific notability.

1. Independent Sources: The platform has been covered by reliable, independent sources such as PwC, Deloitte, KPMG, and Saudi Gazette, which provide significant analysis on its implementation and role in tax compliance within Saudi Arabia. These sources establish the platform's notability as they are independent, non-promotional, and provide in-depth coverage.

2. Impact: Fatoora is integral to Saudi Vision 2030, a major national reform program, and plays a critical role in digital transformation and tax regulation in the country. It impacts millions of businesses and has been recognized as a significant development in Saudi Arabia’s economic modernization.

3. Notability Compliance: The article is well-supported by both primary and independent sources, fulfilling the criteria outlined in WP:GNG. The platform's wide-reaching impact, both locally and internationally, demonstrates its significance.

For these reasons, I believe the article should be retained. Njoy deep (talk) 05:50, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Cyprus–Saudi Arabia relations

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

Previously deleted under looser notability standards at AfD in 2009. Not every country A and country B combination is notable. Very poorly sourced, no secondary sources at all. Contains wild claims such as "political relations are close due to similarities between the 2 countries on historical, geographical and economical issues." AusLondonder (talk) 09:16, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bilateral relations, Saudi Arabia, and Cyprus. AusLondonder (talk) 09:16, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Article is based on 2 sources, 1 of which is primary. Fails GNG. LibStar (talk) 11:45, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Added more sources and encyclopedic context. Bilateral relations between two nations should not be considered irrelevant, and without notoriety, the two countries have mutual cooperation agreements, and like all articles of embassies, consulates and diplomatic relations with the exception of a diplomat Ghirmai Ghebremariam, who opened a query of deletion because it does not meet expectations, the other previous ones could have relevance in the future, and if they should be maintained and improved, not redirected or merged, much less eliminated. Alon9393 (talk) 21:21, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: Indefinitely blocked for disruptive behaviour. Geschichte (talk) 05:08, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 13:00, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Articles with proposed deletion tags

Syria

Husam Hourani

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

Article fails WP:GNG. Simione001 (talk) 00:48, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Syria-related deletion discussions. Simione001 (talk) 00:48, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Simione001 (talk) 00:48, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. Simione001 (talk) 00:48, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 18:23, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect - To 1984 AFC Asian Cup squads#Syria

Lâm (talk) 18:26, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. He played at two tournaments, so which do we redirect to??? Giant Snowman 18:28, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Per Giant Snowman. Svartner (talk) 00:13, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: No WP:SIGCOV Warm Regards, Miminity (talk) (contribs) 00:28, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Muslim conquest of Mediterranean islands

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

This is a compilation of wars that are mostly unrelated other than that they were waged by Muslim rulers/states. There is no one "Muslim conquest of Mediterranean islands". It neither describes anything that is unique to itself nor properly covers a broader history that reoccurs among sources as a common theme. This article pretty much synthesizes some sort of a narrative and pushes a vague grouping of events. Aintabli (talk) 00:23, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Islam, Algeria, Syria, France, Greece, Italy, Spain, and Turkey. Aintabli (talk) 00:23, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:28, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. The topic of the article seems too broad and without a well-defined scope. It's a collection of various, many of them unrelated, wars waged by various muslim rulers all over the Mediterranean throughout the centuries. Modern scholarship doesn't really treat all these events in a unified manner. @Cplakidas explained it more thoroughly in the talkpage discussion "Article scope is utter WP:OR". Another issue that was pointed out by an editor is the fact that the content might potentially be one-sided, as the article was translated from the Arab wikipedia and uses mostly Arab-language, and many of poor quality, sources. Piccco (talk) 11:07, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I tagged the article for all the reasons mentioned in the talk page, but there definitely are more problems in terms of source adequateness and verifiability, as well as balance of viewpoints presented. To be clear, the topic, if carefully redefined, has merit. E.g. something on the 'Early Muslim naval campaigns in the Mediterranean', if we consider the early Muslim world as fairly homogeneous during the first centuries of its existence, or the Muslim-Christian naval wars along the lines of Ekkehard Eickhoff's Seekrieg und Seepolitik zwischen Islam und Abendland or the multifaceted Muslim experience of the Mediterranean as in Picard's La Mer des Califes, but it cannot be a catch-all for cherry-picked Muslim naval activity that happened between Muhammad and the Ottomans; it should also not be one-sided, taking only the perspective of the Muslims, or treat only the 'conquests' in detail and gloss over the losses in quick order. Furthermore, much if not all of the topic is actually covered in other articles such as Early Caliphate navy (which also has its problems, but at least has a more clearly defined scope) or Fatimid navy. A pity for the immense translation effort that went into it, but IMO this is a case of WP:STARTOVER. Constantine ✍ 15:38, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Pallikari ap' ta Sfakia 17:40, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep this is an informative and well sourced article documenting an established and recognised occurrence in history. I don't see how it's original research to group together events that historians themselves typically group together. Flyingfishee (talk) 17:03, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The events are factual, but the choice of scope is very much WP:OR as being both too broad geographically and chronologically and too narrow in examining the Muslim conquests only, even if they are centuries apart, but not their context, not the intervening events, etc. It is as WP:OR and unbalanced as having an article on 'Indian victories' with events from remote antiquity to modern times. No historian adopts such a categorization or groups these events together in this uncritical fashion. Constantine ✍ 18:52, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Cplakidas' analysis. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 14:49, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Draftify. The article has all the problems mentioned, although I'm not sure they are quite as bad as implied. The rationale for deletion, however, is weak. Deletion is not an end-around when you don't have the time or wherewithal to improve an article yourself. This is a borderline TNT case to me. The dates in the infobox are not far off the dates of the already cited Seekrieg und Seepolitik zwischen Islam und Abendland. Islands are a focus of recent scholarship Change and Resilience: The Occupation of Mediterranean Islands in Late Antiquity and the works of Luca Zavagno. There is a valid topic here, but the article is terribly unfocused. I'd be satisifed with moving it to draftspace to see if anyone can/wants to fix it before TNTing it. Srnec (talk) 00:23, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Turkey

Turhan Mildon

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

Fails GNG and sources found all routine or promo. No WP:INHERIT just because his company is notable. WP:BEFORE check did not yield any substantive sources. ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 12:39, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and Turkey. Shellwood (talk) 13:02, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – The subject does not have enough news coverage. Articles are about the company. Mysecretgarden (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 23:03, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Turkish football clubs in European competitions 1990–1999

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

WP:NOTSTATS applies. Article contains no prose/context, no references, and no relevant external links. It's just pure statistics, and adds no value. Useful information that is better contextualized is already available at Turkish football clubs in European competitions. S.A. Julio (talk) 09:38, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. S.A. Julio (talk) 09:39, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Turkey-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 09:44, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Football and Europe. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:43, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per nom. Giant Snowman 18:47, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Hemshin

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

Fail to see how this is notable. Whole article is probably WP:SYNTH. Creator of this article conveniently added no pages for the citations, and when I looked into one of two of them (can't access the other, though it is likely the same case), I found no mention about this event [21]. I'm not surprised, since they also misused citations at Han–Xiongnu War (215 BC–200 BC) [22] [23] HistoryofIran (talk) 02:22, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, History, Military, and Turkey. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:11, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as per HistoryofIran, I read the references cited in the article, and could find absolutely no mention of either this battle, or of Hemshin itself. I had a good search and couldn’t find any other sources on it either - not a single mention of Hemshin / Hemşin anywhere for the early 1830s, battle or otherwise. Absurdum4242 (talk) 16:25, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as WP:SYNTH. Cannot find any mention of this either. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 17:50, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Verkine Karakashian

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

Fails WP:SIGCOV. 4meter4 (talk) 16:45, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Women, Theatre, Armenia, Greece, and Turkey. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:50, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. No refs. If any coverage of this person ever surfaces, it would take exactly 10 minutes to write a better article. -- Ssilvers (talk) 19:35, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: There is a book reference in the article. I would suggest to keep the article, unless someone actually provided an assessment of its coverage. TheJoyfulTentmaker (talk) 20:14, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@TheJoyfulTentmaker That is not a valid policy based keep vote. WP:SIGCOV requires multiple sources with independent significant coverage, which we generally interpret at AFD is a minimum of three sources. One book source, no matter how in-depth does not meet our notability guidelines.4meter4 (talk) 20:39, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I kindly disagree, a single book may indicate existence of more sources. Even without references, deletion nominators are expected to do a good faith WP:BEFORE: to check Google, Google Books, Google Scholar, and Wikipedia Library if possible. AfD is not a place to urge people to fix unreferenced articles. Nomination must come only after there are good indicators that the subject is not notable, regardless of the state of the article; as stated in WP:NEXIST. Sorry for repeating these in multiple nominations of yours, but there are not enough people watching these nominations about niche topics like this one, and I honestly believe it will be a loss for the encyclopedia if these are prematurely deleted. TheJoyfulTentmaker (talk) 21:40, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@CeeGee I think you created the article, pinging just in case you were not notified. TheJoyfulTentmaker (talk) 21:53, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

We need other sources, suggesting that they exist isn't helpful Oaktree b (talk) 23:53, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@TheJoyfulTentmaker You seem to be misinterpreting policy language. WP:SIGCOV requires multiple sources as a non-negotiable criteria for all wikipedia articles. It's a must and its policy. Period. WP:NEXIST requires people voting to keep articles to produce multiple sources at the time of making a keep argument at an AFD. Asserting there are sources through guesswork is not following NEXIST; nor is arguing for keep based on a book you personally have not seen. Providing sources with url links or the names, publication dates, and pages of specific sources that you personally have looked at is following NEXIST. As for me, I looked at several standard opera reference works, including a Russian language music encyclopedia and found nothing on this person. My attempt at BEFORE may not be perfect but please WP:AGF. Best.4meter4 (talk) 00:52, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest you re-read WP:SIGCOV because it doesn't say what you think it does. The immediate subsection doesn't mention the number of sources but a bit further it says "Sources" should be secondary sources, as those provide the most objective evidence of notability. There is no fixed number of sources required since sources vary in quality and depth of coverage, but multiple sources are generally expected. Multiple sources are not a "must" and the requirement is not "policy" (our notability documents relate to guidance rather than policy). Thincat (talk) 10:49, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Well, this source mentions this person [24], but that's all I can find. I don't think we have enough sourcing. Oaktree b (talk) 23:56, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Oaktree b Just a note: during the period she was active, The Ottoman Empire used the Arabic writing system. So search is not trivial. Even modern sources include various different spellings of her name. Trying the modern Turkish spelling Verkine Karakaşyan, I can easily find at least one journal paper. TheJoyfulTentmaker (talk) 00:11, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Also, I can only see a short segment from the Google Books preview, but the book you linked might have a significant coverage (there are three search hits in separate places of the book). Here is the the second one, page 67: "... Verkine Karakashian read his poem “Freedom” and moved the audience so deeply that the ceremony was repeated for several nights in a row. After this incident, gradually more young girls showed the courage to go onstage and break the ...". Seems there is more before and after this passage, and this itself probably has a citation in the book; so if anyone has access to this book it would be really helpful if you could check. Separately, I added two more sources to the article and found the ISBN number of the book, referenced by CeeGee, who created the article. TheJoyfulTentmaker (talk) 02:52, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: The Armenian wiki has some links, but I'm not in a position to say if they're RS or not. Oaktree b (talk) 00:19, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Clearly not notable Pallikari ap' ta Sfakia 17:20, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. TheJoyfulTentmaker (talk) 20:22, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: The sourcing is improved, now we have 6 references (one thanks to @Oaktree b's Armenian Wikipedia pointer), and hopefully notability concerns are now reduced. Also, I'm curious about the opinions @Basak and @Buidhe, who are experienced editors with contributions related to Ottoman Armenians on the English or the Turkish Wikipedia. TheJoyfulTentmaker (talk) 01:25, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Covered by several additional Turkish sources [25][26] Additional Armenian sources [27][28] The main ref in the Armenian article is the Armenian Soviet Encyclopedia. Whether there were citations at the time of the nomination is irrelevant to AfD. Aintabli (talk) 03:31, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Integral Forex

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

Doesn't meet WP:NCORP. Lacks in-depth independent coverage outside of WP:TRADES. Media covered the death of Integral Forex founder but they are not useful to prove notability of his company. Checked Turkish Wikipedia article, same case, a lot of citations from unreliable trade publications. Gheus (talk) 14:16, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Finance, Companies, and Turkey. Skynxnex (talk) 14:18, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete because it does not provide sufficient independent, reliable sources to establish notability, focusing mainly on promotional content. --Jiaoriballisse (talk) 11:57, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Selva Erdener

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

The article uses zero independent sources with significant coverage. Fails WP:SIGCOV. 4meter4 (talk) 15:45, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Music and Turkey. – The Grid (talk) 16:04, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Women. Shellwood (talk) 16:42, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

~~Procedural~~ keep: I'll try to find sources if I can, but for now I suggest a ~~procedural~~ keep since this is a very low-effort nomination for an opera singer whose name I can recognize. See: WP:NEXIST, WP:BEFORE TheJoyfulTentmaker (talk) 20:52, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Here is one source, from Hıncal Uluc's column. Many more search hits exist, but one needs to sift through them to identify SIGCOV. In addition, the SNG about musicians is likely to be satisfied here, due to concerts and records from notable firms.TheJoyfulTentmaker (talk) 03:06, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@TheJoyfulTentmaker That's not a valid argument for a procedural close per WP:PCLOSE. If you think that there is WP:SIGCOV, then by all means provide evidence of it here. That is what an WP:AFD discussion is for. Better yet, take time to improve the article. You may vote a straight keep based on policy but is there is no procedural argument to be made here.4meter4 (talk) 04:19, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Muslim conquest of Mediterranean islands

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

This is a compilation of wars that are mostly unrelated other than that they were waged by Muslim rulers/states. There is no one "Muslim conquest of Mediterranean islands". It neither describes anything that is unique to itself nor properly covers a broader history that reoccurs among sources as a common theme. This article pretty much synthesizes some sort of a narrative and pushes a vague grouping of events. Aintabli (talk) 00:23, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Islam, Algeria, Syria, France, Greece, Italy, Spain, and Turkey. Aintabli (talk) 00:23, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:28, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. The topic of the article seems too broad and without a well-defined scope. It's a collection of various, many of them unrelated, wars waged by various muslim rulers all over the Mediterranean throughout the centuries. Modern scholarship doesn't really treat all these events in a unified manner. @Cplakidas explained it more thoroughly in the talkpage discussion "Article scope is utter WP:OR". Another issue that was pointed out by an editor is the fact that the content might potentially be one-sided, as the article was translated from the Arab wikipedia and uses mostly Arab-language, and many of poor quality, sources. Piccco (talk) 11:07, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I tagged the article for all the reasons mentioned in the talk page, but there definitely are more problems in terms of source adequateness and verifiability, as well as balance of viewpoints presented. To be clear, the topic, if carefully redefined, has merit. E.g. something on the 'Early Muslim naval campaigns in the Mediterranean', if we consider the early Muslim world as fairly homogeneous during the first centuries of its existence, or the Muslim-Christian naval wars along the lines of Ekkehard Eickhoff's Seekrieg und Seepolitik zwischen Islam und Abendland or the multifaceted Muslim experience of the Mediterranean as in Picard's La Mer des Califes, but it cannot be a catch-all for cherry-picked Muslim naval activity that happened between Muhammad and the Ottomans; it should also not be one-sided, taking only the perspective of the Muslims, or treat only the 'conquests' in detail and gloss over the losses in quick order. Furthermore, much if not all of the topic is actually covered in other articles such as Early Caliphate navy (which also has its problems, but at least has a more clearly defined scope) or Fatimid navy. A pity for the immense translation effort that went into it, but IMO this is a case of WP:STARTOVER. Constantine ✍ 15:38, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Pallikari ap' ta Sfakia 17:40, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep this is an informative and well sourced article documenting an established and recognised occurrence in history. I don't see how it's original research to group together events that historians themselves typically group together. Flyingfishee (talk) 17:03, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The events are factual, but the choice of scope is very much WP:OR as being both too broad geographically and chronologically and too narrow in examining the Muslim conquests only, even if they are centuries apart, but not their context, not the intervening events, etc. It is as WP:OR and unbalanced as having an article on 'Indian victories' with events from remote antiquity to modern times. No historian adopts such a categorization or groups these events together in this uncritical fashion. Constantine ✍ 18:52, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Cplakidas' analysis. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 14:49, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Draftify. The article has all the problems mentioned, although I'm not sure they are quite as bad as implied. The rationale for deletion, however, is weak. Deletion is not an end-around when you don't have the time or wherewithal to improve an article yourself. This is a borderline TNT case to me. The dates in the infobox are not far off the dates of the already cited Seekrieg und Seepolitik zwischen Islam und Abendland. Islands are a focus of recent scholarship Change and Resilience: The Occupation of Mediterranean Islands in Late Antiquity and the works of Luca Zavagno. There is a valid topic here, but the article is terribly unfocused. I'd be satisifed with moving it to draftspace to see if anyone can/wants to fix it before TNTing it. Srnec (talk) 00:23, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Montreux Declaration

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

As the arrested people were all released after a few days I cannot see how this is significant enough to deserve an article. As an alternative to deletion as it is so short this unsourced article could be merged into the treaty article. Although there is no Turkish article I think if it was merged enough sources could be found for at least a few sentences. Chidgk1 (talk) 17:41, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Law, Military, and Turkey. Chidgk1 (talk) 17:41, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ah I have now found the Turkish article and linked it Chidgk1 (talk) 17:49, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ah the Turkish discussion voted to keep so if properly sourced maybe it should be kept per https://tr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vikipedi:Silinmeye_aday_sayfalar/103_emekli_amiral_bildirisi ? Chidgk1 (talk) 17:54, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Full disclosure, I wrote the article. I do understand why not being ref'd would be a ref flag for deletion, yes. And thanks for delving in the the Turkish Wikipeda. But hear me out.

It was a somewhat significant event in modern Turkish history, and not a one-day wonder. Ten or fifty or a hundred years from now some non-zero number of people reading Turkish history are going to see it mentioned and want to know more. (And remember, we ought to try to be global and work against (natural) bias against foreign events.)

It doesn't matter if the people were released in a few days. The hearing was publized and acquitals can be notable.

It's short, but reasonable size for an article. We have a lot of articles that short. And it can be expanded somewhat.

Yeah there are no refs and I marked it such so that other editors could add them. There are sources (I didn't make any of the material up). Not adding them was an uncharacteristic lazy lapse on my part, to leave the work to others, I never do that and I don't remember why I did here. And I can see why no refs would be a red flag for the article not being worthwhile. Still, for deletion, it is not supposed to much matter if an article has refs but whether it can have refs with reasonable effort.

A rule of thumb is that if an article meets the WP:GNG that's an indication (not proof, granted) that the article might well be worth keeping. GNG wants in-depth coverage from multiple reliable, neutralish, and reasonably notable sources. Here's a full article from Associated Press, Here's a full article from Bianet, Here's a full article from Hurriyet Daily News. There're more, and that's just the English articles.

Pretty close to case closed I would think?

(Also, a gentle reminder, you are supposed to do WP:BEFORE before nomination, and I guess you didn't cos I found these quickly in Google. I know, I know, many nominators also don't do it, but IMO they really ought to to save us all time and not have worthwhile articles sometimes deleted. I understand, but hopefully a learning experience here?) Herostratus (talk) 18:48, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy keep: per Herostratus. Notable event with implications spanning a significant time horizon. Plenty of sources exist. TheJoyfulTentmaker (talk) 01:32, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Melikşah Üniversitesi S.K.

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

I searched but this does not seem to be notable Chidgk1 (talk) 17:31, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Basketball and Turkey. Chidgk1 (talk) 17:31, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of Greek exonyms in Turkey

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

I can see someone has put a lot of work in here but it has been tagged unsourced for a long time, so as someone who cannot speak Greek how would I know if it is true? If this is notable why is there no list on Greek or Turkish Wikipedia? Chidgk1 (talk) 17:15, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Language, Greece, and Turkey. Chidgk1 (talk) 17:15, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:28, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Entirely original research; even if totally accurate, it would require WP:TNT and a rewrite with sourcing. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 06:14, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete obviously it's a copy paste from a page like this. There are many such pages of dubious validity circulating on the Greek internet. Pallikari ap' ta Sfakia 17:38, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kardeşlerim

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

I don’t understand how this could get past the new page patrol without sources. Or is the iMDB entry enough for them? Chidgk1 (talk) 16:52, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Turkey. Chidgk1 (talk) 16:52, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The tr.wiki article has twenty sources. Mccapra (talk) 17:16, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Coverage exists; awards and nominations mentioned in TkWp page, for example, -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 18:08, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hatay, Konak

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

Tagged unsourced in 2009 and does not seem to be notable. Konak article exists so maybe this one not needed Chidgk1 (talk) 16:46, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Turkey. Chidgk1 (talk) 16:46, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy keep: See [29], [30] for instance, but even without these, it should be speedily kept based on WP:NTOWN. TheJoyfulTentmaker (talk) 01:19, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

So is ‘’semt’’ still a legally recognized subdivision of “ilçe”?Chidgk1 (talk) 05:22, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Definition of a "semt" can be informal, but Hatay in İzmir as a city center is well-recognized even if it does not have official boundaries. The Konak municipality has a center there, public transit stations, events, etc... Within the "semt", there are lots of officially recognized "mahalle"s, each of which can have their own articles, according to WP:NTOWN. TheJoyfulTentmaker (talk) 06:57, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

So I can create an article about any “mahalle” I like without any sources at all? Chidgk1 (talk) 07:20, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Gaziosmanpaşaspor

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

Talk page suggests it be considered for deletion Chidgk1 (talk) 16:40, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sports and Turkey. Chidgk1 (talk) 16:40, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and Football. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:14, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, no reason to delete. Third-level club with lots of coverage during many years. Geschichte (talk) 17:45, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:47, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Geschichte, needs improving not deleting. Giant Snowman 18:53, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep – Per Geschichte. Svartner (talk) 00:45, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Probably keep Although I find it a little odd I wasn't so good at finding the best sources, but again just because there are no sources on an article, doesn't mean they don't exist. Perfect example of WP:NEXIST. Govvy (talk) 14:41, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Plenty of coverage by news and other publications, some of which are on Google Books and Scholar Aintabli (talk) 18:41, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fırat University Faculty of Veterinary Medicine

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

As we already have an article for the uni why do we need this unsourced article? Chidgk1 (talk) 16:37, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education, Biology, and Turkey. Chidgk1 (talk) 16:37, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Animal and Medicine. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:15, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as it seems like text page or draft --Loewstisch (talk) 10:02, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Faculty of Medicine, ÇOMÜ

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

We already have an article for the university. This article tells the reader mostly just what they would find more reliably on the uni website Chidgk1 (talk) 16:34, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education, Medicine, and Turkey. Chidgk1 (talk) 16:34, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dorian (Turkish band)

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

“D&R” is a shop (which sells records among other things) so I am not sure that source in the Turkish article is enough to show notability Chidgk1 (talk) 16:28, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Turkey. Chidgk1 (talk) 16:28, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ayten Sokak

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

The article says the street is notable but it has no sources and there is no Turkish article Chidgk1 (talk) 16:22, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politics and Turkey. Chidgk1 (talk) 16:22, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 16:58, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Adile Mermerci Anatolian High School

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

I did a search and although there are one or two good sources such as https://avesis.yildiz.edu.tr/yayin/dde9fb67-9c04-4dba-9bea-b6873f25805c/the-comparative-analyzes-of-the-students-performance-about-matrix-in-student-selection-exam-oss-and-the-approved-lecture-books-of-ministry-for-the-national-education-meb I did not find enough to show that it is notable Chidgk1 (talk) 16:15, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Schools and Turkey. Chidgk1 (talk) 16:15, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 16:59, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2014 İstanbul Cup – Singles

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

The only reference is the draw and the article was tagged re missing cites ten years ago. So is the reader just supposed to trust the Wikipedia editor for the scores? Chidgk1 (talk) 16:06, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Tennis and Turkey. Chidgk1 (talk) 16:06, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:16, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I've fixed the references using the links from the WTA website [31]. If there's an issue with referencing, please look for sources yourself and try to have a go at fixing it yourself instead of taking the page straight to AfD and expecting everyone else to fix things on a timer. Related WikiProjects can help out if you're not familiar with a particular subject matter. Iffy★Chat -- 09:45, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep for the reasons given by Iffy above. Agree also that taking the page straight to AfD is making a mountain out of a molehill. Yimingbao (talk) 10:59, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2015 in Turkish television

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

Tagged 8 years ago as unsourced it would be too time consuming for a reader to check if this is correct or not. I checked a couple of things and found them wrong (2 shows mentioned as still running have apparently ended). Chidgk1 (talk) 16:03, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Turkey. Chidgk1 (talk) 16:03, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:16, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2009 İstanbul Cup – Doubles

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

As the external link only shows the draw the scores might just be a figment of the writers imagination Chidgk1 (talk) 15:56, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Tennis and Turkey. Chidgk1 (talk) 15:56, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:17, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep For the same reasons as in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2014 İstanbul Cup – Singles, this page is now fixed too. Iffy★Chat -- 09:48, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2014 in Turkish television

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

Searched but I cannot find enough good sources. No Turkish article Chidgk1 (talk) 11:43, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Turkey. Chidgk1 (talk) 11:43, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:01, 14 September 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, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2012 in Turkish television

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

Turkish article also uncited, and tagged as maybe unencyclopedic Chidgk1 (talk) 11:41, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Turkey. Chidgk1 (talk) 11:41, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:01, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:46, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2011 in Turkish television

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

The Turkish article is also uncited, and it has been tagged as possibly unsuitable for Wikipedia Chidgk1 (talk) 11:39, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Turkey. Chidgk1 (talk) 11:39, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:01, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:46, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Turkey at the 2009 World Games

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

Tagged uncited over a decade ago. Nothing in the article shows it is notable Chidgk1 (talk) 11:35, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Games and Turkey. Chidgk1 (talk) 11:35, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:02, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:46, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Şarkı

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

Hard to search for sources as I am not a native speaker and the word means “song”. Seems unlikely to be notable but instead of deleting could perhaps be merged? Chidgk1 (talk) 17:28, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Music and Turkey. Chidgk1 (talk) 17:28, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:26, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If sources are located discussing the specific song form, then a merge could be sensible. As is, however, I think either a redirect to fasıl or the definition on Wiktionary (via {{wiktred}}) would make the most sense. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 20:05, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Although it is a stub, the article is about a specific musical form, which is notable on its own. [32] A potential merge would be an editorial dicussion, not an AfD discussion.

TheJoyfulTentmaker (talk) 01:17, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:37, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. TheJoyfulTentmaker (talk) 02:07, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Üçköprü

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

This confluence is not significant in itself as the river is small - no objection to merging into the river article Chidgk1 (talk) 17:11, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Turkey. Chidgk1 (talk) 17:11, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:38, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yer-sub

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

Although there are some sources such as http://www.ejst.tuiasi.ro/Files/64/14_Yerzhanova%20et%20al.pdf I am not sure there are enough to show notability for a stand-alone article. As an alternative to deletion maybe merge into Tengriism? Chidgk1 (talk) 16:49, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Religion, Central Asia, and Turkey. Chidgk1 (talk) 16:49, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:38, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge : per nom.--Gabriel (……?) 11:35, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tengriism is a Redirect, not an appropriate Merge target page. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:07, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oh you right. Gabriel (……?) 05:34, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Gabriel601 I don’t know the subject so you should say whether merging to Tengrism is suitable as I don’t really know merge or delete which is better? Chidgk1 (talk) 05:59, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Provincial road 34-12 (Turkey)

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

Unsourced and only 7 km long so does not deserve own article - no objection if anyone merges it Chidgk1 (talk) 17:49, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Transportation and Turkey. Chidgk1 (talk) 17:49, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. If you are suggesting a Merge or Redirect, please provide a link to the suggested target article.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:56, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

People's Liberation Party-Front of Turkey/Revolutionary Coordination Union

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

As can be seen from the cite on the Turkish article this was just one of many many far left parties in Turkey. What makes this one notable? Chidgk1 (talk) 17:43, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politics and Turkey. Chidgk1 (talk) 17:43, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:46, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: +Move to a shorter name such as "People's Liberation Party-Front of Turkey (not a combination of multiple names). There's vast coverage of THKP-C: [33][34] Searching other names might return even more sources. Aintabli (talk) 16:50, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 19:10, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

All Progressive Youth Association

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

Google scholar has no sources and neither does the Turkish article Chidgk1 (talk) 16:08, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politics and Turkey. Chidgk1 (talk) 16:08, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Seems to fail WP:GNG, I was only able to find passing mentions in Bianet. Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 16:11, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 16:56, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete no sources at all. Xegma(talk) 18:03, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - again, lack of references is not on its own a criteria for deletion. The article as it exist right now doesn't fully explain the nature of the group. TÜM-İGD is the youth wing of the TKP (1920) (ex Ürün Sosyalist Dergi [tr], one of the main remnants of the old Communist Party of Turkey and as such, unrelated to the current Communist Party of Turkey). It's a nationwide movement, that is notable in its own right. I note material on 2012 May Day, 2010 YÖK action (the Bianet coverage mentioned above would have been for https://bianet.org/haber/students-take-the-streets-on-30th-anniversary-of-yok-133750 for 2011 protest presumably). Here coverage in Yeni Dünya, here coverage on 2006 protests in Hurriyet, Evrensel, Milliyet, Cumhuriyet, Yeni Safak, etc, etc. Most of coverage is coverage on various protests of the group over the past years. --Soman (talk) 18:44, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 18:32, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Coach Trip series 8

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

Has been tagged as unsourced for over a decade. No objection if anyone merges it to Coach trip but it does not seem notable enough to deserve its own article Chidgk1 (talk) 12:58, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Turkey. Chidgk1 (talk) 12:58, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: WP:SPLITLIST applies. Every of the 18 series has a page. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 13:41, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:59, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Wikipedia:NOTDATABASE An endless list of nothing. Pallikari ap' ta Sfakia 17:36, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 13:05, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep for technical merrits. Either all CT series should be deleted, or (preferably) all should be merged into a kind of episode list. There's no point in singling this page out. – sgeureka ^t•c 07:45, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 18:32, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kartal Anatolian High School

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

I did a search and this seems not to be notable Chidgk1 (talk) 19:07, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Schools and Turkey. Chidgk1 (talk) 19:07, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Procedural keep: While I acknowledge that high school articles are not automatically notable, there is a community consensus that a good faith WP:BEFORE that includes some print resources or local newspapers is needed, per this RfC. This is especially important given the underrepresentation of high schools from the non-English-speaking parts of the world on the English Wikipedia. TheJoyfulTentmaker (talk) 23:22, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@TheJoyfulTentmaker Not quite sure what you expected me to do about “print resources”. I don’t live in Istanbul so cannot pop round to a local library in Kartal, but there must be plenty of editors who do live in the city, so if they wish to find offline resources to cite to keep the article it will be easier for them than for me. Chidgk1 (talk) 15:14, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Added one source about a controversy. The point is that, for high schools with a history, a deeper BEFORE is needed, according to the community consensus. This nomination does not even have the findings of a regular BEFORE. TheJoyfulTentmaker (talk) 17:35, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment may be saved if existent sources are added. --Johnpaul2030 (talk) 12:24, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Johnpaul2030 Great. Glad you found suitable sources - could you add them? Chidgk1 (talk) 15:37, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 22:46, 6 September 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) 09:25, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Added couple of sources since the nomination; some about its sports teams and some related to the controversies. I believe these satisfy WP:SIGCOV to some degree and contribute to the school's notability. Also, I still believe that more sources can be found in the print archives; from around the time when the school was being opened. TheJoyfulTentmaker (talk) 04:48, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Others

United Arab Emirates

GTC FX

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

It does not meet the notability guideline for companies. Some of the sources in the article are questionable. Frost 03:15, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Finance, Companies, and United Arab Emirates. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:10, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - does not meet NCORP — MaxnaCarta ( 💬 • 📝 ) 06:42, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - as said above, does not meet WP:NCORP Mia ^{a data witch (chat)} 12:22, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Other competitors already have their own entries. User:Martinolau 16:17, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Moza Sultan Al Kaabi

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

I don't believe she meets the notability criteria, as almost all sources only mention her death in a car accident. And the page was created three days after her death. فيصل (talk) 15:59, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and United Arab Emirates. فيصل (talk) 15:59, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women and Medicine. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 16:01, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete lack significant coverages about her works and yes maximum sources are about her death. Xegma(talk) 17:37, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The subject of the article is notable per WP:ONEEVENT - the first Emarati woman to become an orthopedic surgeon.--jojo@nthony (talk) 03:50, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
(Comment made after relisting.) Before I assess the sources myself, I must point out that this is not how ONEEVENT works. First, ONEEVENT says that people notable for only one event are generally not notable. Second, ONEEVENT applies to people notable for a single event (which could also be notable), not to people notable for a single achievement. Being the first female Emirati orthopedic surgeon is a claim to notability; sources are still needed to show that she is notable. Toadspike [Talk] 13:09, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Shadow311 (talk) 16:13, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 17:19, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yemen

Hamdan Dammag

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

No indication of notability per WP:BIO or WP:NAUTHOR. Notability is not inherited from a famous parent. I am unable to find multiple reliable sources discussing the individual in a significant way. The article was also possibly written by the subject himself. ... discospinster _talk 20:29, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Computing, and Yemen. ... discospinster _talk 20:29, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Poetry-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:05, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - this page was created by @Dammag, probably the same guy this article is about Abo Yemen ✉ 19:12, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - very slight coverage about the person. Ping me if you find enough for WP:SIGCOV. Bearian (talk) 21:45, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

[1] ttps://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2024/09/11/australia/anti-war-protesters-clash-police-australia-intl-hnk

[2] ttps://www.skynews.com.au/australia-news/politics/good-for-our-economy-vic-premier-spruiks-benefits-of-land-forces-expo-to-melbourne-as-she-issues-stern-message-to-protesters/news-story/ca519b16ae3f76e831cf496d39ffb1d9?amp&nk=ec02638979b700359840bbc02fea4526-1726559897

[3] ttps://7news.com.au/news/huge-protest-expected-at-land-forces-expo-at-melbourne-exhibition-and-convention-centre-c-15992509.amp

[4] ttps://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/victoria/army-of-protesters-to-cause-chaos-ahead-of-weapons-expo/news-story/25d424b4046e0db12096a8e36fdd43f2?amp

[5] ttps://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/article/2024/sep/10/melbourne-protest-land-forces-international-defence-exposition

[6] ttps://amp.abc.net.au/article/104328710

[7] ttps://amp.theguardian.com/world/article/2024/sep/08/thousands-of-anti-war-protesters-to-disrupt-controversial-weapons-expo-in-melbourne

[8] ttps://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/tanks-trucks-and-guns-inside-melbournes-controversial-defence-expo/k0ajf3htu

[9] ttps://www.theage.com.au/politics/victoria/police-to-get-up-to-15-million-to-deal-with-anti-war-protests-this-week-20240910-p5k9co.html

[10] ttps://amp.9news.com.au/article/dd712abe-1fb6-4b8c-9c62-4192b3b91a97

[11] ttps://7news.com.au/news/thousands-of-anti-war-activists-start-disrupting-land-forces-weapons-expo-in-melbourne-c-16013759.amp

[12] ttps://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/police-pepper-spray-activists-as-protest-against-melbourne-weapons-expo-escalates/4en9xquy1

[13] ttps://www.smh.com.au/national/victoria/land-forces-2024-protests-live-thousands-of-demonstrators-disrupt-melbourne-weapons-expo-20240910-p5k9ee.html?post=p57kw8

[14] ttps://www.news.com.au/technology/innovation/military/25000-protesters-to-surround-land-forces-defence-expo-in-melbourne-sparking-chaos/news-story/0753c6d2196e9e6a10f53c8add84271e?amp

[15] ttps://amp.abc.net.au/article/104334816

[16] ttps://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-09-11/live-blog-land-forces-protest-melbourne-israel-gaza/104333922

[17] ttps://amp.theguardian.com/australia-news/2024/sep/12/melbourne-war-protests-land-forces-weapons-expo-ntwnfb

[18] ttps://www.theage.com.au/national/victoria/land-forces-2024-protests-live-thousands-of-demonstrators-disrupt-melbourne-weapons-expo-20240910-p5k9ee.html

[19] ttps://amp.abc.net.au/article/104339212

[20] ttps://www.pedestrian.tv/news/melbourne-protests-explained-land-forces-2024-expo/

[21] ttps://amp.theguardian.com/australia-news/article/2024/sep/11/protesters-descend-on-melbournes-cbd-as-defence-industry-expo-opens

[22] ttps://www.abc.net.au/listen/programs/am/protest-at-weapons-convention/104335756

[23] ttps://amp.abc.net.au/article/104347986

[24] We didn't see it coming: "This City" is a groundbreaking work in Israeli cinema

[25] המצעד העברי של וואלה! תרבות לשנת תשע"ו - עשרת הגדולים

[26] ttps://www.calcalist.co.il/style/article/sjtnoezru

[27] ttps://www.imdb.com/name/nm6689252/?ref_=ttfc_fc_cl_t1

[28] ttps://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2024/09/11/australia/anti-war-protesters-clash-police-australia-intl-hnk

[29] ttps://www.skynews.com.au/australia-news/politics/good-for-our-economy-vic-premier-spruiks-benefits-of-land-forces-expo-to-melbourne-as-she-issues-stern-message-to-protesters/news-story/ca519b16ae3f76e831cf496d39ffb1d9?amp&nk=ec02638979b700359840bbc02fea4526-1726559897

[30] ttps://7news.com.au/news/huge-protest-expected-at-land-forces-expo-at-melbourne-exhibition-and-convention-centre-c-15992509.amp

[31] ttps://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/victoria/army-of-protesters-to-cause-chaos-ahead-of-weapons-expo/news-story/25d424b4046e0db12096a8e36fdd43f2?amp

[32] ttps://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/article/2024/sep/10/melbourne-protest-land-forces-international-defence-exposition

[33] ttps://amp.abc.net.au/article/104328710

[34] ttps://amp.theguardian.com/world/article/2024/sep/08/thousands-of-anti-war-protesters-to-disrupt-controversial-weapons-expo-in-melbourne

[35] ttps://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/tanks-trucks-and-guns-inside-melbournes-controversial-defence-expo/k0ajf3htu

[36] ttps://www.theage.com.au/politics/victoria/police-to-get-up-to-15-million-to-deal-with-anti-war-protests-this-week-20240910-p5k9co.html

[37] ttps://amp.9news.com.au/article/dd712abe-1fb6-4b8c-9c62-4192b3b91a97

[38] ttps://7news.com.au/news/thousands-of-anti-war-activists-start-disrupting-land-forces-weapons-expo-in-melbourne-c-16013759.amp

[39] ttps://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/police-pepper-spray-activists-as-protest-against-melbourne-weapons-expo-escalates/4en9xquy1

[40] ttps://www.smh.com.au/national/victoria/land-forces-2024-protests-live-thousands-of-demonstrators-disrupt-melbourne-weapons-expo-20240910-p5k9ee.html?post=p57kw8

[41] ttps://www.news.com.au/technology/innovation/military/25000-protesters-to-surround-land-forces-defence-expo-in-melbourne-sparking-chaos/news-story/0753c6d2196e9e6a10f53c8add84271e?amp

[42] ttps://amp.abc.net.au/article/104334816

[43] ttps://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-09-11/live-blog-land-forces-protest-melbourne-israel-gaza/104333922

[44] ttps://amp.theguardian.com/australia-news/2024/sep/12/melbourne-war-protests-land-forces-weapons-expo-ntwnfb

[45] ttps://www.theage.com.au/national/victoria/land-forces-2024-protests-live-thousands-of-demonstrators-disrupt-melbourne-weapons-expo-20240910-p5k9ee.html

[46] ttps://amp.abc.net.au/article/104339212

[47] ttps://www.pedestrian.tv/news/melbourne-protests-explained-land-forces-2024-expo/

[48] ttps://amp.theguardian.com/australia-news/article/2024/sep/11/protesters-descend-on-melbournes-cbd-as-defence-industry-expo-opens

[49] ttps://www.abc.net.au/listen/programs/am/protest-at-weapons-convention/104335756

[50] ttps://amp.abc.net.au/article/104347986

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

[6]

[7]

[8]

[9]

[10]

[11]

[12]

[13]

[14]

[15]

[16]

[17]

[18]

[19]

[20]

[21]

[22]

[23]

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

[6]

[7]

[8]

[9]

[10]

[11]

[12]

[13]

[14]

[15]

[16]

[17]

[18]

[19]

[20]

[21]

[22]

[23]

Middle East

Country deletion sorting

Bahrain

Bahrain Proposed deletions

Egypt

Egypt Proposed deletions

Iran

Iran Proposed deletions

Iraq

Israel

Jordan

Kuwait

Lebanon

Proposed deletions

Oman

Palestine

Deletion Review

Proposed deletions

Templates

Categories

Redirects

Qatar

Saudi Arabia

AfD debates

Articles with proposed deletion tags

Syria

Turkey

Others

United Arab Emirates

Yemen