Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/California

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to California. 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|California|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.

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

Removing a closed AfD discussion

Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.

Other types of discussions

You can also add and remove links to other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to California.

Further information

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

This list is also part of the larger list of deletion debates related to US.

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

Purge page cache

watch

California[edit]

Sons of the Covenant Monastery[edit]

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

Fails WP:GNG, lacks significant coverage in multiple independent secondary sources. The article is predominantly reliant upon primary sources. It is also not clear as to whether the monastery relates to the structure, which fails the requirements of WP:NBUILDING or the religious order, which fails WP:NORG. Dan arndt (talk) 09:11, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Religion, Iraq, and California. Dan arndt (talk) 09:11, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Patrick Bet-David[edit]

AfDs for this article:

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

Even though there's lots of sources, upon closer inspection most of them are low quality/unreliable (LADbible, National Today, SportsKeeda, Leaders.com, Market Realist, TeamBoma, Financhill), self-published like podcasts, YouTube videos or Bloomberg company profiles or books he has published, which are not independent. The Yahoo Finance articles are reprints of PRnewswire (a press-release service) and Moneywise (which looks like a low-quality source). Even most of the articles by reliable sources (Sports Illustrated, Toronto Sun, CBS News, Los Angeles Times) aren't really about Bet-David and thus don't count for significant coverage.

The Fortune article is an article that Bet-David wrote rather than a profile, so I don't think it counts for notability either. The Barron's and The Real Deal articles covers a house he purchased, which maybe counts for notability, but the focus of the article seems to be on the house sale price rather than David himself. There is no consensus on the reliability of Entrepreneur magazine (see WP:RSP) and concerns that the publication includes promotional content/undisclosed paid articles. The previous AfD from 2018 closed as delete. Hemiauchenia (talk) 22:24, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Finance, Internet, and United States of America. Hemiauchenia (talk) 22:24, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Plenty of articles written by this fellow, nothing about him... Even the last AfD is well-reasoned; the sources given there were PR or reprints of PR items. I can't find anything we can use. The sources now in the article are articles written by this person. Oaktree b (talk) 23:21, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politics, Iran, Germany, and California. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:16, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:16, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete doesn't pass WP:GNG and reads a bit like a drafted CV. SportingFlyer T·C 02:49, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Brandon Ebel[edit]

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

Seeking to re-instate re-direct Tooth & Nail Records, which was initially reversed by public relations effort by Tooth & Nail involved role account. I re-instated the re-direct, but it's being challenged in Special:Diff/1226976635 and that editor requests it to go through AfD. Graywalls (talk) 17:06, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Businesspeople, and California. Graywalls (talk) 17:06, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Music and Oregon. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:21, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Coastal Television Network[edit]

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

Subject does not meet the WP:NCORP because of a lack of coverage about the network's activities. Let'srun (talk) 11:09, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and California. Let'srun (talk) 11:09, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Camp JCA Shalom[edit]

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

Redirect to Jewish summer camp. Fails WP:NORG. No WP:SIGCOV of otherwise non-notable summer camp. Longhornsg (talk) 08:42, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Judaism, United States of America, and California. Longhornsg (talk) 08:42, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tamara Yajia[edit]

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

Does not meet WP:BIO, or the notability standards for authors or comedians. No SIGCOV, one self published book with no reviews, no secondary coverage for writing or comedy. Links in article are either dead links about twitter presence or interviews, a search turned up no other evidence of notability. Ruth Bader Yinzburg (talk) 22:34, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: I suppose having a funny twitter could be notable, but what's used for sourcing now is brief mentions. I can't find anything outside of social media; not meeting notability requirements. Oaktree b (talk) 23:34, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Bands and musicians, Women, Television, Entertainment, Internet, Argentina, and California. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:04, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The San Francisco Improv Alliance[edit]

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

The article has no sources, I cannot find any sources, and the group is possibly defunct given that their website is a dead link. The group's founder may have created this page, given the username. The creator's other article also has cites no sources, though I will attempt to find some before recommending deletion for that as well. Wikipedaen (talk) 00:42, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete No information found other than routine database entries (e.g. Yelp). WeirdNAnnoyed (talk) 01:22, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Theatre, Organizations, and California. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:30, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. An unremarkable local group, article probably created by the creator of the group, defunct for 15 years, no substantial coverage. Walsh90210 (talk) 21:01, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Peter Riva[edit]

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

This subject fails WP:GNG and WP:NARTIST. Marked for COI and primary sourcing issues over 10 years ago, this article's sourcing still consists of 1) coverage about other topics that merely mention the subject, and 2) primary sources. JFHJr (㊟) 01:51, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Arts, Management, Switzerland, California, New York, and Pennsylvania. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:28, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Cele De[edit]

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

Fails WP:NBAND as I could not find any coverage in sources to back up any claims made in the article. Cocobb8 (💬 talk • ✏️ contribs) 21:22, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and California. Shellwood (talk) 22:03, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Scott Fox (author)[edit]

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

Appears to be overly promotional and shows no sign of meeting WP:GNG due to lack of RS. — VORTEX³⁴²⁷ (Talk!) 03:15, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Businesspeople, Entertainment, Finance, Law, Internet, California, Michigan, and New York. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:19, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Vortex - We got a notice that this page was flagged for deletion. Great timing as I have been meaning to hopefully update it. The info is old and not entirely accurate as it was written by fans of my books years ago. Can u share any guidance on how we can improve its "notability" to meet Wikipedia standards? Also what is "RS"? You're probably a volunteer so thanks for all the work you do for the Wikipedia community. Scott Nelsonave21 (talk) 20:34, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Scott. Please read this link WP:GNG for the general standards to meet "notability". On Wikipedia, RS stands for "reliable sources". For authors, this commonly includes reviews of your books. None of the sources cited on the article are WP:RS because they are just raw interviews of you, only mention you briefly (see WP:GNG for more info) or are written by Forbes contributors (see this link WP:FORBES for info on deciding what Forbes articles count as RS).

Also, yes, like many editors on Wikipedia, I am a volunteer and edit as a hobby :) — VORTEX³⁴²⁷ (Talk!) 06:33, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mention: @Nelsonave21 — VORTEX³⁴²⁷ (Talk!) 06:33, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Additionally, I'm concerned about you saying "We got a notice that this page was flagged for deletion." Just a head's up — if you got an email about this, please be aware that scammers have targeted people whose articles have been deleted or flagged for deletion before (WP:SCAM), offering to restore it or something similar. Most, if not all, of these offers are fradulent. — VORTEX³⁴²⁷ (Talk!) 09:13, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

MacGregor (filmmaker)[edit]

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

Non-notable filmmaker with an unsourced BLP Niafied (talk) 07:37, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film, Spain, and United States of America. sig
Keep: Unsourced? Yes. Rewrite? Needed. But I don't think the subject person is non-notable. He was listed as the cinematographer for several big productions in the article, including Vivarium, Fall, Kandahar, and A Thousand Suns, as well as a documentary film The Mauritania Railway: Backbone of the Sahara credited with his real name Miguel de Olaso. For each one I found sources to back it. (The Jewish Chronicle and Screen Daily for Vivarium[1][2], Empire and The Austin Chronicle for Fall[3][4], The Hindu and IBC for Kandahar[5]&[6], Inverse for A Thousand Suns[7], and The Atlantic for The Mauritania Railway [8]) So this already fulfills the third criterion of WP:FILMMAKER, where a person has to play a major role in co-creating a well-known work with multiple reliable sources to cover or review it. I also found an interview of the subject person with Red Shark News[9], which covered his early life in detail, but I'm not sure about the reliability of this source and whether it can be considered as demonstrating notability. Nonetheless, I think fulfilling WP:FILMMAKER would already be sufficient for me to vote Keep. —Prince of Erebor（The Book of Mazarbul） 12:03, 31 May 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 May 31. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 17:04, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers and California. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:13, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as per Prince of Erebor. I can see why it would attract a deletion nomination though. He was interviewed by Red Shark News and there are a couple other good articles to use. He's picked up some good awards. I can't understand why though with this much work, there are no refs. I had a quick look in the history and there were some a while back. But they're gone. Rather than draft or redirect, a bold tag to improve this article is a must. Karl Twist (talk) 10:56, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thomas Henyey[edit]

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

Has been tagged for notability for over a decade. -- Beland (talk) 06:56, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. Beland (talk) 06:56, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: A few hits on similar names in Gscholar, but they could be anyone. I don't find much else for sourcing. Oaktree b (talk) 13:07, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:10, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sacks and Co.[edit]

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

The subject of this article is a business with no proven notability. As written, it contains no references. A limited web search reveals no feature stories or in-depth articles that would indicate that this organization should be included in an encyclopedia. A single story in Daily Variety [[10]] from 2006 was all I could unearth

I had previously submitted it for PROD but the reviewer somehow felt this was worth keeping. Volcom95 (talk) 06:32, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. Volcom95 (talk) 06:32, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Entertainment, Advertising, Companies, Management, California, New York, and Tennessee. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:52, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The Sacks and Co. article currently lacks sufficient reliable sources to establish notability, raising concerns about its verifiability and relevance. However, instead of deletion, efforts could be made to improve the article by adding credible references and enhancing its content.--Welcome to Pandora (talk) 08:19, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

SEW[edit]

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

Fails WP:CORP, sourced only by press releases, and in a WP:BEFORE search all I could find was even more press releases. They've worked with some notable companies, but on Wikipedia notability is not inherited. No indication of notability for any of the awards they've won. Spammy tone can be fixed, but notability issue will remain, so I can't really be asked to clean this up. Wikishovel (talk) 13:36, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Technology, Software, and California. Wikishovel (talk) 13:36, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I honestly don't think the tone can be fixed here without effectively starting from scratch. Blow it up. Alpha3031 (t • c) 14:08, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Can't find independent significant sources. Most are press releases. Doesn't pass WP:GNG. Hkkingg (talk) 22:58, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Matt Hunt (journalist)[edit]

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

Heavily embellished promotional bio created by an SPA, with no actual in-depth coverage by independent reliable sources. Except for nigeriasportsnews.com, which appears to be a puff piece, none of the sources refbombed in the article are actually about the subject—only tangential mentions from issues he has been involved in. Paul_012 (talk) 09:07, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Authors, Journalism, and Thailand. Paul_012 (talk) 09:07, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Pinging Jamiebuba, who recently accepted the draft at AfC. --Paul_012 (talk) 09:07, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Photography, Environment, Internet, California, Florida, and Virginia. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:44, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

DFH Network[edit]

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

Fails WP:GNG. Kadı Message 19:45, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: News media, Television, and Turkey. Kadı Message 19:45, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Kadı Message 19:47, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 21:23, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Winston Utomo[edit]

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

Not sufficient sources to meet ANYBIO; sources are more about IDN Media. BoraVoro (talk) 12:49, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Indonesia, Singapore, California, and New York. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:34, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of independent notability from significant coverage; I would not oppose a redirect to IDN Media. Bearian (talk) 14:51, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Taulia[edit]

AfDs for this article:

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

Fails to meet NCORP; not sufficient independent media coverage; routine Run-of-the-mill announcements. BoraVoro (talk) 07:37, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and California. Shellwood (talk) 09:20, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Finance and Technology. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:44, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

~~:Delete per WP:NCORP 104.7.152.180 (talk) 13:28, 29 May 2024 (UTC)~~[reply]

Comment: An IP that added "Delete per WP:NCORP" to 3 AFDs in 2 minutes. I think the chance that the closing admin places weight on these posts is approximately zero. Geschichte (talk) 16:52, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Striking, as this is block evasion. jp×g 🗯️ 01:50, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Huupe[edit]

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

I can't find mention of this sporting item, beyond sites to purchase it. Appears PROMO. Sourcing used in the article appears in non-RS. Oaktree b (talk) 22:49, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Basketball, Technology, California, Massachusetts, and Wisconsin. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:07, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Oaktree b the articles below list helpful information to users about the product. This is not a promotion as this just lists information about the company, how it was founded, and how this will enhance the sport that people cherish. This should not merit a deletion.There are other articles as sources that can be added that prove and list this as well. Kompyoub (talk) 08:06, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Oaktree b I agree with @Kompyoub where the article does have reliable sources that show history and information on the product. This is not anything to do with anything promotional. I am happy to help answer anything but this article should stay. Nrochluz (talk) 12:25, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not casting a formal !vote since I've taken admin actions against sockpuppetry here, but I do want to note that my assertion in the edit history of the page that SBJ had decent coverage was an error: said article states that it is "sponsored content" at the bottom of the page. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 13:47, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I figured something was up. Oaktree b (talk) 19:40, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with all of this, delete Cmarsch☮︎ (talk) (contribs) 03:59, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, re Rosguill, if you're referring to the bit in the sitemap (where it says Sponsored Content / All Sponsored Content across two lines) that seems to be a link to all their sponsored pieces. Those all have a marking at the top from what I can see, and I can't see anywhere else with the word Sponsored. On the other hand, there seems to be very little secondary analysis from the reporter themselves in the article that I could see, and analysing under TRADES, I am inclined to classify it as failing ORGCRIT. Also, it's a bit of a moot point, since I can't find another source that might meeet ORGCRIT. Overall, my assessment is that it is very likely that it is too soon for this company to meet NCORP, so I would also have to go with delete. Alpha3031 (t • c) 08:16, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
re Rosguill, if you're referring to the bit in the sitemap (where it says Sponsored Content / All Sponsored Content across two lines) No, that appears to be further down the page. On my computer, below the last line of the article, there's a navigation bar to two other articles, followed by red text on a line on its own reading SPONSORED CONTENT, which is then a link to this page explaining their native advertisements _signed,Rosguill ^talk 17:29, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no or few reliable sources for this product or brand. Bearian (talk) 16:39, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No Limit Forever Records[edit]

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

Vanity label that no longer operates. Most of the refences are from their own defunct website or to streaming media. No indication of notability. Karst (talk) 15:25, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Music, Companies, and California. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:27, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep WP:N doesn't expire and it passes based on a few sources, though the Soundcloud sources need to be trashed. Nate • (chatter) 20:23, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge and redirect to No Limit Records. First, this isn't a notable company. This is a non-notable company associated with some notable performers. The company itself must be "the subject of significant coverage ... with a stronger emphasis on quality of the sources to prevent gaming of the rules". I don't see any such cited. I see articles about performers, with the company figuring only incidentally or not at all in them.

Second, the company (CA 201030110082) doesn't appear to be independent at all of Master P or No Limit Records. Its only official act was incorporation (Oct 2010). It was effectively dead 3 1/2 years later when its agent quit and officially dead 6 months after that. Except in company blog posts it's Master P who's signing artists, not the putative company founder Lil Romeo, and he's signing them to NL Records, not NL Forever. Some of the signings postdate the 2014 demise of this company. I'm persuaded that No Limit Records, New No Limit, No Limit Forever, and No Limit Global are simply alternative branding of one entity. Yappy2bhere (talk) 01:12, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge and redirect to No Limit Records per Yappy2bhere toweli (talk) 03:23, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Cribl[edit]

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

Doesn't seem like it actually meets NORG. Coverage is all your typical SERIESA stuff. History is also a little suspicious TBH but that's mostly secondary to the routineness of coverage. Alpha3031 (t • c) 15:18, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Computing, and California. Alpha3031 (t • c) 15:18, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

The result was delete‎. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 08:16, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Death of Shaylee Mejia[edit]

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

No evidence of sustained in-depth coverage; all local coverage from March; lead includes a weaseled potential BLP violation that this girl's death has been "widely attributed" to a fight she had at school. Zanahary (talk) 07:16, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Crime, and California. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 07:58, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Seems a clear WP:BLP1E situation. Reliable sources only cover her in the context of a single event, she is a low-profile individual, and the event itself is not significant (although it is of course very sad). WP:NOTNEWS also relevant, I think. Chocmilk03 (talk) 08:07, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't really get your argument here. If it's an event based article it can't really be a BLP1E issue? But this definitely doesn't pass NEVENT either and should be deleted on those grounds. PARAKANYAA (talk) 19:29, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, I guess it's not technically a bio but about the event of her murder? The line is maybe a little blurry in the case of an article that is solely about the death of a single person. But agree, WP:NEVENT doesn't seem to be met either. There's no deadline, but there's also no evidence of continued coverage since the event or that this event will have any sustained significance. Chocmilk03 (talk) 06:00, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I can only find a half-dozen articles in Gnews about the event happening from the time it did, then nothing. Another non-notable death with no lasting consequences, NOTNEWS. Oaktree b (talk) 12:17, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: The incident which could be a potential murder/manslaughter case is already gaining significant coverage in the entire country, not just from local news. There will likely be bigger matters and legal proceedings concerning the death, which if you thoroughly investigate the details you will find some connection between the bullying and violence that the victim endured.

Cheera L (talk) 19:51, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Well, we aren't a CRYSTALBALL. Oaktree b (talk) 04:08, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That's the article's author btw Zanahary (talk) 23:12, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete too much innuendo and no sustained coverage. Walsh90210 (talk) 21:48, 3 June 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.

Land Conservancy of San Luis Obispo County[edit]

AfDs for this article:

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

Doesn't appear to meet WP:ORG / WP:GNG. Last AfD had low participation. Boleyn (talk) 16:18, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and California. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:56, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Environment-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:06, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:00, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

San Jose Taiko[edit]

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

While previously deleted for G11, this time the page has been written in a more encyclopedic tone. Unfortunately, there is just not any coverage that I can find. BrigadierG (talk) 20:40, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Martial arts, Japan, and California. BrigadierG (talk) 20:40, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

References to published academic work demonstrating the significance of this organization to the art of taiko in North America have been added, as well as national recognition from the NEA for the original managing director and artistic director of the organization. 31N2024 (talk) 00:38, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:14, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Coverage is in primary or non-RS. I don't find anything beyond them performing at various venues. This also appears PROMO. Oaktree b (talk) 02:00, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Has the nominator accessed the book coverage now referenced in the article which boasts of two books having 23 page coverage of this band? Atlantic306 (talk) 21:13, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting to consider new sources added as well as User:Atlantic306's question.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:52, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 02:25, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of stamp clubs and philatelic societies in the United States[edit]

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

Most likely fails WP:NLIST, consists of 60% red links. WP:NOTDIRECTORY also applies, and I didn't find WP:RS describing this list besides third-party directories. Cocobb8 (💬 talk • ✏️ contribs) 13:23, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 13:36, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Collapsed list of notified projects for AFD readability

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Alabama-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 13:45, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Alaska-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 13:45, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Arizona-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 13:46, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Arkansas-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 13:46, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 13:53, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Colorado-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 13:53, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Connecticut-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 13:54, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Delaware-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 13:54, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Florida-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 13:54, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Georgia (U.S. state)-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 13:54, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Hawaii-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 13:54, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Idaho-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 13:55, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Illinois-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 13:55, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Indiana-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 13:55, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Iowa-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 13:55, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Kansas-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 13:55, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Kentucky-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 13:55, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Louisiana-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 13:55, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Maine-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 13:56, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Maryland-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 13:56, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Massachusetts-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 13:56, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Michigan-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 13:56, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Mississippi-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 13:56, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Missouri-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 13:57, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Montana-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 13:57, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Nebraska-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 13:57, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Nevada-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 13:57, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New Jersey-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 13:57, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New Hampshire-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 13:57, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New Mexico-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 13:58, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 13:58, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of North Carolina-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 13:58, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of North Dakota-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 13:58, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ohio-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 13:58, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Oklahoma-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 13:58, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Oregon-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 13:59, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pennsylvania-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 13:59, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Rhode Island-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 13:59, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of South Carolina-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 13:59, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of South Dakota-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 13:59, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Tennessee-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 14:00, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Texas-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 14:00, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Utah-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 14:00, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Vermont-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 14:00, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Virginia-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 14:00, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of West Virginia-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 14:00, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Wisconsin-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 14:01, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Wyoming-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 14:01, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment The links I clicked on had no references at all, or none that would count as reliable sources. Didn't check all of them. Dream Focus 19:45, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Most of the listed clubs are local organizations which would be unlikely to satisfy the notability criteria of WP:ORG. Hence, this looks mostly like a directory, which Wikipedia isn't. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 23:48, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy keep. This list is self-defining, and does not require extensive documentation. So far around twenty entries are individually notable, and the reasons suggested for deletion are not persuasive: 1) the number of redlinks is irrelevant; there is potential for expansion, and the list would be perfectly valid if the items were not linked, as long as it's possible to verify the existence of items that don't have their own articles; for this, third-party directories are fine. That said, some effort to document them is necessary, but fixing that is part of the normal editing process, not a valid reason for deletion. There is no deadline for locating sources.

2) none of the criteria of the cited WP:NOTDIRECTORY apply; this seems to be one of those policies that people cite because it sounds like it would apply, apparently without bothering to read and understand it. Specifically: this is not a "simple listing without contextual information"; the context is clearly given. It is not a list or repository of loosely associated topics; the items on the list are all closely connected by subject matter. It is not a cross-categorization. It has nothing to do with genealogy. It is not a program guide. It is not a business resource. WP:NOTDIRECTORY is about collections of information that have no encyclopedic value for readers; this list clearly has value. "This list is full of redlinks and doesn't have enough sources" is not a valid rationale for deletion. It's a reason to improve the list. P Aculeius (talk) 13:32, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

P Aculeius, those are all very good points, thanks for pointing them out. However, you have not addressed how this list meets WP:NLIST, do you think you could explain how it would to justify a speedy keep, as the fact that the entries themselves are notable does not guaranty the list itself being notable? Cheers, Cocobb8 (💬 talk • ✏️ contribs) 14:44, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Even if hypothetically NLIST was not met (which I believe it is), WP:LISTPURP suggests that there would still be other grounds to keep.

As prodder and nom, you have not shown any evidence of having demonstrated WP:BEFORE due diligence. The plethora of Google results for searches like "stamp clubs in America" suggests that this was not done. It isn’t really the most GF behavior to simply, since the burden of proof generally lies with the “keep” side once process has begun, make a prod or AfD nomination without actually determining if there’s a prima facie case for a notability or verifiability challenge.

Sorry for the sharpness, but sometimes it’s necessary.

RadioactiveBoulevardier (talk) 07:41, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Strong keep as deprodder. In my view it meets WP:LISTPURP and WP:NLIST and I feel this is a commonsensical call. RadioactiveBoulevardier (talk) 07:29, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 02:08, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

delete I'm just not seeing this. The NY society's building is historic, but when you look at sources about these places, even the few with articles really don't seem notable. And anyway, what are the sources for this list? I'm looking at the listing from Linn's Stamp News, and it's far more complete and is up-to-date; it's also clear that most of the listings would never garner an article. I don't see the point of duplicating a not-very-useful subset of thei info (just the names), and once we go past that, we're in WP:NOTDIRECTORY territory. Mangoe (talk) 02:55, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per WP:BEFORE - while stamp collecting is not the huge hobby it was a couple of decades ago, there is a huge literature on such clubs. Bearian (talk) 16:50, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Still no consensus. "There is a huge literature on such clubs"....it would help, of course, if examples were provided.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:34, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mountain House Community station[edit]

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

This proposed commuter train station does not pass WP:GNG or WP:NSTATION Sources 1, 4, and 5 have WP:TRIVIALMENTIONS of this planned station in the broader context of the Valley Link system; sources 2 and 3 are primary sources. With this station not scheduled to open until 2028 at the earliest, a standalone article is WP:TOOSOON. I propose to redirect this page to Valley Link until there is sufficient SIGCOV in reliable sources to warrant a standalone page. Dclemens1971 (talk) 00:54, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Architecture, Stations, and California. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 01:37, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect per nomination. Appears to be too soon for a standalone article. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 12:21, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. There are already lots of references, and their number and length will grow as designs are finalized and coverage of the project and individual stations continues. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 04:35, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You obviously didn't read them as none of the independent sources say more than a sentence or two about the station, and you're making a very bold assumption about a station not expected to open until near the end of the decade. Valley Link already exists. But why let facts get in the way of your personal feelings? Trainsandotherthings (talk) 12:23, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:39, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Per WP:FUTURE "Individual scheduled or expected future events should be included only if the event is notable and almost certain to take place." According to the sources, "The Valley Link project has been awarded $25 million by the state.That funding will go toward Valley Link’s first phase — the 26-mile section from the Pleasanton BART station to the proposed Mountain House station. The overall project is expected to cost $3.6 billion." — Maile (talk) 19:02, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Regardless of how certain the WP:FUTURE is, the station still has to pass the WP:SIGCOV test to be notable, and it doesn't -- it has passing references in sources focused on the whole system. It will someday, but until then, a redirect is appropriate. Dclemens1971 (talk) 23:56, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect. Fails NOT and GNG. The above keeps have entirely missed the part of FUTURE that says future events should be included only if the event is notable (bolding mine); there is no IRS SIGCOV of this event, so it emphatically fails that requirement. JoelleJay (talk) 21:49, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:44, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect the station itself currently fails WP:GNG, but is a possible redirect and has the possibility to be restored in the future if it receives secondary coverage. The problem with the keep !votes: the coverage isn't about the station but rather about the proposed network, and there's no certainty the station will be notable in the future. A redirect is fine for now. SportingFlyer T·C 05:58, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lya Stern[edit]

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

This article is mainly a resume. Most of the sources in the article consist of dead links from websites that are related to Lya Stern; the rest of the sources either have brief mentions of her or don't mention her at all. After doing a Google search to see if there were sources that could be added to the article, the only significant coverage I found of her was from a website that listed Wikipedia as a source. The rest of the information I found was from her YouTube channel and mentions of her from her students. As a result, she doesn't met WP:GNG or WP:NBLP. That Tired Tarantula^Burrow 20:13, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Women, Romania, and United States of America. Shellwood (talk) 20:15, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Authors, California, New York, and Washington, D.C.. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 22:08, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment One source via Newspapers.com goes into some depth. Hameltion (talk | contribs) 03:55, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete (Weak) - There is a big gap in WP on instrumental performers who have created the American musical/movie music scene, and in general the encyclopedia is too quick to delete (especially for women and minority performers), but here I think the AfD is correct. The Baltimore Sun article gives a bit of notability, but the other sources do not. A blurb on the back of one's teacher's independently published book is not enough. There needs to be more and I could not find anything that led to more than what a local performing teacher would have. Glad to be proven wrong. -- Michael Scott Asato Cuthbert (talk) 08:13, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as there is a staff written bio at AllMusic here and an album review here to go with the detailed Baltimore Sun article linked earlier by Hameltion. Haven't done a full search yet, imv Atlantic306 (talk) 23:31, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What does Eudice Shapiro have to do with the subject of this article? That Tired Tarantula^Burrow 23:32, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:50, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Just agreeing with That Tired Tarantula above -- @Atlantic306 you have linked to reviews for a different musician. If Lya Stern had an Allmusic staff bio, that would be relevant, but I could not find one. -- Michael Scott Asato Cuthbert (talk) 01:37, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about that, have struck my vote and comment. In my defence the erroneous AllMusic bio is the first reference in the article but I should have noticed, imv Atlantic306 (talk) 22:11, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom lacks coverage fails WP:GNG.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 10:04, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Unverifiable claims of notability. doesn't meet WP:GNG and WP:SIGCOV. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 09:20, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletions[edit]

for occasional archiving