Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Asia

Dear reader/writer of this WikiProject Deletion sorting/Asia. The present page was above the template_include_limit. As a result, the bottom of the page was not displayed correctly. At Category:Pages where post-expand include size is exceeded, we tried to fix the problem, in order to empty this category (see the related talk page). The original page can be seen in the page history (although it will not display correctly). In any case, feel free to revert if you have a better solution to fix the page overflow problem.

Points of interest related to Asia on Wikipedia: Outline – History – Portal – Category – WikiProject – Deletions – Cleanup – Stubs – Assessment – To-do

Deletion Sorting Project
(talk) Project page Lists (by ABC) Lists (by topic) Lists (computer-readable) AfD: Today, Yesterday Delsort scripts
v t e

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Asia. 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:

1. 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.
2. You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Asia|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.

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

Removing a closed AfD discussion

Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.

Other types of discussions

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

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.

Purge page cache

watch

Purge page cache

This list also includes sublists of deletion debates involving articles related to specific Asian countries.

Dubai Polo & Equestrian Club

Dubai Polo & Equestrian Club (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Non notable article about an organization/club that doesn't meet WP:GNG. I can't talk of WP:NCORP when there is no notability and WP:SIGCOV. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 07:15, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Business, Companies, and Asia. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 07:18, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:27, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of Turkic countries

List of Turkic countries (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

WP:OR WP:SYNTH WP:RS WP:UNSOURCED. Follow-up to deleted List of Turkic dynasties and countries, see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Turkic dynasties and countries. NLeeuw (talk) 23:44, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Language, Geography, and Lists. NLeeuw (talk) 23:44, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy delete per G4. The article was created on 7 March 2024, while the previous article was deleted on 10 June 2023. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 02:25, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I wasn't sure whether G4 applied in this case, as the title is different, but yeah, the contents and scope seem to be pretty much the same. NLeeuw (talk) 08:39, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Ethnic groups and Asia. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 02:26, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy delete for a zombie article. Per the previous discussion, everything that is not WP:OR, is covered by Organization of Turkic States. Rjjⁱⁱⁱ (talk) 05:12, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy delete G4. Mccapra (talk) 09:03, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete No different than Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Turkic dynasties and countries. Azuredivay (talk) 17:01, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of programs broadcast by Hum TV

List of programs broadcast by Hum TV (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Fails WP:NLIST and is WP:NOTTVGUIDE. It has not "been discussed as a group or set by independent reliable sources" as references verify the shows but do not talk about the group as a whole. There are nine current programs that are sourced which can easily be placed in the Hum TV page if necessary. History of the page also shows this has been the target of socks and COI since 2017 from Hum TV. While not a reason to delete, the list only stands to promote the station. CNMall41 (talk) 18:31, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, Lists, Asia, Pakistan, Middle East, Europe, and United States of America. CNMall41 (talk) 18:32, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep: detailed article about a notable network: see WP:SPLITLIST. If a merge into the main article was an improvement, I would not be opposed but it would be an issue. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 19:13, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It is not a detailed article unfortunately. It is a list. If it is a problem to merge per SPLITLIST, then a redirect would work. However, it would need to be notable per NLIST to have a standalone page. I looked and could not find reliable sources that talk about the list as a grouping but I have been proven wrong before if someone can provide those sources. --CNMall41 (talk) 20:10, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I would tend to believe that, whenever the list format is appropriate, a list can be a detailed page on any given subject mentioned briefly in a section of another article. The subject is obviously a subtopic of Hum TV, it would be difficult to argue otherwise. See Template Main list (which uses the word Main where "Detailed" is to be understood). See also the template For Timeline, similar. If you want to redirect and merge, sure, if all agree and size is not an issue; but this type of page is pretty standard, though, by the way. Look at the categories and the pages they contain....

For sources, you have for example, https://internationalrasd.org/journals/index.php/pjhss/article/download/1259/936/9962 ; or see Forging the Ideal Educated Girl: The Production of Desirable Subjects in Muslim South Asia (2018). But I consider WP:SPLITLIST to be the applicable section of the guideline and the fact that it's a pretty standard approach to programs of notable networks should imv encourage us to keep that list. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 21:00, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"I would tend to believe that, whenever the list format is appropriate, a list can be a detailed page on any given subject mentioned briefly in a section of another article" - I like that thinking and generally it seems acceptable on its face. The problem is that the list must meet notability guidelines. If not, then it should stay mentioned briefly on the notable network page. Here there are only nine programs and they do not all appear to be original programs, just current programming. I do like "a pretty standard approach to programs of notable networks" as you mentioned above. They can easily be covered by the category as opposed to standalone list (for those that are "original programmin" - the rest are just TV Guide listings) in my opinion. --CNMall41 (talk) 22:09, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: WP:NLIST applies without any special exception and that in general lists of programs, where needed, can be handled within the article about the channel, and don't generally merit a stand-alone list article, unless such a list would pass the scrutiny per WP:NLIST. WP is not a WP:NOTDIRECTORY nor WP:NOTTVGUIDE —Saqib (talk I contribs) 19:59, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to Hum TV as WP:ATD. 2A00:23C6:139B:A101:78CA:7B5:3148:9172 (talk) 00:45, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep : I suggest to Keep the Article. As it a large number of notable program's are listed on it.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 2402:ad80:ab:6d1:1:0:713f:e3e2 (talk • contribs)

Arguments to avoid: WP:NOTINHERITED. --—Saqib (talk I contribs) 17:51, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rahil Abbas Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shrawan Ghimire (2nd nomination)

1. REDIRECT Target page name

Din Mohammad Jurat

Din Mohammad Jurat (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Article subject fails to meet WP:GNG. The only source of which I can find about him on Google was about him being sacked as an advisor. Nothing else more than that. Also the creator of the article seems to be a newbie which I guess hasn't practiced about the wikipedia article wizard before contributing to wikipedia. You can also visit here for further reference. Most of the reference used on this particular article headline are not corresponding to the original source. Maybe he had to fake it to make it look like its an independent reliable source. Gabriel (talk to me ) 18:50, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Businesspeople, and Politicians. Gabriel (talk to me ) 18:50, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Afghanistan-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:16, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep This article clearly meet the Wp:GNG and WP:POLITICIAN.

please have a look at these reliable sources.

• • BBC (1) (2) (3) (4)
  • CNN (5)
  • New york times (6)
  • VOA (7)
  • Radio free europe (8)

Parwiz ahmadi (talk) 21:03, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

All the link you have provided still doesn't address why he was nominated for an AFD. The only reasonable news was that he was sacked. The rest of the news has nothing to do with him apart from him being sacked. Editors should take note that the article creator was the same person who voted this keep.--Gabriel (talk to me ) 21:55, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What about this one ?

https://www.afghan-bios.info/index.php?option=com_afghanbios&id=795&task=view&total=1733&start=766&Itemid=2 Parwiz ahmadi (talk) 22:40, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete The sources (including the above) only briefly mention him so lack of significant coverage and he barely passes WP:POLITICIAN. The Afgan bios source is better so if there are more like this I might change my mind. The article will need a rewrite though as it is a mess. — Iadmc♫^talk  21:02, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Abdul Azim Badakhshi

Abdul Azim Badakhshi (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

The first nomination was withdrawn and not properly discussed. I am not convinced the subject meets the criteria for "Sport personality" according to WP:SPORTSPERSON which states that "A sportsperson is presumed to be notable if the person has won a significant honor." which he didn't. "Meeting this requirement alone does not indicate notability", the subject still needs to pass GNG guidelines. I would like to discuss it further as the subject is not even close to meeting WP:NMMA criteria. Having fought in ACB, AFC, Brave FC, is not enough and the subject has never been ranked in the world top 10 as per WP:NMMA. Lekkha Moun (talk) 18:13, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep I withdrawn my request cuz as a Persian language user I find and confirm the authenticity of the sources which meet WP:SPORTSPERSON clearly:
  • BBC (1) (2)
  • The Independent (3)
  • Hindustan Times (4) (5) (6)
  • Afghanistan International (7) (8) (9) (10) (11)
  • ESPN (12) (13)
  • UFC (14)
  • The Print (15) (16)
  • Radio Azadi (17) (18) (19) (20) (21)

Claggy (talk) 19:33, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Greetings, Your concern is understandable. But He clearly meet WP:SPORTSPERSON and Wp:Bio , Despite of being a athlete, He has become a national symbol in Afghanistan, with support from the Millions of Afghans including former President, ministers, and other officials who recognize his achievements. His journey is completely motivator for new generation in Afghanistan and India. Besides his sports career, he is a successful motivator, investor, and human rights activist, I hope this satisfies your concerns.Parwiz ahmadi (talk) 22:07, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Sportspeople, Martial arts, Afghanistan, and Maharashtra. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 21:12, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep: I removed some of WP:NONRS references, He clearly meet WP:SPORTSPERSON. Youknowwhoistheman (talk) 16:46, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete First of all, I would like to ask Parwiz ahmadi What is your connection with the said article subject? You seem to have so much interest in him and you have been pleading with editors to help you save the article. You were pleading with Liz for her cooperation and telling her to close the AFD discussion immediately which the reference can be found here. You were also pleading with a user named Untamed1910 in assisting you to also help you save the article which the references can be found here. There is no Wikipedia article you have ever submitted for WP:AFCREVIEW that has been accepted. All were decline. 99% of the ones you have created and move to main space are already deleted except Din Mohammad Jurat which still doesn't also seem to meet WP:GNG. The only news was that he was fired. How does that now makes him suitable for wikipedia without meeting WP:GNG. From what I have reviewed so far I definitely support Lekkha Moun. The article should be deleted because I don't see how it meets WP:GNG either. This is a English Wikipedia, so I don't see how the sources above help.--Gabriel (talk to me ) 18:34, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Hello Sir@Gabriel601

  I must say that yes, I requested Ms. @User:Liz to close the AFD according to Wikipedia's policies since seven days have passed since the AFD started. As the Wikipedia rules state, the AFD should be closed if possible. However, I did not use the word "immediately." It would be better if you speak the truth.

  Secondly, my entire interest in preserving this article is due to the several days of effort I have put into it, and I am fully aware and confident that this article meets WP:SPORTSPERSON criteria. He is one of the most famous athletes in Afghanistan and is considered a national figure in Afghanistan. Parwiz ahmadi (talk) 18:54, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  You told Liz to Please keep this article and close the nomination which sounds like an immediate task. Secondly effort you put about writing articles you never submitted for review doesn't matter here especially when it has now been nominated for AFD. It is a process that has to be passed since you fail to follow the right way as a newbie. Gabriel (talk to me ) 19:15, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Dear @Gabriel601 ,This matter does not concern you regarding what I have written on Ms. Liz's talk page.

  Please write your own personal opinion and that’s it. you are not Ms. Liz's representative or Advisor,

  In my opinion, your manner of speaking is inappropriate and offensive. I request the respected admin to take this point into consideration.

  Your reaction is very unusual and aggressive. Parwiz ahmadi (talk) 20:01, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  I just remembered also you don't have the right to tell an admin the final decision to take on an AFD discussion. He or she can still relist the AFD if the consensus debate is still not clear. My statement might be aggressive to you but they mean no harm than to coach you. Stop moving article directly to main space without submitting them for review to avoid AFD next time. A question was asked by @Bbb23 on your user talk page but you never responded. @Whpq has also warned you regarding your edits. So nothing seems to be new. Gabriel (talk to me ) 20:23, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Do you have the right to ask Liz to undelete your drafts? Here is an example of what you wrote:

  Undeletion Draft Requests Hello Liz, I hope you are doing great. I visited your talk page because you deleted the draft articles Draft

  Mayweather, Draft

  (restaurant), Draft

  Darlington, Draft

  Maksumov, Draft

  So, do you have the right to request Liz to undelete seven or eight of your articles? Parwiz ahmadi (talk) 20:45, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  I have the right to request because they were draft that was untouched after six months and deleted by Liz as per deletion of old drafts. You seem to be a stubborn newbie. Who know if that was why @Bbb23 was requesting for your previous account username. Your edit needs to be checked. If you can be moving articles to main space without review and non of your article submitted has been approved ( All declined ) on this current account. Then how would your old account then look like. I am done communicating with you. I leave the rest to other of the editors on wikipedia to check your works. Gabriel (talk to me ) 21:42, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  @Gabriel601 This is a English Wikipedia, so I don't see how the sources above help. Non-english sources are perfectly acceptable if they are WP:RS. See WP:RSUEC. And user conduct issues should be taken elsewhere. It doesn't particularly help or concern the afd. — hako9 (talk) 23:12, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment:Since I have come up as a subject in this AFD discussion, I feel "involved" and will leave the closure to another administrator. Secondly, I don't remember seeing any User talk page messages but I have been very remiss/behind on replying to talk page messages as I'm caring for a bedbound relative and find responding to talk page messages more taxing than other kinds of editing/admin work. So, I don't believe I've been influenced but will decline to close to avoid any appearance of impropriety. Finally, unless there was problematic content (copyright violations, BLP violations, etc.) I will restore a deleted article to Draft space as long as the editor knows they have to submit the draft for review to AFC so that request is not that unusual. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:45, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Seems like a great decision. Wishing you a greater strength as you undergo your caring for a bedbound relative. Gabriel (talk to me ) 22:08, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, _signed, Rosguill ^talk 16:36, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletions

187.245.67.52 (talk) 19:54, 16 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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

Erasmus Student Network Armenia

Erasmus Student Network Armenia (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Local branch of Erasmus Student Network, no independent notability. Broc (talk) 08:31, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Education, and Armenia. Shellwood (talk) 09:53, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep- Working on expanding the article. ESN Armenia is quite active and one of the more notable student organizations within the country. English publications may be limited as most of the content referencing the org is in Armenian. Will continue to expand with refs. Any help is appreciated :) Archives908 (talk) 15:49, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge into a subsection of Erasmus Student Network. I do not think it is bad that the information is out there if verifiable and noteworthy enough to mention specifically, though ESN Armenia is hardly notorious enough to warrant their own WP article, considering that there are 44 national, and even more regional ESN network organisations. Note also that Erasmus Student Network Yerevan has also been created, and would merit the same treatment. --Konanen (talk) 18:24, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 02:27, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 11:11, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ceyhun Osmanli

Ceyhun Osmanli (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Being an Azerbaijani Deputy does not make a person encyclopedic. Not according to the criteria. --Correspondentman (talk) 11:11, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2024 June 5. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 11:24, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep yes it does. Members of national parliaments are notable under WP:NPOL. Mccapra (talk) 11:53, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians and Azerbaijan. Skynxnex (talk) 12:55, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep: Clearly meets WP:NPOL as an Azeri MP. I have to question if the nominator even read the guideline they are presumably citing. Curbon7 (talk) 20:37, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rashad Aslanov

Rashad Aslanov (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Current sources in the article don't pass WP:GNG and I couldn't find sources through a WP:BEFORE which discussed him in-depth. Suonii180 (talk) 17:07, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians and Azerbaijan. Suonii180 (talk) 17:07, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Miskin Abdal

Miskin Abdal (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Fails WP:GNG and WP:BIO. References cited are unclear, poorly formatted and mostly incapable of verification. Unencyclopedic tone. Created and edited by sockpuppets. Geoff | ^{Who, me?} 16:02, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Politicians, Philosophy, Poetry, and Azerbaijan. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 16:20, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep: Although the article indeed has a lot of problems, these cannot be a reason for deletion. (The most major issue is the large amount of unsourced content, which may simply be removed.) The topic appears to be notable. There is significant coverage among a multitude of sources:[1][2][3][4][5] (The last two sources are solely on the details of his life and works.) Aintabli (talk) 03:29, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  I did not find any references to the information added to the wiki page in the citations you provided. All I found were statements by those authors and nothing else. HeritageGuardian (talk) 20:50, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  There are 5 links, 2 being sources solely about him. I doubt you checked any of them. Your comment and vote below basically disregards what AfD is meant to be for. On top of this, we can all see you created your account 6 minutes before commenting here. Welcome back, I guess! Aintabli (talk) 02:43, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  I have checked all your citations from 1 to 5. None of them has any references to the claims made in them and in this Wikipedia article. If you think that I missed them, then you are welcome to present any documentations. HeritageGuardian (talk) 05:29, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  That's not the point of those links. Aintabli (talk) 14:59, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  I took a look to this page https://az.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miskin_Abdal. There are a lot of absurd statements, like Safavid King Sultan Hossain visited some village in nowadays republic of Armenia. Safavid King Ismail gave an order to M. Abdal and etc. They are absurd, because kings' orders were not given to anybody, but kept in chancery or diwan. There is no record of King Sultan Hossain visiting some village in that region. It seems articles about this person are hoaxes. HeritageGuardian (talk) 16:17, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  The Azerbaijani-language version has nothing to do with the English Wikipedia. Aintabli (talk) 17:03, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - WP:AFDISNOTCLEANUP, clearly meets WP:GNG per [6], which is already cited in the article. Psychastes (talk) 18:33, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I was unable to read this citation. I see that it was published in 2001. What kind of document or any evidence it has? thx HeritageGuardian (talk) 20:52, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I found the citation 6 at https://ia801605.us.archive.org/26/items/huseyn-ismayilov-miskin-abdal-2001/H%C3%BCseyn%20%C4%B0smay%C4%B1lov%20-%20Miskin%20Abdal%20%20-%202001.pdf. It is the same as citation 5 in previous log. There is no references to any documents. HeritageGuardian (talk) 05:24, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - references to this article do not cite any documents that could support claims made in it. All of them are opinions of their authors.HeritageGuardian (talk) 21:05, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:51, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have investigated this article in depth and found out that this is a hoax for the following reasons.

1. All citation for this article do not reference any well known Safavid literature, although in its first paragraph, it is stated that "many years was in charge of foreign affairs of the Safavid state under Shah Ismail Khatai (1487–1524)." Names of all persons who were in charge of foreign affairs during Shah Ismail are well known. None of them was an ashugh or had nickname Miskin Abdal or was from nowadays territory of Armenia as stated in this article

2. At page 38 of the first citation "https://www.academia.edu/40616613" there is a picture supposedly of an order given to M. Abdal by Safavid King Ismail. However, it is fake. Because non of the Safavids Kings had that kind of large seal and usually Safavid orders have seal at the top of the text but not at the bottom. Also, kings' orders were not given to anybody, but kept in chancery.

3. In the first paragraph of this article it is stated "He was the founder of the ashugh school" and again referred to this book "https://www.academia.edu/40616613, where there is no references proving this statement.

4. The second paragraph states "One of the brightest figures in the history of Azerbaijan, he played an important role in the development of science and art." and refers to a book, where I did not find any proof to this statement. Only statement by its author.

5. The third paragraph states "Under the name of Miskin, Abdal (Architect of the soul) was the creator of the literature of Azerbaijani minstrels - ashugh folk singers." to which there is no reference.

6. The fourth paragraph states "After many years of service at the court of Shah Ismail I Khatai, in 1524 he returned home. He opened the first school in Sariyagub ... " and refers to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miskin_Abdal#cite_ref-3 However, the referred content does not have anything related to the above statement. So, the fourth paragraph is a completely false statement.

7. The rest of the article until the last sentence does not have any citations, so I accepted it as statement of users who created this article. Btw those users were identified as sockpuppets

Due to the above reasons, I recommend this article be deleted immediately. HeritageGuardian (talk) 05:01, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Leyla Abdullayeva

Leyla Abdullayeva (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

• NO GNG. Created for advertising and PR purposes. --Correspondentman (talk) 12:46, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Bilateral relations, Azerbaijan, and France. ‍—‍a smart kitten_[meow] 13:47, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: The other language Wikipedias seem to have a better sourced version of this, with around ten separate sources, however I'm not sure about their quality.

=== Russian language ===

• [7] [8] [9] [10] [11]

=== Azerbaijani Wikipedia ===

• [12]

Testeraccount101 (talk) 13:52, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Speedy close, because AFD is made by sock of the banned user. User:Correspondentman is banned in Azerbaijani Wikipedia as a sock of User:Elshad Iman (Elşad İman). Here is the discussion. He (User:Elshadiman) has been banned on English Wikipedia for sockpuppetry. You might check the archive through this page Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Elshadiman/Archive. On top of that he continues to use the same sock accounts in English Wikipedia that he used in azwiki: User:Redaksiya, User:90AA123 and User:Correspondentman, which has only 36 edits, all in AFD. Sock accounts cannot create AFDs. — Toghrul R (t) 06:59, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:31, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: If you believe an editor is a sockpuppet, please file a reports at WP:SPI. It's not a matter that can be resolved in a discussion about possibly deleting an article.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:11, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: Doesn't meet the minimal inclusion for a journalist. Sources are PR as well as doesn't meet WP:ANYBIO and WP:SIGCOV. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 09:38, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep: Azerbaijan's ambassador to France and former spokesperson for the Ministry of Foreign affairs is a notable diplomat, and meets WP:GNG.--Nicat49 (talk) 20:07, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:07, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Muhammad Abdul Malek

Muhammad Abdul Malek (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Not a single source used in this article is reliable which can establish notability of the person. - AlbeitPK (talk) 18:55, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Islam, and Bangladesh. AlbeitPK (talk) 18:55, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:02, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hazari Gonj Hamidia Fazil Madrasah

Hazari Gonj Hamidia Fazil Madrasah (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Sources do not demonstrate notability. Nothing indicates that this high school is notable in the article. Vinegarymass911 (talk) 17:23, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education, Schools, and Bangladesh. Vinegarymass911 (talk) 17:23, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mangrove Institute of Science and Technology

Mangrove Institute of Science and Technology (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Delete Fails to meet WP:GNG and WP:NSschool. Most of the references are from the institute’s website. The other link https://theorg.com/org/mangrove-institute-of-science-and-technology is from an internet directory. Wikilover3509 (talk) 05:08, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: I have fixed spacing in the headers that broke some of the links, but have no opinion or further comment at this time. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:18, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Schools, Science, Technology, and Bangladesh. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:19, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mysterious Team Bangladesh

Mysterious Team Bangladesh (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

TOO Soon; lacks reliable sources; BoraVoro (talk) 06:59, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Internet, and Bangladesh. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 10:26, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment Although The Business Standard and The Register are generally reliable as news organizations, both their articles are based entirely on the third source, Group-IB. The notes about sources in WP:GNG say, "Several journals simultaneously publishing different articles does not always constitute multiple works, especially when the authors are relying on the same sources, and merely restating the same information." The article effectively has a single source. And it isn't clear that Group-IB has a reputation for accuracy and fact checking. --Worldbruce (talk) 00:45, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:43, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kamalapur (neighbourhood)

Kamalapur (neighbourhood) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Reviewed during NPP. Does not meet wp:notability. A neighborhood in the city of Dhaka. Clearly does not have presumed wp:notability under the SNG per the criteria there which leaves GNG. The only source is a blog and even that just gives it a one word mention. So no sourcing much less the required GNG sources. North8000 (talk) 20:56, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bangladesh-related deletion discussions. Owen× ☎ 22:05, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment Kamal Siddiqui et al.'s 2010 Social Formation in Dhaka, 1985-2005: A Longitudinal Study of Society in a Third World Megacity ISBN 978-1-4094-1103-1 contains half a page about the concentration of the city's Buddhists in Kamalapur and the adjacent Basabo neighborhood, describing the related viharas, pagodas, and schools there. Other than that, sources of any depth focus on Kamalapur railway station, about which we already have an article. --Worldbruce (talk) 03:02, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to Motijheel Thana, of which Kamalapur is the easternmost slice, until sufficient in-depth reliable sources are written about the neighborhood to justify a stand alone article. --Worldbruce (talk) 03:22, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:33, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect as suggested to Motijheel Thana. Right now, there is a single source in the article, which constitutes WP:OR. Bearian (talk) 15:21, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Abubakar Muhammad Zakaria

Abubakar Muhammad Zakaria (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

No significant coverage in independent, reliable secondary sources. Fails WP:GNG. - AlbeitPK (talk) 06:43, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Islam, and Bangladesh. AlbeitPK (talk) 06:43, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. The article clearly meets the WP:ACADEMIC policy 4 no criteria. Because, some books written by him are taught in the university of Bangladesh, See here. ~ Deloar Akram (Talk • Contribute) 09:53, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Independent and reliable sources are available. Also, several academic books are taught in university.Md Joni Hossain (talk) 14:08, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Policy-based arguments would be appreciated. The fact that books written by the article subject are used in university courses is not a valid argument to Keep. We delete plenty of articles on academics who have written books used in coursework somewhere.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:51, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment - I'm not able to find reliable sources in English that show his academic profile, I assume they must exist in non-English languages so would appreciate it if someone could offer them for consideration. Currently there are claims on the page but, as far as I see, not much which can be verified per WP:V. JMWt (talk) 06:48, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@JMWt: "Dr Abu Bakar Muhammad Zakaria - Curriculum Vitae" see here. 202.134.9.128 (talk) 03:42, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Friend, a self-published CV is not suitable for WP:V JMWt (talk) 05:10, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep His tafsir is the only bengali tafsir, published and approved by Saudi government printed by King Fahd Complex for the Printing of the Holy Quran https://quranenc.com/en/browse/bengali_zakaria and his book "Shirk fil Qadim wal Hadis is a famous book, many scholars quoted from it including Ali al-Sallabi, his Book Hindusiat wa tasur is the most famous Islamic academic book on Hinduism in Arab world after the book "Fusulun fi Adianil Hind" written by Ziaur Rahman Azmi, and he wrote the book as his thesis in Madinah University under the supervision of Ziaur Rahman Azmi and followed him, he is an official bengali representative of Saudi religious propagation ministry who supervise the bengali section of www.islamhouse.com/bn and he has also entry in shamila library https://shamela.ws/author/1532 and there is a possibilty that he may be going to be an emeritus professor of Islamic University, Kushtia by university authority as his age is now 65.202.134.11.243 (talk) 12:37, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Royalty and nobility-related deletion discussions. Willthacheerleader18 (talk) 14:29, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep: There is WP:GNG . Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 07:52, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - the WP:GNG requires significant coverage in independent and reliable sources. We haven't had anything offered which meets this standard in any language, so we can't WP:V the basics. Those who want to !keep cam of course rewrite thr page as/when they find acceptable sources. JMWt (talk) 05:58, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  @JMWt Are you want to say that Offline Source is not acceptable? You should remain in WP:good Faith. ~ Deloar Akram (Talk • Contribute) 08:32, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Which offline source meets the standards of the GNG? I am remaining to assume Good Faith in the part of other contributors and don’t really see why you are suggesting otherwise. If there is an offline source that shows the importance of this person, which they’ve not written themselves, that I’ve missed then I’m happy to correct myself. JMWt (talk) 15:40, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  @JMWt I mention my opinion in first comment. [Please see here]. ~ Deloar Akram (Talk • Contribute) 16:52, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Ok. Well, as others have already stated, being the author of university textbooks is not regarded as suitable notability for en.wiki

  I'm not saying that you are not offering an opinion in good faith, but I am saying that this is not a policy reason for !keep JMWt (talk) 17:18, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

1 see here, his book about hinduism is highly praised in Zad TV by Muhammad al-Munajjid and the presenter also telephoned the publisher and requested hum to translate the book in English. His book Hindusiat wa Tasur was highly praised by Abdullah bin Salam al-Batati in the program "Al-Khajanah" of Zad TV owned by Muhammad Al-Munajjid and wished to be translated in English giving the book highly importance as a detailed work on Hinduism from the Islamic perspective.[13] His book Ash-Shirk fil-Qadim Wal Hadith has been partially translated into Indonesian by Abu Umamah Arif Hidayatullah as "Syirik pada Zaman Dahulu dan Sekarang".[14][15] Besides, the same translator also translated some of his other works into Indonesian language.[16] - 202.134.14.139 (talk) 16:28, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Salman Muqtadir

Salman Muqtadir (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Sources are trivial (included in a list of other youtubers) and non-independent. One significant coverage is about his investigation by the police. No other significant independent secondary source covering his popularity as a content creator. - AlbeitPK (talk) 01:51, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Bangladesh. AlbeitPK (talk) 01:51, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Bands and musicians, Internet, and Australia. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:26, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Most of the sources cover the police investigating him. That is not enough to satisfy WP:BIO. LibStar (talk) 17:42, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Given previous AFDs, not eligible for Soft Deletion. Have any sources mentioned in previous discussions been examined?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:54, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: An article that doesn't meet WP:ENT for inclusion on Wikipedia. While I couldn't find any clue in the former AFDs that I still hold deep breath of how it had survived two–three discussions. I am not going to base in any past whatsoever but here is the source analysis and final conclusion. source 1 is a primary source but it verifies the content as used in most of the articles like that per WP:PRIMARYSOURCE. Source 2 is good for sourcing but doesn't support the 'wife marriage'. source 3 is an obvious advert and interview making me suspect the credibility/reliability of source 2. Source 4 is unreliable, and source 5 looks like an advertorial unverifiable publication. Source 6, source 7, and source 8 contributes to a non notable controversy and I call it WP:BLP1E because the said event is not notable for a standalone article. [17] and [18] supports a non notable film and book, hence doesn't meet WP:NACTOR or WP:NAUTHOR. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 21:08, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Not a notable person Md Joni Hossain (talk) 18:24, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Previously I nominated this article for Afd and my view still same. There is no WP:SIGCOV and fails WP:GNG. আফতাবুজ্জামান (talk) 21:56, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lisa Filipetto

Lisa Filipetto (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Ambassadors are not inherently notable. The 2 sources provided are primary. Fails WP:BIO. LibStar (talk) 19:55, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Bilateral relations, Ethiopia, Cambodia, and Australia. LibStar (talk) 19:55, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Clearly not notable. If there were more sources then it would've been fine. Wolverine XI ^{(talk to me)} 15:15, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sokpoly Voeun

Sokpoly Voeun (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Semi-advertorialized article about a filmmaker and photographer, not properly sourced as passing inclusion criteria for filmmakers or photographers. The strongest attempted notability claim here is a table of "nominations" for awards at various film festivals, except there aren't actually real awards in the mix here: three of the listed festivals are just "screened" or "selected", with no evidence of any actual award nominations or wins shown at all, and most of them are "to be announced" because the festival is still in the future and hasn't even released its program announcements yet, so it still isn't even confirmed that the film will even screen there at all, let alone win any awards.
All of them, further, are "sourced" to the self-published websites of the film festivals themselves, rather than media coverage, and the rest of the footnotes are also a mix of primary and unreliable sources that aren't support for notability, rather than WP:GNG-building coverage in media or books.
There's also a possible conflict of interest here, as the creator and primary other editor have been blocked as sockpuppets in an WP:SPI check following their behaviour in the related Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Reign in Slumber discussion. Bearcat (talk) 14:21, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Photography, and Cambodia. Bearcat (talk) 14:21, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:27, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of battles in Penghu

List of battles in Penghu (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Unsourced and very short (4 entries) list without much context. I don't think there's much reason for it to exist as its own article, as opposed to those events being described in the Penghu article. toweli (talk) 13:17, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Military, Lists, China, and Taiwan. toweli (talk) 13:17, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tibet Airlines Flight 9833

Tibet Airlines Flight 9833 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Non-notable accident. No sustained continued coverage, no lasting effects have been demonstrated and no in-depth coverage generated from the accident. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 14:48, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Aviation, and China. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 14:52, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Guan Xueting

Guan Xueting (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Non-notable figure skater who fails WP:NSKATE; bronze/silver medal placements at the national championship level do not meet the requirements of WP:NSKATE. Google search turns up nothing outside of wikis and scoring databases. Bgsu98 (Talk) 22:32, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Women, Skating, and China. Bgsu98 (Talk) 22:32, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Much more results if one searches for the name with hanzi, rather than with pinyin. I've added a couple of sources. /Julle (talk) 00:02, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep: per Julle, but aside from the sources about her abduction that Julle added to the article (which I am worried that some may consider them as run-out-of-mill or 1E), I have further added three sources from Sohu and China Daily which detailed her figure skating and post-retirement coaching career. Fulfils GNG. —Prince of Erebor（The Book of Mazarbul） 15:06, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Death of Li Keqiang

Death of Li Keqiang (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Only two Chinese supreme leaders (Mao & Jiang) have articles about their death, and his funeral was far less grand than these two. Even the death of Hu Yaobang (which triggered June 4th) don't has article about his death. Coddlebean (talk) 14:41, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Politicians. Coddlebean (talk) 14:41, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of China-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 15:26, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Coddlebean, which deletion criterion is met here? You used similar argumentation at the Early life of Mao Zedong AfD quite recently, and that article was speedily kept because you did not provide a rationale. Folly Mox (talk) 16:13, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy Keep I agree with @Folly Mox your nominations need to provide a clear rationale. Saying x similar article exists or y similar article doesn't exist isn't a rationale for deletion. The article is both on its face impressively sourced and in need of cleanup, but I don't think there's any discernible policy-based rationale here. Oblivy (talk) 01:30, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy keep per WP:CSK#3 – I don't see anything resembling a rationale for deletion in the nomination statement. The article looks fine at a quick glance. —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 02:43, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy Keep: per Mx. Granger; WP:CSK#3, as the nominator did not provide any rationale for deletion. Also, I disagree with the example the nominator raised. Death of Hu Yaobang [zh] did exist in zhwiki, and it is clearly notable as well since it is literally the triggering point of the June 4th Incident with many in-depth analysis from academic or media sources. The fact that it does not have an article in enwiki is simply because no one had created it yet, and this argument is clearly a case of WP:OTHERSTUFFDOESNTEXIST. —Prince of Erebor（The Book of Mazarbul） 13:23, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Keep per WP:CSK#3 as no valid deletion rationale is provided. I also concur with Mx Granger and Prince of Erebor above. S5A-0043^Talk 16:35, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Grand Hyatt Beijing

Grand Hyatt Beijing (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

This article has only 1 source in 18 years of existence. Google News comes up with PR type stories or routine coverage of a staff member doing something. Nothing in-depth and third party to meet GNG. LibStar (talk) 04:55, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Travel and tourism and China. LibStar (talk) 04:55, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, it fails all notability guidelines. Search result brought nothing. Piscili (talk) 05:53, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Piscili (talk · contribs), I found some offline sources below. Would you review? Thank you, Cunard (talk) 10:13, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, notability per nom. I can find endless blogger reviews and PR/press releases, but not a single RS addressing this article's topic! Chiselinccc (talk) 09:27, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Chiselinccc (talk · contribs), I found some offline sources below. Would you review? Thank you, Cunard (talk) 10:13, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources.
  1. "旅館評：北京東方君悅大酒店" [Hotel Review: Grand Hyatt Beijing]. Next Magazine (in Chinese). 2002-08-29.

     The review notes: "北京東方君悅大酒店的英文全名頗長，叫GRAND HYATT BEIJING AT ORIENTAL PLAZA，在二○○一年十月開幕。 位置北京的心臟王府井。 七八棟高層大廈匯集在一起，蔚為奇觀。 飯店是中國最大的商務建築群東方廣場的一部分，旁邊有一棟一棟的高級公寓和辦公大樓。 從這裡走出去就是全北京最熱鬧的王府井大街，再遠一點可以步行到故宮和天安門去。 整間飯店，官方宣傳文字上說像傳統四合院的格局，其實是一個U字形的建築，分成東翼和西翼。 這次陪著金庸先生下榻，他住一六○一房，我住一○一六房，剛好是一頭一尾。"

     From Google Translate: "The full English name of Grand Hyatt Beijing is quite long, called GRAND HYATT BEIJING AT ORIENTAL PLAZA. It opened in October 2001. Location Wangfujing, the heart of Beijing. Seven or eight high-rise buildings come together to form a spectacle. The hotel is part of Oriental Plaza, the largest business building complex in China, and is adjacent to high-end apartments and office buildings. Walking out from here is Wangfujing Street, the busiest street in Beijing. A little further away, you can walk to the Forbidden City and Tiananmen Square. The entire hotel, according to the official promotional text, is shaped like a traditional courtyard house, but it is actually a U-shaped building, divided into an east wing and a west wing. This time I stayed with Mr. Jin Yong. He lived in room 1601 and I lived in room 1016, which happened to be one end of the room."

  2. Wu, Xueming 吳學銘 (2002-11-12). "老北京 新酒店 令君悅" [Old Beijing. New Hotel. Grand Hyatt Beijing]. Min Sheng Bao (in Chinese). p. B7.

     The article notes: "北京東方君悅酒店自去年底試行營業以來，至今已屆滿一年，住房率屢創新高，成為北京和中國飯店市場的新話題。位在北京王府井大街上，現是中國最大的商務建築群猁北京東方廣場內的東方君悅大酒店，是現代西方酒店和超級商場的綜合性產物。"

     From Google Translate: "It has been one year since the Grand Hyatt Beijing Oriental opened on a trial basis at the end of last year. The occupancy rate has reached record highs and has become a new topic in Beijing and the Chinese hotel market. Located on Wangfujing Street in Beijing, it is now the largest business building complex in China and the Grand Hyatt Hotel in Beijing Oriental Plaza. It is a comprehensive product of modern Western hotels and super shopping malls."

     The article notes: "走進東方君悅酒店，第一眼的感覺是它不太像凱悅集團酒店的格調，倒有點像香港的海逸酒店，最代表性的該是大廳內獨一無二的那顆水柱型風水球，配合精心的流水設計，創造東方式的流動平衡感。中國人那種講求「流水聚財」的觀念，在東方君悅表現很明顯。"

     From Google Translate: "When you walk into the Grand Hyatt Oriental, your first impression is that it doesn’t quite resemble the style of a Hyatt hotel, but rather resembles the Harbor Plaza Hotel in Hong Kong. The most representative one is the unique water column-shaped Feng Shui ball in the lobby. Combined with the careful flowing water design, it creates an oriental flow and balance. The Chinese concept of "gathering wealth by flowing water" is very obvious in Grand Hyatt Oriental."

  3. "北京東方君悅酒店住宿新體驗" [New accommodation experience at Grand Hyatt Beijing]. Sing Tao Daily (in Chinese). 2002-01-30. p. D3.

     The review notes: "坐落於中國最大的商務建築群東方廣場之中，呈新月形、門外設有偌大噴泉的北京東方君悅大酒店給人非一般豪華感覺。... 由在亞洲居住了20 年的美國攝影師George Mitchell 所拍攝的黑白照片與陳設摩登的客房配合起來，不但沒有格格不入的感覺，好像筆者這種對老北京文化還未深切認識，但又充滿好奇的 遊人看起來，反而另有趣味。... 最喜歡吃的筆者在這數天裡，可謂大快朵頤。 設於飯店大廳中樓層，配備了一個開放式廚房的凱菲廳 (右下圖) 更是筆者的心頭愛。 "

     From Google Translate: "Located in the Oriental Plaza, the largest business building complex in China, the Grand Hyatt Beijing Oriental Hotel, which is crescent-shaped and has a huge fountain outside the door, gives people an extraordinary sense of luxury. ... The black-and-white photos taken by George Mitchell, an American photographer who has lived in Asia for 20 years, match the modernly furnished guest rooms. Not only do they not feel out of place, it seems like the author, who has not yet deeply understood the culture of old Beijing, but is full of curiosity. From the perspective of tourists, it is actually something else interesting. ... The author, who loves to eat the most, had a great time in these few days. Located on the middle floor of the hotel lobby and equipped with an open kitchen, the Kaffi Hall (pictured below right) is my favorite."

  4. "東方君悅 諧與酒店" [Grand Hyatt Oriental Harmony Hotel]. Ming Pao (in Chinese). 2001-12-29. p. D1.

     The article notes: "北京東方君悅大酒店位於東長安街一號，位處北京中心地區，集時尚商舖與辦公室於一隅，旁邊是著名鋪與辦公室於一隅，旁邊是著名鋪的公屋大王府。酒店建成後才交由君悅管理，"

     From Google Translate: "Grand Hyatt Beijing is located at No. 1 East Chang'an Street, in the central area of ​​Beijing. It has fashionable shops and offices in one corner. Next to it are famous shops and offices in the same corner. Next to it is the famous public housing estate Grand Palace. After the hotel was completed, it was handed over to Grand Hyatt for management."

  5. "北京東方君悅屢奪魁" [Grand Hyatt Beijing wins the championship again and again]. Sing Tao Daily (in Chinese). 2006-02-27. p. C1.

     The article notes: "北京東方君悅大酒店自○一年開業以來，先後在多個國內外的酒店評選中奪魁，共獲頒三十項殊榮，踏入○六年僅兩個月，亦已獲頒五項殊榮 ，其中最新獲著名旅遊雜誌「亞洲目的地」(Destin Asian)評選為本年度北京最受歡迎飯店。 至於今年已獲得之獎項分別為：獲「胡潤百富———富豪之選」選為本年度富豪最喜愛的品牌酒店、「私家地理」選為五百家世界最佳酒店、「Conde Nast Traveler」(美國)選為亞洲五十家最佳飯店等。"

     From Google Translate: "Since its opening in 2001, Grand Hyatt Beijing has won the first place in many domestic and foreign hotel selections, and has been awarded a total of 30 awards. In just two months since 2006, it has also been awarded five awards. , which was recently selected as the most popular hotel in Beijing this year by the famous travel magazine "Destin Asian". As for the awards received this year, they are: selected as this year's favorite brand hotel by the rich by "Hurun Report - Rich People's Choice", selected as one of the 500 best hotels in the world by "Private Geography", "Conde Nast Traveler" "(U.S.A.) was selected as one of Asia's 50 Best Hotels, etc."

  6. Events held at the hotel:
     1. Li, Chun 李春 (2019-10-01). "中共建政七十周年 北京觀禮 林鄭傍晚趕返港" [The 70th anniversary of the founding of the Communist Party of China. Watching the ceremony in Beijing, Carrie Lam rushes back to Hong Kong in the evening]. United Daily News (in Chinese). p. A10.

        The article notes: "香港特首林鄭月娥率兩百四十人觀禮團抵北京，出席中共建政七十周年活動。以港府官員、建制派成員、商界為主體的香港代表團，獲安排住東長安街的東方君悅大酒店，酒店保安嚴密。"

        From Google Translate: "Hong Kong Chief Executive Carrie Lam Cheng Yuet-ngor led a viewing group of 240 people to Beijing to attend the 70th anniversary of the founding of the Communist Party of China. The Hong Kong delegation, which is composed of Hong Kong government officials, members of the pro-establishment camp, and the business community, was arranged to stay at the Grand Hyatt Hotel on East Chang'an Street. The hotel has tight security."

     2. "NBA快訊 小布 李小龍粉絲" [NBA News: Xiaobu, Bruce Lee fan]. World Journal (in Chinese). 2010-07-27. p. Sports 2.

        The article notes: "在北京東方君悅大酒店舉辦簽書會上，小布為他親自撰寫的圖書「科比24」召開媒體見面會暨新書簽售活動。"

        From Google Translate: "Lakers star Kobe Bryant embarked on a business trip to China on the 26th. In the evening, he held a book signing event at the Grand Hyatt Hotel in Beijing. Bryant held a media meeting for his personally written book "Kobe Bryant 24". and book signing event."

     3. "姚明 補請中國隊友 將與葉莉赴歐洲度蜜月" [Yao Ming invites Chinese teammates to replace him. He and Ye Li will go to Europe for their honeymoon]. World Journal (in Chinese). 2007-08-10. p. D1.

     The article notes: "今晚的北京東方君悅大酒店「高人林立」，中國男、女籃球隊教練員、隊員悉數現身出席姚明、葉莉的宴會。王治郅、易建聯、隋菲菲等人組成的「巨人陣」外加「中國高度」姚明，今晚的宴會有望成為中國歷史上平均海拔最高的「私人聚會」。"

     From Google Translate: "Tonight, Beijing's Grand Hyatt Oriental Hotel is "full of distinguished people". The coaches and players of the Chinese men's and women's basketball teams all showed up to attend Yao Ming and Ye Li's banquet. The "Giant Formation" composed of Wang Zhizhi, Yi Jianlian, Sui Feifei and others plus "Chinese Height" Yao Ming, tonight's banquet is expected to become the "private party" with the highest average altitude in Chinese history."

  7. Less significant coverage:
     1. "Fodor's Expert Review: Grand Hyatt Beijing". Fodor's. Archived from the original on 2024-05-28. Retrieved 2024-05-28.

        The review notes: "The wow factor at this top-notch hotel—close to Tiananmen Square and the Forbidden City—comes from its huge glass facade and extraordinary lagoon-like swimming area: above its lush vegetation, waterfalls, and statues, a "virtual sky" ceiling imitates different weather patterns. "

     2. "Grand Hyatt Hotel Beijing". AFAR. Archived from the original on 2024-05-28. Retrieved 2024-05-28.

        The review notes: "From the lobby, the Grand Hyatt Beijing is another grand hotel with soaring ceilings and windows, polished marble floors, and an attentive staff. Two levels below the lobby, however, is one of the most unique and spectacular wonders ever seen in a hotel: an enormous grotto!"

     3. "Hyatt Opens Its First Hotel in Beijing". Los Angeles Times. 2001-12-09. Archived from the original on 2024-05-28. Retrieved 2024-05-28.

        The article notes: "Hyatt International Corp., which runs six hotels in China, is opening its first one in Beijing, complete with parking for 12,000 bicycles. About 200 of the 591 rooms at the Grand Hyatt Beijing have been opened; the rest are to open by April."

  There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow Grand Hyatt Beijing (simplified Chinese: 北京东方君悦大酒店; traditional Chinese: 北京東方君悅大酒店; pinyin: Běijīng Dōngfāng Jūnyuè Dàjiǔdiàn) to pass Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline, which requires "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject".

  Cunard (talk) 10:13, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep: A very thorough search of sources by Cunard (again). Aside from the offline sources listed, I have also found a lot more Chinese sources on the internet, which includes but is not limited to a Wen Wei Po[19] article that mentioned the subject hotel winning multiple awards in 2006, articles from Elle China[20] and Phoenix Television[21] introducing the application of new technologies at the hotel during the pandemic and in 2014 respectively, articles from China Daily[22] and Sina[23] introducing the hotel (these two may seem a bit like advertorial but definitely provided SIGCOV), articles from China Daily[24] and China Hospitality News documenting the appointment of senior staff at the hotel, an article from Sina[25] reporting on the tenth anniversary of the hotel, etc. I believe these have demonstrated notability far beyond GNG and NCORP. @Piscili and Chiselinccc: Please take a look at the newly located sources from Cunard and myself, thanks! —Prince of Erebor（The Book of Mazarbul） 18:55, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: It was probably open to me to close this as no consensus or keep considering Cunard's sourcing (and subsequent pings to those who !voted delete). However, to produce a firmer consensus and allow for a re-evaluation of their position for the nominator and two delete !voters, as well as potential outside input also, relisting for another seven days. Without foreshadowing the future, this will be unlikely to need another 7 beyond this, and may even be able to be closed prior to this extra 7 if consensus becomes clearer.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 06:33, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Also ping LibStar as per AfD relist comments. Daniel (talk) 06:34, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hunan Coal Group

Hunan Coal Group (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

I did WP:BEFORE and searched for independent reliable sources to establish the notability of the subject as per WP:GNG and WP:NCORP, but I found nothing that can establish notability. Here is a breakdown of cited sources:

• 1: http://www.hnmyjt.com/Item/2.aspx (This is the official website of the Company and is WP:PRIMARY, so it can't establish notability, The full article is just rely on this source)
• 2: https://www.hunan.gov.cn/hnszf/hnyw/zwdt/201212/t20121210_4719900.html (A government site, can't really establish notability, Just listed hundreds of companies in China)
• 3: https://clb.org.hk/en/content/hunan-coalminers-strike-over-privatization-plans (Just Passing mention to Hunan Coal Group and the article is only about the "Strike" of the workers of the company, not about the company.
• 4: https://caijing.chinadaily.com.cn/a/202107/20/WS60f66c85a3101e7ce975a86d.html (The article is talking about the history of coal in Hunan, no coverage of the Hunan Coal Group at all. Also, At the end, the article mentions:"(Author Liao Jianxiang is Secretary and Chairman of the Party Committee of Hunan Coal Group Co., Ltd.")
• 5: https://www.gov.cn/xinwen/2018-05/22/content_5292722.htm (Government site, Even I skip that part, the article does not give in-depth coverage of the subject, it talk about the Jailed of Chairman of Hunan Coal Industry) GrabUp - Talk 12:10, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and China. GrabUp - Talk 12:10, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This article has been reviewed and rated Stub-class, which means it is a promising starting article, though large space remains for improvement.

Hunan Coal Group is a large coal mine company of more than 30,000 employees, the largest in Hunan Province of China. This fact alone may make it worthwhile for an introduction in wiki.

As for the reliability of the sources, I will discuss later. Ctxz2323 (talk) 00:24, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Ctxz2323: As you said, “Hunan Coal Group is a large coal mining company with more than 30,000 employees, the largest in Hunan Province of China. This fact alone may make it worthwhile for an introduction in Wiki.” From which Wikipedia rule did you get this information? Go and read WP:NCORP. It requires multiple in-depth coverages from reliable, independent sources to establish notability. It doesn’t really matter how big the company is; if the company is significant, it should obviously get coverage from reliable sources. Also, an article getting reviewed does not guarantee that it will be there forever. GrabUp - Talk 03:22, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources.
  1. Xie, Chunyang 谢春阳 (2008-02-29). "湘煤集团损失巨大急需援手" [Hunan Coal Group has suffered huge losses and is in urgent need of help]. China Coal News [zh] (in Chinese).

     The article notes: "在今年年初我国南方部分地区遭受的罕见冰雪灾害中，湖南省煤业集团(以下简称湘煤集团)遭受巨大损失，在恢复和重建过程中急需有关部门伸出援手。 今年1月中旬以来的冰雪灾害持续时间长，破坏性大，历史罕见．给湘煤集团造成了巨大损失， 此次灾害申，湘煤集团的51对矿井停电15天至25天，其中停电5昼夜以上的矿井21对，停电15昼夜以上的矿井11对，停电25昼夜以上只能采用柴油机发电保井的矿井5对。"

     From Google Translate: "In the rare ice and snow disaster that hit parts of southern my country at the beginning of this year, Hunan Coal Group (hereinafter referred to as Hunan Coal Group) suffered huge losses and urgently needed help from relevant departments in the recovery and reconstruction process. The ice and snow disaster since mid-January this year lasted for a long time, was extremely destructive, and is rare in history. The disaster caused huge losses to Xiang Coal Group. According to the disaster, 51 pairs of mines of Xiang Coal Group were without power for 15 days to 25 days, including 21 pairs of mines with power outages for more than 5 days and nights, 11 pairs of mines with power outages for more than 15 days and nights, and 25 pairs of mines with power outages for 25 days and nights. The above 5 pairs of mines can only use diesel engines to generate electricity to protect the mines."

  2. Xin, Wen 欣文 (2008-02-27). "湘煤集团受灾矿井抓紧排水" [Hunan Coal Group's disaster-stricken mines pay close attention to drainage]. China Coal News [zh] (in Chinese).

     The article notes: "本报讯1月中旬以来拘冰冻灾害，导致湖南电网严重受损，造成大面积停电，致使湘煤集团51对生产矿井中，有44对矿井不同程度遭受了淹井、淹水平的重创。 ． 目前，湘煤集团正抓紧受灾五_L井排水工作，力争早日恢复生产。 据统计，此次冰灾中，因矿井停产、设备损毁、旁屋倒塌和各项救灾投入给湘煤集团造成的损失已超过5亿元，有十多万职工家属正常生活受到严重影响。"

     From Google Translate: "This newspaper reported that the freezing disaster since mid-January has caused serious damage to Hunan's power grid and caused widespread power outages. As a result, 44 of the 51 pairs of production mines of the Hunan Coal Group have suffered varying degrees of flooding. At present, Hunan Coal Group is stepping up the drainage work of the disaster-stricken 5_L well and striving to resume production as soon as possible. According to statistics, during this ice disaster, the losses caused to Hunan Coal Group by mine shutdowns, equipment damage, side building collapses, and various disaster relief investments exceeded 500 million yuan, and the normal lives of more than 100,000 employees' family members were severely affected."

  3. Yue, Guanwen 岳冠文 (2006-06-20). "湘煤集团成立" [Hunan Coal Group was established]. Changsha Evening News (in Chinese). p. A6.

     The article notes: "湖南煤业集团(简称湘煤集团)是以涟邵矿业集团、白沙煤电集团、资兴矿业集团、长沙矿业集团、湘潭矿业集团和省辰溪煤矿6家国有骨干煤炭企业重组而成的大型企业。其中前三家进入2005年全国煤炭工业100强企业行列。"

     From Google Translate: "Hunan Coal Group (referred to as Xiang Coal Group) is a large-scale enterprise reorganised from six state-owned backbone coal enterprises: Lianshao Mining Group, Baisha Coal and Electricity Group, Zixing Mining Group, Changsha Mining Group, Xiangtan Mining Group and the provincial Chenxi Coal Mine. Among them, the first three entered the ranks of the top 100 enterprises in the national coal industry in 2005."

  4. Ruan, Xiaoqin 阮晓琴 (2006-06-20). "湘煤集团昨日正式挂牌，计划进军内蒙古与山西开矿" [Hunan Coal Group was officially listed yesterday and plans to enter Inner Mongolia and Shanxi to open mines]. Shanghai Securities Journal (in Chinese).

     The article notes: "湘煤集团由湖南省6家国有骨干煤炭企业重组而成：涟邵矿业集团、白沙煤电集团、资兴矿业集团、长沙矿业集团、湘潭矿业有限责任公司和湖南辰溪煤矿。其中前三家进入2005年全国煤炭工业100强企业行列。这6家企业集中主要省属煤炭资源，资产组成十分优良。据悉，组建后的湘煤集团拥有生产矿井50对，总资产为40亿元，3年后煤炭产量将达到1000万吨。... 该集团的组建，正式吹响了湖南省新一轮煤炭资源整合升级行动的号角。"

     From Google Translate: "Hunan Coal Group was reorganised from six state-owned key coal enterprises in Hunan Province: Lianshao Mining Group, Baisha Coal and Electricity Group, Zixing Mining Group, Changsha Mining Group, Xiangtan Mining Co., Ltd. and Hunan Chenxi Coal Mine. Among them, the first three entered the ranks of the top 100 enterprises in the national coal industry in 2005. These six companies concentrate mainly on provincial coal resources and have very good asset composition. It is reported that after establishment, the Xiang Coal Group has 50 pairs of production mines with total assets of 4 billion yuan. Coal output will reach 10 million tons in three years. ... The establishment of the group officially sounded the clarion call for a new round of coal resource integration and upgrading actions in Hunan Province."

  5. Tang, Zhenwei 唐振伟 (2013-07-01). ""煤电互保"政府间博弈升级 "三西"煤深受其害. 湘煤集团并未从中受益" [The inter-governmental game on "mutual guarantee of coal and electricity" escalates, and coal in the Three West Regions is deeply affected by it. Hunan Coal Group did not benefit from this]. Securities Daily (in Chinese). p. C2.

     The article notes: "公开资料显示，在今年4月22日召开电煤运行形势座谈会上，湖南经信委副主任杨晓晋在会上要求火电企业要优先采购湘煤集团、资江煤业集团等省内生产的电煤"

     From Google Translate: "Public information shows that at a symposium on thermal coal operation situation held on April 22 this year, Yang Xiaojin, deputy director of Hunan Economic and Information Technology Commission, asked thermal power companies to give priority to purchasing electricity produced in the province such as Hunan Coal Group and Zijiang Coal Industry Group."

     The article notes: "5月，12家火电企业从省内煤矿企业购进电煤量有所提高，但从湘煤集团购进的煤量仍在逐步下降。上述数据显示，湖南省内最大的煤炭企业湘煤集团并未从“煤电互保”中受益。对此，有分析人士认为，湖南的“煤电互保”政策保护了事实上中小煤企，不利于淘汰落后产能。"

     From Google Translate: "In May, the amount of thermal coal purchased by 12 thermal power companies from coal mining companies in the province increased, but the amount of coal purchased from Xiang Coal Group was still gradually declining. The above data shows that Hunan Coal Group, the largest coal company in Hunan Province, has not benefited from the "coal and electricity mutual guarantee". In this regard, some analysts believe that Hunan's "coal and electricity mutual guarantee" policy actually protects small and medium-sized coal companies and is not conducive to the elimination of backward production capacity."

  6. Li, Tieqiao 黎铁桥 (2009-03-25). "湘煤集团 新疆勘探到百亿吨煤田将成 为湖南新的能源供应基地" [Hunan Coal Group. Xinjiang has discovered 10 billion tons of coal fields and will become a new energy supply base in Hunan]. Changsha Evening News (in Chinese). p. A4.

     The article notes: "据介绍,湘煤集团于2008年底与新疆有关方面签署协议，获得在吐鲁番、哈密等地200亿吨煤炭资源开采权，并成立湘煤集团新疆能源有限公司。近日，湘煤集团在吐鲁番沙尔湖煤田钻井探煤,发现厚达151.14米的煤层。"

     From Google Translate: "According to reports, the Hunan Coal Group signed an agreement with relevant parties in Xinjiang at the end of 2008, obtaining the right to mine 20 billion tons of coal resources in Turpan, Hami and other places, and established the Hunan Coal Group Xinjiang Energy Co., Ltd. Recently, Hunan Coal Group was drilling for coal in the Shaerhu Coalfield in Turpan and discovered a 151.14-meter-thick coal seam."

  7. "湘煤集团挖掘产能 增产确保电煤供应" [Hunan Coal Group explores production capacity and increases production to ensure thermal coal supply]. 中经网 [China Economic Net] (in Chinese). 2008-07-21.

     The article notes: "作为我省基础能源供应主力的湘煤集团，克服年初冰灾带来的重大影响，在部分骨干矿井停产达30天的情况下，上半年仍供应电煤131.4万吨，比去年同期增加10.5万吨。冰灾期间，湘煤集团51对矿井中，有44对不同程度受损。"

     From Google Translate: "As the main provider of basic energy in our province, Xiang Coal Group overcame the major impact of the ice disaster at the beginning of the year. Even though some backbone mines were suspended for 30 days, it still supplied 1.314 million tons of thermal coal in the first half of the year, an increase of 105,000 tons over the same period last year. Ton. During the ice disaster, 44 of the 51 pairs of mines of the Xiang Coal Group were damaged to varying degrees."

  8. Li, Junjie 李俊杰 (2016-02-15). Yan, Lu 閆璐; Du, Yanfei 杜燕飛 (eds.). "湘煤集團總經理李義成涉嫌違紀被查 曾遭網友舉報" [Li Yicheng, general manager of Hunan Coal Group, was investigated for suspected disciplinary violations and was reported by netizens]. People's Daily (in Chinese). China News Service. Archived from the original on 2024-05-26. Retrieved 2024-05-26.

     The article notes: "湖南省煤業集團有限公司是經湖南省人民政府批准設立的大型省屬國有獨資企業，是全國煤炭50強企業，是該省政府確定的全省能源保障主平台和重點支持加快發展的企業。據悉，該公司於2006年6月19日挂牌成立，現旗下擁有全資、控股子公司37家，擁有煤礦總數60個，總設計生產能力3000萬噸/年。"

     From Google Translate: "Hunan Coal Industry Group Co., Ltd. is a large-scale provincial state-owned enterprise established with the approval of the Hunan Provincial People's Government. It is one of the top 50 coal enterprises in the country. It is the main platform for energy security in the province and an enterprise determined by the provincial government to focus on accelerating development. It is reported that the company was established on June 19, 2006. It now has 37 wholly-owned and holding subsidiaries, a total of 60 coal mines, and a total designed production capacity of 30 million tons per year."

  There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow Hunan Coal Group, or Xiangmei Group (simplified Chinese: 湘煤集团; traditional Chinese: 湘煤集團; pinyin: Xiāngméi Jítuán), full name Hunan Provincial Coal Industry Group (湖南省煤业集团有限公司), to pass Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies)#Primary criteria, which requires "significant coverage in multiple reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject".

  Cunard (talk) 09:49, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Cunard: But where are the links for me to verify them? How can I confirm that these sources are reliable? Additionally, the majority of them are only a paragraph or two . How can this be considered in-depth coverage of the subject? These are trival mentions, Read WP:SIGCOV to know what In-depth coverage means. GrabUp - Talk 09:59, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

These are offline sources. The quotes I provided are not the full articles. For most of the articles, there is more coverage of the company that I did not quote. The quotes I provided are sufficient to demonstrate the company meets Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies)#Significant coverage, which says: "The depth of coverage of the subject by the source must be considered. Trivial or incidental coverage of a subject is not sufficient to establish notability. Deep or significant coverage provides an overview, description, commentary, survey, study, discussion, analysis, or evaluation of the product, company, or organization."

Cunard (talk) 10:08, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Cunard: Offline articles is a very good excuse to my question, that how can I or someone verify them? Also, you can add whatever you want and justify them to establish notability. There is no proof that these coverages are from reliable independent secondary sources. GrabUp - Talk 10:25, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

With the responses "a very good excuse" and "you can add whatever you want", there is nothing substantive I can or want to say in response. Cunard (talk) 10:32, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Cunard: Hey, I want to know how and where you get these articles. I mean, obviously, you don't have all these printed copies in your home, so I just want to know where you search and get them. GrabUp - Talk 10:36, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Generally, people access would access subscriptions to non-FUTON sources through a library (usually a national library, state library or academic library). Individual subscriptions do of course exist, but they are usually more expensive than they are worth. Wikipedia:The Wikipedia Library is a good resource generally, but I do not believe it has much in the way of Chinese (and other East Asian) sources. I believe some US institutions have access to the newspapers in question via East View or Apabi, for example. Some other institutions may instead have some specific sources in their microfilm collections, though as those do not usually have full text indexes they are much more annoying to search. Alpha3031 (t • c) 05:26, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, but I wanted to know from him where he got these. His lack of reply to my question is raising some concerns about these offline sources. GrabUp - Talk 07:44, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep per the sources found by Cunard. —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 03:47, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  @Mx. Granger: May I know where you confirmed that these coverage are real and are from reliable secondary sources? GrabUp - Talk 04:14, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  I also feel that, as a reviewer, GrabUp should be more neutral and objective. At the beginning of this page, you said:

  "I did WP:BEFORE and searched for independent reliable sources to establish the notability of the subject as per WP:GNG and WP:NCORP, but I found nothing that can establish notability. Here is a breakdown of cited sources: ..."

  Let me put some words on your comments.

  • 1: http://www.hnmyjt.com/Item/2.aspx (This is the official website of the Company and is WP:PRIMARY, so it can't establish notability, The full article is just rely on this source)

  ctxz2323: But getting some data and facts, instead of self-flattering words, from there may be ok.

  • 2: https://www.hunan.gov.cn/hnszf/hnyw/zwdt/201212/t20121210_4719900.html (A government site, can't really establish notability, Just listed hundreds of companies in China)

  ctxz2323: Again, the citation was for a historical fact, i.e., to support the sentence "In 2009, Hunan Coal Group, China Telecom, and Datang Telecom Group jointly established Hunan Black Gold Times (湖南黑金时代).". And that is a provincial government webite, a very high one.

  • 3: https://clb.org.hk/en/content/hunan-coalminers-strike-over-privatization-plans (Just Passing mention to Hunan Coal Group and the article is only about the "Strike" of the workers of the company, not about the company.

  ctxz2323: Contributed by another editor, but I don't think it is useless.

  • 4: https://caijing.chinadaily.com.cn/a/202107/20/WS60f66c85a3101e7ce975a86d.html (The article is talking about the history of coal in Hunan, no coverage of the Hunan Coal Group at all. Also, At the end, the article mentions:"(Author Liao Jianxiang is Secretary and Chairman of the Party Committee of Hunan Coal Group Co., Ltd.")

  ctxz2323: The history of coal in Hunan is relevant to the Hunan Coal Group, as shown by its title "湘煤集团：汲取红色动能 建设百年湘煤" (Google translate: "Xiang Coal Group: absorb red kinetic energy and build a century-old Hunan Coal Group".). And the source China Daily is maybe the largest English newspaper in China.

  • 5: https://www.gov.cn/xinwen/2018-05/22/content_5292722.htm (Government site, Even I skip that part, the article does not give in-depth coverage of the subject, it talk about the Jailed of Chairman of Hunan Coal Industry) GrabUp - Talk 12:10, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  ctxz2323: From Xinhua News Agency? Its news is widely used even internationally.

  On the whole, I agree that the wiki article is far from perfect, but not so bad as should be deleted. Ctxz2323 (talk) 08:21, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  @Ctxz2323: Your breakdown does not provide any logic to pass WP:SIGCOV or WP:GNG. Passing mentions from government sites (primary sources) can’t establish notability. GrabUp - Talk 08:42, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  These sources are just trival mentions as per WP:ORGTRIV. GrabUp - Talk 08:57, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  The ping didn't work, just so you know. I am assuming good faith that the quotes Cunard provided are real, not fake. The sources generally look like reliable WP:NEWSORGs. —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 14:27, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  So, no proof or links; your vote is based on assumption. Thanks for your reply, but this does not convince me that these sources are reliable secondary sources. GrabUp - Talk 14:31, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Thanks for your reminding (though sounds a bit too tough).

  I have just added 2 English sources accessible on the Net. Ctxz2323 (talk) 23:32, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  @Ctxz2323: The first source is from Bloomberg, not a news coverage. Just a small page with intro of the company, not an in-depth coverage at all. The second source is from Wood Mac, an Analytic company, the article does not provide in-depth coverage just a summary and because it is an analytics, is fails under WP:ORGTRIV which says “standard notices, brief announcements, and routine coverage, such as:

  of quarterly or annual financial results and earning forecasts,” GrabUp - Talk 03:18, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak Keep Sources 1 and 5 seem to be WP:NCORP qualifying from a glance, and thats enough to make the company pass the guideline. WP:OFFLINE sources are allowed to be used to meet notability guidelines, and if someone has reason to believe someone is making up sources they are happy to go to WP:ANI with evidence to discuss the matter further. Jumpytoo Talk 05:31, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  @Jumpytoo: The first source is from Bloomberg; it's not a news article or anything similar, just a company page with one paragraph:

  • Hunan Coal Group Co. Ltd. mines, processes, and distributes coal products. The Company produces anthracite coals, coking coals, lean coals, general bituminous coals, and other products.

  Just this nothing else,

  The second source is from CLB. The article is about the strike of the workers but does not provide in-depth coverage of the company. The article mentions:

  • Several thousand workers at the Hunan Coal Industry Group have entered the tenth day of a strike in a protest over the company’s proposed privatization and stock exchange listing plans.
  • The strike began on 22 August when managers at the group’s Jinzhushan mine in central Hunan tried to force miners starting their shift to sign lay-off compensation agreements that took no account of how long they had worked at the mine. Those who refused to sign the agreement were not allowed to work.

  In these two paragraphs, the first mentions Hunan Coal Industry Group, and the second reports that they are forcing workers to work. How do these meet WP:NCORP? This is not significant or in-depth coverage as per WP:SIGCOV. GrabUp - Talk 09:00, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Regarding offline sources, there is a section named “Challenging offline sources” that you can read. It allows me to challenge offline sources, and so I am challenging these offline sources. GrabUp - Talk 09:04, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  To clarify, I mean Cunard's sourcing list, not whatever sourcing is in the article. The sources I mention specifically contain negative coverage which generally have the NCORP required intellectual independence. Per the link you provided on challenging online sources, They might even be able to provide you a scan or an excerpt from that source, which Cunard already did in their vote. And as per WP:OSO, If an editor seeking deletion believes the creator placed fictitious references in the article to make a hoax seem legitimate, the burden of proof is on the one seeking deletion. Jumpytoo Talk 09:21, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Just google "Hunan Coal Group" on the net, and you will see quite a bit coverage hard to ignore. Ctxz2323 (talk) 01:26, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  @Ctxz2323: I have already provided an analysis of the cited sources. If you would like, you can share your ‘Hard to Ignore’ sources, and I will gladly analyze them for you. GrabUp - Talk 03:53, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 19:15, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep: Cunard has already conducted a thorough search of sources. China News Service, Changsha Evening News, and Shanghai Securities Journal are well-established media, and I believe Cunard's searches in good faith. I am not sure what the nominator is trying to nitpick here. It is reasonable to challenge the authenticity of the sources, but that should be done by providing evidence of any flaws or uncertainties, not just bludgeoning without any basis. But since there are still potential doubts about the sources listed in this discussion, I have done some additional searches for Chinese sources online, coming up with articles from Xinhua News Agency[26], China Daily[27], Shanghai Securities Journal[28], Red Net [zh][29][30], China News Service[31][32], Sohu[33], and People's Daily[34]. All of these are verifiable online sources with SIGCOV. I believe these newly located sources should help settle the disputes from the previous discussion. Keep per NCORP. —Prince of Erebor（The Book of Mazarbul） 18:50, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wang Meng (figure skater)

Wang Meng (figure skater) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Fails WP:NSKATE; medal placement at the junior level or bronze/silver medals at the senior-level national championships explicitly do not meet the requirements of WP:NSKATE. PROD removed. Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:31, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and China. Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:31, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep there is sufficient independent coverage.--Wish for Good (talk) 04:13, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Wish for Good, are you going to share with the rest of the class or should we just take your word for it? Bgsu98 (Talk) 22:18, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 02:31, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Skating-related deletion discussions. Owen× ☎ 12:43, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:35, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:19, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Wishfully thinking keep assertions don't put a subject past GNG, ANYBIO, or WP:SPORTSPERSON (which requires at least one source which directly details the subject). Such sourcing hasn't been applied, presented or found. BusterD (talk) 22:14, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Devapāla's Conflict with Tibet

Devapāla's Conflict with Tibet (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Poor attempt of the author to keep Pala Tibetan War from AFD. Same content with different title. See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pala Tibetan War.Imperial^[AFCND] 14:54, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, History, Military, China, and India. Imperial^[AFCND] 14:54, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Devapāla's Conflict with Tibet has no issues like Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pala Tibetan War as you said.
  This article is Notable and has been given significant coverage by reliable sources.

• Devapāla came into conflict with Tibet, there is nothing impossible in this because Tibetan sources claim that their kings Khri-srong-lda-btsan and his son Mu-teg-btsan-po subdued India and forced Raja Dharma- pala to submit. Devapāla also may have come to clash with them and defeated them.^[1]
• Devapāla might have come into conflict with Tibet; there is nothing impossible in this because Tibetan sources claim that their kings Khri-Srong-Ida-Btsan and his son Mu-teg-Btsan-po subdued India and forced Dharma- pāla to submit. Devapāla also may have clashed with them and defeated them^[2]

Based Kashmiri (talk) 15:33, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop listing down this big {{tq}} here. It was already a mess at the earlier discussion. Comment down if you've any possible arguments that could potentially save the article. I am pretty sure you haven't read what WP: NOTABILITY, and this reflects everywhere in the AFD. Long paragraphs are not the factor that determines whether it passes GNG or not. And I can see you've duplicated the text twice here. Imperial^[AFCND] 19:29, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This event is notable and has received significant coverage in Reliable Sources (WP:RS) and it passes WP:GNG & WP:SIGCOV and this isn't WP:OR since reliable sources mention the event as Devapāla's Conflict with Tibet.
Also what do you mean by "And I can see you've duplicated the text twice here."?? I gave you two reliable sources which mentions the event in a similar way. Based Kashmiri (talk) 04:44, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Based Kashmiri, what you've done is exposed plagiarism. They mention the event in a similar way because one source plagiarized the other, not because this is a conventional way to write about this. -- asilvering (talk) 19:12, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As per the WP:DEL-REASON guideline, there is no reason to delete this article and I have provided multiple reliable sources about this event here in the replies below. Based Kashmiri (talk) 11:33, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Do we have evidence that one of these sources plagiarised the other? Cortador (talk) 06:47, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. This is obviously a recreation of the previously deleted article. It does have a better title, in that it is no longer claiming there was a "Pala Tibetan War", but this is the same issue. We can write about this hypothetical conflict (one of the sources you list above even says "might have"!) on Devapala (Pala dynasty). If eventually we find sources to justify a separate article, we can spin out out from Devapala (Pala dynasty). But we did not find those sources in the last AfD, so I doubt we will find them here either. While I'm looking at that article, I note that we also have the sentences There is nothing impossible as the Tibetan sources claim that their kings Khri-srong-lda-btsan and his son Mu-teg-btsan-po subdued India and forced Dharmapāla to submit. Therefore, Devapāla must have also clashed with and defeated the Tibetan kings. Not only does this not follow the sources (our article says "must have", while neither source says so), it is obviously plagiarism. -- asilvering (talk) 19:18, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  This is not a recreation of the previously deleted article, also this article doesn't have any issues like that article, if you think there is any issue in this article then list them down.
  The previous article had issues with the "Dharmapāla's Conflict with Tibetans" section and the "Conflict with Nepal" section, which is excluded from this article. This article focuses on the conflict between Devapala and Tibet, with reliable sources mentioning the event as "Devapala's Conflict with Tibet." The main problem with the previous article was the uncited title, but this article provides reliable sources to support its claim.Based Kashmiri (talk) 15:17, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  I don't mean "it literally contains the exact same words as the previous article". If that were the case, it could just be nominated for speedy deletion. I mean "it is in effect the same article with the same problems", which is true. At least one of the two reliable sources you brought up above appears to be plagiarized, so not only is this not two separate sources with in-depth coverage, it's only one source with very brief coverage. This can easily be written about on Devapala (Pala dynasty) if necessary. (But I'd advise against plagiarising a plagiarised source to do so.) -- asilvering (talk) 19:20, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  This article cannot be deleted for the reasons you've provided, as per the Wikipedia deletion policy WP:DEL-REASON.

  Additionally, here are some additional reliable sources about this event:

  • (1)
  • (2)
  • (3)
  • (4)

  Based Kashmiri (talk) 11:13, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  These sources do not support your case. -- asilvering (talk) 17:16, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Then explain how? Also you still haven't given any reasons to delete this article from as per the Wikipedia's deletion policy WP:DEL-REASON. Based Kashmiri (talk) 04:02, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  The reason for deletion is simple, and it is the most common deletion reason that exists: this does not pass WP:GNG. We need multiple reliable, secondary sources that discuss the topic in depth. -- asilvering (talk) 10:37, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

:Delete per asilvering and Imperial Okmrman (talk) 04:40, 13 May 2024 (UTC)Blocked sock. Owen× ☎ 05:49, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

They do not have any valid reason to delete the article, Please provide a valid reason from WP:DEL-REASON.Based Kashmiri (talk) 08:19, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Okmrman And I just checked your User contributions and noticed you have voted for deletion for every single AFD you had discovered EVERY MINUTE, without even reading anything.Based Kashmiri (talk) 08:25, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Both @Asilvering and @ImperialAficionado haven't provided any valid reason to delete this article from WP:DEL-REASON, how can you agree with them? Based Kashmiri (talk) 08:29, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 10:14, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 05:52, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete , this is simply not notable and has wrongly been re-created as an article with a different name. If this goes on a topic ban would be in order for the editor. Chiswick Chap (talk) 09:10, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

---

• Note to closer: I think I can improve this article based on the concern raised in this discussion, let me work on this article further. I'd request the closer to please draftify it so I can improve this article. Based.Kashmiri ^(🗨️) 04:30, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 02:27, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete I don't see enough evidence that this needs a standalone article. Even if it does when all history is put together, it's clear the author does not yet have the requisite experience to write that article. It would have to be started from scratch and by a more experienced editor, which can be them in the future, but I think deleting is best for now to put an end to the disruption. Usedtobecool ☎️ 03:45, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment: There's so much WP:Synthesis present in these creations. IMHO the new creation seems to dovetail somewhat with the old page's sources, events, and personalities. But so far, there's a general consensus among other content-area editors this material has no place in pagespace (yet, if at all). The page creator's "gaming" behavior in recreating the same basic pagespace without violating specific prohibitions, seems by itself a behavioral issue, and several times repeated. BusterD (talk) 16:50, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion

Patricia Sauthoff

Patricia Sauthoff (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

The article contains no notability claim under WP:NACADEMIC. Fails WP:GNG. Melmann 20:12, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators and Women. Shellwood (talk) 20:40, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Negligible impact yet on scholarly community. A misguided creation of this BLP. Xxanthippe (talk) 22:29, 4 June 2024 (UTC).[reply]
• Delete. An assistant professor with one book. I did not find any reviews of it. For this sort of field we are going to need multiple reviews of multiple books for WP:AUTHOR notability. —David Eppstein (talk) 22:50, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, History, Hong Kong, Bihar, Canada, Colorado, and New Mexico. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:25, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete -- per WP:TOOSOON -- on the right track, but Xxanthippe and David Eppstein assessed the current notability properly. -- Michael Scott Asato Cuthbert (talk) 19:15, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please see: Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/India

UHO MZF F.C.

UHO MZF F.C. (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Reviewed during NPP. No evidence of wp:notability under SNG or GNG. Coverage and sourcing is just They exist" and champions of two cups of some type. North8000 (talk) 23:30, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Football, and Indonesia. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:04, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep The combined sources already in the article, and including the additional source in the Bahasa article, are exactly the sort of GNG-passing coverage I would expect of a lower division football team. SportingFlyer T·C 18:15, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• That sounds like saying that it can't meet the actual GNG (and so IMO is not wp:notable) and so we need a different GNG to make sure that non-notable lower division football teams get in. North8000 (talk) 21:33, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  I'm not happy at the way you've completely mis-represented my keep !vote. The article easily passes GNG. SportingFlyer T·C 23:14, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@SportingFlyer: I posted in a way that highlighted what I felt to be issues with your argument. In hindsight, viewing it from another angle, such is a "spun negative" description of your post. I did not intend to do something like that. Please accept my apologies for that. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 00:06, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. GiantSnowman 16:29, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per SF. GiantSnowman 16:33, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. The sources in the article only cover the game results, not the subject itself. As a team playing in the lowest division of football, its notability is limited to its region and it's relatively unknown on a national level. IMO, it doesn't meet the GNG. Ckfasdf (talk) 19:49, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That's not true. These are not match reports, but rather articles about how the team won the championship, failed in the round of 16, et cetera, and football club notability is not based on whether they're important regionally, internationally, et cetera. They are also covered on an ongoing basis by the newspaper in their local area including sources not currently linked in the article, such as [35]: this is about the competition but the club is clearly the subject of the article. SportingFlyer T·C 23:18, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That is a routine coverage. According to WP:SPORTCRIT; Local sources must be independent of the subject, and must provide reports beyond routine game coverage. None of reference in the article provide reports beyond routine coverage, such as information about the team itself. Ckfasdf (talk) 02:22, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dana (payment service)

Dana (payment service) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Promotion (e.g. ISO 27001 Certification and Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Certificate...) no sources to meet NCORP BoraVoro (talk) 08:50, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I made the article not to promote but is it allowed if I change the information so that it doesn't seem like an advertisement? You can find information about Dana (payment service) Badak Jawa (talk) 10:08, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@BoraVoroif I find your decision to give a deletion tag very odd because it should be after a few minutes or a few days after the article was created Badak Jawa (talk) 10:21, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

half a year isn't enough? BoraVoro (talk) 10:22, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Finance, Companies, Software, and Indonesia. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:45, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  @BoraVoro and @Wcquidditch After I took another look at the article, it seemed to be indirectly promotional, so the article deserved to be deleted. It was my fault for creating the article without citing credible sources and I also recognized most of the references were promotional after I googled them Badak Jawa (talk) 15:48, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep: Looking at the sources provided on the page and Dana was on the top 5 as the most popular e-wallet apps in Indonesia in 2019,^[1] the company is notable enough to meet WP:NCORP. Additionaly, the app is popular among Gen-Z Indonesians and used by 115 million users.^[2][3] Concerning the article is too promotional, I have removed those advertorial content.Faldi00 (talk) 01:24, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per above. Also as one of top 5 mobile wallet in Indonesia according to 2022 report. It's not difficult to look up independent source or even academic publication on DANA, so it should pass NCORP. Ckfasdf (talk) 19:30, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep: The tone has been improved, and on 2023 it reached 170 million users, so it should pass NCORP. WC gudang inspirasi (^{Read! Talk!}) 00:23, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Freya Jayawardana

Freya Jayawardana (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

this subject doesn't meet WP:GNG criteria and can't stand-alone (WP:NLIST) as a musician (WP:MUSIC and WP:BANDMEMBER). May this subject have to be redirect to List of JKT48 members page. Ariandi Lie ^{Let's talk} 17:09, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Bands and musicians, Women, Dance, Internet, and Indonesia. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:22, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. She may not be as famous like a Hollywood celebrity. However, she is one of the notable members of JKT48. WJetChao (talk) 19:29, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 21:26, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

TheJournalish

TheJournalish (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Article PRODded with reason "Non-notable journal. Not indexed in any selective databases, no independent sources. Does not meet WP:NJournals or WP:GNG." Article dePRODded by article creator with reason "this journal is endorsed and ranked by the Ministry of Research Technology, and Higher Education of the Republic of Indonesia (as already cited). Why would that not demonstrate notability?" This apparently refers to current ref. 3, but that database (SINTA) does not appear to be very selective and therefore fails both NJournals and GNG. PROD reason still stands, hence: delete. Randykitty (talk) 21:13, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academic journals and Indonesia. Randykitty (talk) 21:13, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Indonesia publishes dozens of academic journals,[36] and for some reason the first one documented on Wikipedia gets PROD and AFD within days. Why is that? I can't see why the endorsement of the journal by the government would not establish notability. (See [37], the Director-General of Strengthening Research and Development, Ministry of Research Technology, and Higher Education of the Republic of Indonesia, Decree Number 105/M/KPT/2022.) The journal has been published for less than four years, but has more than 300 incoming citations according to Google Scholar.[38] Does this not clearly meet C2 of WP:JOURNALCRIT? -- Mikeblas (talk) 23:40, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment: I'm sorry, but 300 citations is rather pathetic, even for a new journal. Also, it appears that every journal published in Indonesia gets into Sinta, so that is not really a ringing endorsement. C2 is most certainly not met. As for why this got PRODded and then taken to AfD: I patrol all new articles on academic journals and if they appear not to be notable, I propose them for deletion. Nothing nefarious here. --Randykitty (talk) 06:43, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  WP:JOURNALCRIT doesn't give a quantitative guideline, just that subjective one. -- Mikeblas (talk) 14:01, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• That's because different fields have different citation densities. But even n a low-citation density field is 300 citations after 4 years not very impressive and certainly not enough for C2.

• Delete clear failure to meet anything in WP:NJOURNALS. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 08:22, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete SINTA is not embraced by the government, it's just classification/accrediation system for Indonesian journals. Being indexed by SINTA is basically just meant "this journal exist" the same way school accrediation exist Nyanardsan (talk) 12:16, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: If I had to close this based on the discussion so far, it would be to delete. However, more discussion genuinely would be helpful.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 02:30, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Wayang Kampung Sebelah (via WP:PROD on 29 January 2024)

Ultimate Knight Windom XP

Ultimate Knight Windom XP (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

No independent sources. Doesn't seem to meet WP:NPROD. jlwoodwa (talk) 17:49, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games and Japan. jlwoodwa (talk) 17:49, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Astra Superstars

Astra Superstars (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

I could not find any coverage in reliable sources, hence fails both WP:GNG and WP:NVG. Cocobb8 (💬 talk • ✏️ contribs) 01:47, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. Cocobb8 (💬 talk • ✏️ contribs) 01:47, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment It got coverage in Hardcore Gaming 101 and Official Sega Saturn Magazine, so it doesn't need much to push it over the notability threshold. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 02:21, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:29, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. Articles covering this game are aplenty: https://segaretro.org/Astra_Superstars/Magazine_articles Cortador (talk) 12:56, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Per sources found by Cortador plus my own. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 13:39, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Matthew's Best Hit TV

Matthew's Best Hit TV (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Fails WP:NTV; no sources. Mvcg66b3r (talk) 23:45, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Japan. Mvcg66b3r (talk) 23:45, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kyogaku shiken

Kyogaku shiken (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Raoul mishima (talk · contribs) attempted to nominate this article for deletion, but managed to {{subst:afd2}} directly onto the log page instead of creating a subpage and transcluding it (and did not tag the article either). Their rationale follows:

I'm not sure I understand this article, but I'm sure it is not encyclopedic et does not belong here.

This is purely a procedural nomination to clean up a malformatted attempt; I offer no opinion or comment of my own. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:24, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Buddhism and Japan. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:24, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:27, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jeremy The Remix

Jeremy The Remix (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Reverted redirect; the edit summary said the article can be improved by his fans, but I couldn't find any sources to improve the article with. It might be improvable with offline sources, but that's not something I have access to. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 23:40, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Albums and songs and Japan. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 23:40, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: was going to suggest redirecting to the singer, but even that article has thread-bare references... Nothing found for this pre-internet musician, perhaps in paper sources, but none that I can see that have been digitized. Oaktree b (talk) 03:55, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Jeremy Jordan (singer, born 1973): Unless sufficient print material from Japan can be located, this article does not show sufficient notability of its subject as is. A chart placement is good, but if it only peaked that low then in probably wasn't on the chart for very long (I couldn't tell you because I can't access the book; preview is unavailable on Google Books), and it's hard to call that notable charting. And if that's all the article has going for it, I don't see it passing. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 03:58, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Try My Love (Jeremy Jordan album). I'll include the information about it in the Try My Love album article, sinceThe Remix includes 3 songs of the mentioned album in remixes versions. Like I did in the Wikipedia in Portuguese article link to Try My Love - Wikipedia in Portuguese.--Markus WikiEditor (talk) 20:44, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. I don't see significant coverage - one source is a listing from a fan-written encyclopedia, the other is Discogs. I see no utility in a redirect. Bearian (talk) 15:27, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Opinion is divided between Delete and Redirect with two target articles suggested.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:13, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. can be improved by his fans is an excuse for shoddy work fit for Fandom. Does this one-hit wonder still have fans considering he does not appear to be active since 2011? WP:BEFORE shows very little out there besides Discogs. WP:SIGCOV is too thin for this remix album. This should serve a warning to editors that Wikipedia is not Fandom, not an excuse for entries of obscure albums. SpacedFarmer (talk) 16:35, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pidge (Voltron)

Pidge (Voltron) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Fails WP:GNG no sigcov outside of listicles and primary sources. There is one seemingly good source from the Mary Sue but I don't think that's enough. Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 22:02, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements, Comics and animation, and Japan. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 22:07, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge I think this article should be merged to List of Voltron characters as a compromise. Dwanyewest (talk) 08:17, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment Why not do all the characters at once? Princess Allura, Hunk, Keith, Lance, Prince Lotor, Sven / Shiro, and Emperor Zarkon. I created the Voltron fandom years ago, and when the latest Voltron series was made, they worked directly with me on putting information there about it. If people want to learn about the characters, they can just go to https://voltron.fandom.com/wiki/Category:Characters and find more detail. Dream Focus 15:32, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Copyright violation. This information was on the official Voltron wiki [39] back in 2011, which is older than this article, and unlike this article it has references to which episodes information was in. Dream Focus 15:40, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  [40] The user that copied it mentioned https://voltron.fandom.com/wiki/Pidge_(Legendary_Defender) in a reference for where the information came from. Dream Focus 22:55, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Delete per WP:COPYVIO 104.7.152.180 (talk) 00:50, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment: Voltron Fandom Wiki Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted according to a notice at the bottom of the Pidge page, so I'm not sure if the copyright violation necessarily applies as a deletion reason in this specific case. I've added attribution to the edit history. Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 04:30, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Is there any more support for a Merge, assuming that content doesn't violate our copyright guidelines?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:53, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect to List of Voltron characters, this fails WP:INDISCRIMINATE. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 01:03, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Akiko Kitamura

Akiko Kitamura (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Fails WP:NSKATE; medal placement at the junior level does not meet the requirements of WP:NSKATE. Google search turns up nothing outside of wikis and scoring databases. Previous AFD received zero arguments in favor of keeping this article that cited any evidence of notability. Bgsu98 (Talk) 16:44, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Women, Skating, and Japan. Bgsu98 (Talk) 16:44, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:59, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment: There's coverage on a person with the same name [41], who does regular dancing (not ice dancing) and choreography, but I don't know if these are the same people. Oaktree b (talk) 19:29, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Takeo Saeki

Takeo Saeki (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Not significant enough for standalone article. Possible merge/redirect to Ju-on but no sourced info to merge. Boleyn (talk) 12:02, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements, Film, and Japan. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 12:25, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete or merge as WP:ATD. The sourcing here is severely lacking. For this one article, I am more willing to grant that sources could exist, given its roots in Asia. A merge would allow us to WP:PRESERVE some amount of history and content, in case sources are found at a later time. Shooterwalker (talk) 19:20, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 19:14, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Re-Direct to Ju-On. Article just reiterates plot lines of the films in the series, and any reader can play catch-up with that on the Ju-On article. There's nothing to really merge as nothing is cited or stands out enough from the Ju On series on its own. Andrzejbanas (talk) 17:59, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to Ju-On - As Andrzejbanas said, the only content in this article is just truncated reiterations of the plots of each of the films, all of which have their own articles that include a plot summary. With no content outside of the films' plots and no sources whatsoever, Redirecting to the franchise's main article would be the best solution here. Rorshacma (talk) 01:15, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Registration of players under control (Nippon Professional Baseball)

Registration of players under control (Nippon Professional Baseball) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

This does not appear to be a notable topic, with most references to NPB.jp (the league website) and the Japan Professional Baseball Players Association. Lacking independent reliable sourced coverage. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:23, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Baseball and Japan. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:23, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. This is a clearly notable topic somewhat analogous to the Rule 5 draft in American baseball, and contrasting with Developmental player system (Nippon Professional Baseball). Players must be "registered" in order to play in top-league games, and it is significant news whenever new players are registered. There are sources available in English (e.g. this academic article from Marquette Sports Law Review, Through Sweat and Tears: High School Baseball and the Socialization of Japanese Boys from the University of Michigan in 2005, and numerous news articles about the decisions to register particular players), and it appears no WP:BEFORE was conducted in Japanese, where we see books like 「プロ野球・二軍の謎」(Mysteries of NPB's Minor League, Gentosha, 2017, here), 「プロ野球ビジネスのダイバーシティ戦略」(How Independent Leagues Promote Diversity in Japan, PHP, 2019, here), or 「プロ野球の経済学」(The Economics of NPB, Tōyō Keizai, 2016, here). All of these were found in just a few minutes and I'm sure there is much more available when searching for "registered player"+"NPB" or "developmental player"+"NPB". Dekimasuよ! 00:51, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I do not speak Japanese. You're going to have to share what these books actually say, so that we can judge if it's in-depth coverage or WP:ROUTINE mentions. – Muboshgu (talk) 00:55, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A significant amount of each book-length project listed, as implied by my translations of the book titles, plus apparently dozens more books. I'm not sure it's helpful to do a news or books WP:BEFORE search for "支配下登録" (if you did so), see hundreds or thousands of direct hits in both books and newspapers, and discard all of them due to not understanding Japanese. I'm not sure what you want me to describe about all of the sources either; they describe the contents that are described in the article, the history of the system, its implications for players participating in the system, the commemoration ceremonies for being registered, etc. Dekimasuよ! 01:08, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep per Dekimasu. Multiple books discussing the subject passes GNG. DCsansei (talk) 19:45, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:29, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 23:42, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Starwing Paradox

Starwing Paradox (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Digging around on this, there's nothing online that I could find but announcements of the game's development and content (mostly press release regurgiation), with zero reaction, review or critical response. The most notable aspect was a tournament being cancelled, but that was due to Yoshiyuki Sadamoto being tied to the game as a character designer and not the game itself. Game required a server connection that's since been shut down, with little commentary about that either. WP:BEFORE just shows no real indication of notability. Kung Fu Man (talk) 16:11, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. Kung Fu Man (talk) 16:11, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:05, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment, leaning keep: Does someone know the Japanese sources? I imagine that they'd be the most relevant for determining notability of an only-in-Japan game. In general, JP media tends to be more "fannish" than American video game outlets (lots of open regurgitation of the plot & characters), but I'm seeing some coverage. Famitsu has an overview here (yes, with lots of fannish "here are all the characters" rather than commentary, but see above, it's a Japanese game and it's going to get JP media standards), including links to 6 interviews with the voice actors, staff, and singers. Of which the staff ones are probably the "most" relevant (e.g. [42], [43]). Even if the game flopped, flops are interesting too. I'd be inclined to give the benefit of the doubt to a case of borderline notability if this was a Sunrise collaboration, Sunrise is a big deal. SnowFire (talk) 21:55, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• @SnowFire: The problem isn't that it was a flop, it's that there was no reaction to the game itself. We still need at least some sort of reception here, even for an arcade game, for the purposes of notability. Even Japanese sources didn't indicate that from what I dug through, just famitsu's interviews and the usual "this is what's in this update!" sort of PR articles.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 05:44, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • There does exist media that is only questionably notable as media (i.e. a game / book / film / etc.) but are notable anyway under GNG. Comes up with canceled games most obviously, which never get reviews but might have eaten up a bunch of time / money at a studio. The whole "tournament canceled" thing seems similar - obviously not relevant as a game, but sourced and covered overall on the topic-as-a-whole.
  • I do agree that the coverage is not very substantial by English-media standards, but it does look like there is at least some coverage. This Famitsu first-look report talks about the game-as-a-game. And I know you've already mentioned it, but there are trivial-ish "Here's what's in this update!" stories floating around, a la the 5 related articles at the end of [44] - all dealing with the work, just in "Hey you can buy this" or "there's a new mode now" form.
  • And to be clear, yeah, I'm not saying that the delete argument is that it was a flop, but the fact it doesn't appear to have done too well is surely the cause for why it's a bit difficult to find sourcing. Don't get me wrong, this is a very borderline notability game, but when the sources are largely not in English but clearly existent, I'd be inclined to kneejerk on the side of keep. SnowFire (talk) 21:34, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, _signed, Rosguill ^talk 16:43, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak keep. In addition to the current sources (of which Siliconera is probably the highest quality site), there's initial announcement reporting from Anime Herald. I'm not familiar with them, but they have a reasonably large set of staff editors? But perhaps more to the point, this was primarily a Japanese release, and so we should be looking for Japanese reportage. Forcing Google to give me what it thinks are Japanese news articles relevant to "星と翼のパラドクス"... reminds me that I do not speak or read Japanese even enough to pretend. But I don't think there has to be very much more there than we're already seeing to drag this over the line. Lubal (talk) 19:11, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• @Lubal: I mean generally we wait til sources are *found* first instead of assuming, that's kinda the problem. Also the Siliconera and Anime Herald sources aren't giving reception; the only one that is at all is the one Famitsu source Snow found, and that's not enough for an article...--Kung Fu Man (talk) 19:23, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• I'm not sure I quite read our notability guidelines to imply that only sources giving explicit reception of the game would contribute to notability. But that aside, I have tried to bumble through the Japanese sources with the help of Google Translate. As a disclaimer, it's going to be exceptionally hard for me to judge the reliability of some of these sources due to the language barrier. This, from ASCII Games seems particularly promising. It's a bylined full-length article about the initial demo reveal of the game, including review elements and details like the arcade game per-play cost that are absent from our current coverage; the site has some sort of editorial review policy but I cannot speak to its overall source quality. This is the online footprint of what appears to be a print magazine with what looks like a two-page spread about the game, although the way this is presented, I can't actually translate the pages themselves. This is a full length interview with the game's creators; I'm aware that there's some contention about to what extent, if any, interviews contribute to crossing inclusion thresholds. I'm confident there are more, as my capacity to search for, read, and evaluate this material is very poor. Lubal (talk) 20:12, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak keep per above and Lubal's sources. There's some sources to work with here. I'm not a huge fan of using previews for Reception, but I think it's better than nothing since the preview version of the game sounds pretty close to the released version. And per above, it really would not surprise me if there exists better sources buried in Japan-only magazines and the like that are difficult to find due to releasing long after the heyday of Japanese arcades and just a year before COVID would wreck the remnants of the arcade market. SnowFire (talk) 01:53, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Snow I'll be honest, I really don't like the approach of WP:SOURCESMUSTEXIST simply because it's Japan. There's been plenty of times that's been disappointing. I'm not going to fight on it but it's just not a particular route I'm fond of given the track record is all.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 01:56, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Even though no support for deletion has arrived, both !votes say weak keep and the other commenter is only leaning keep. More discussion could help. Even if the article survives AfD, though, it will clearly need improvement.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 21:24, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Doczilla: To clarify, the commenter "leaning" keep is the same as the second editor !voting weak keep (i.e. me), so there are two other editors chiming in, not three. Also, the article was improved if you check the history and one of the sources included, meaning that there is a Reception section now (when the AFD nomination was written there wasn't one). And while it was a "weak" keep, it's not that weak, to be clear. If I truly had no opinion I wouldn't have !voted, the "weak" part is simply acknowledging that the topic is borderline. SnowFire (talk) 03:31, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

San Jose Taiko

San Jose Taiko (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Scan for Korea-related AfDs

Sekolah Kebangsaan Bukit Tinggi, Kedah

Sekolah Kebangsaan Bukit Tinggi, Kedah (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Semi-advertorialized article about a primary school, not properly sourced as passing notability criteria for schools. As always, schools (especially at the primary level) are not "inherently" notable just for existing, and have to be shown to pass WP:GNG on reliable source coverage about them in media or books -- but this is "referenced" entirely to the school's own self-published website about itself, which is not support for notability, and is written in a tone that resembles the school writing about itself ("in the center, you'll find an open book and a scroll, representing the thirst for knowledge and the quest to uncover it") rather than objective third-party analysis. Bearcat (talk) 15:22, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Schools and Malaysia. Bearcat (talk) 15:22, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

DXN (brand)

DXN (brand) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Upon a meticulous review of the DXN (brand) article, I propose it be considered for deletion for several compelling reasons:

Firstly, the article is excessively reliant on primary sources, including the company's own website, press releases, and internal documentation. This overdependence raises substantial concerns regarding the neutrality and verifiability of the information presented. Wikipedia's guidelines underscore the necessity of secondary sources to furnish an objective and thorough examination of the subject matter.

Secondly, the article is deficient in adequate third-party reliable sources that could independently corroborate the company's claims and establish its notability. For an article to adhere to Wikipedia's notability standards, it must be underpinned by significant coverage from reputable, independent sources. The present article fails to satisfy this criterion, thus undermining its credibility.

Moreover, the content of the article exhibits a promotional tone. DXN operates as a direct selling company, also recognised as multi-level marketing (MLM), which frequently prompts concerns about the legitimacy and ethical practices of such business models. The promotional nature of the article is likely to mislead readers into perceiving it as an endorsement rather than an impartial encyclopaedic entry. Wikipedia's neutrality policy dictates that articles should not function as advertisements or endorsements. LearnologyX (talk) 12:12, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Medicine, and Malaysia. Skynxnex (talk) 14:30, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak delete. Most of the sources cited are controlled by the company itself. Of the rest, Direct Selling News is a trade publication; DXN's mere presence on their list could be cited in an article, but doesn't establish notability. The only significant coverage here is from the Sri Lankan Daily News; that article is archived here. I have concerns that this is undisclosed paid news, like is common in Indian media. It certainly reads like a press release rather than independent reporting. For non-cited sources, quite a few about the company's products' purported health benefits are excluded by WP:MEDRS. Something like this Elsevier publication (p. 642) is a good start, but even I don't think this rises to significant coverage, and it seems I tend more liberal than consensus on that regard. I do not know enough about accessing Malaysian media to know if we're missing quality sources there. Lubal (talk) 16:27, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Creditability of Daily Express is in question when it is open to feature Video, Story on their website from the volunteers. There are two articles (1 & 2) published in the Daily Express that read more like press releases than news coverage. LearnologyX (talk) 17:24, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  I hadn't mentioned the cited Daily Express source because I didn't think it did anything to establish notability, but I'm pretty sure it's just a repackaged press release anyway. Lubal (talk) 19:59, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Finance, Advertising, India, and Europe. LearnologyX (talk) 16:56, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment: The revision history for the article DXN (brand) demonstrates multiple significant issues that warrant its deletion. The article has been subject to numerous actions due to copyright violations, as indicated by the changes made to hide revisions under RD1 (Violations of copyright policy) on 11:21, 9 April 2021; 01:15, 8 April 2021; 00:08, 23 September 2020; and 14:16, 26 January 2020. Furthermore, the page was temporarily protected on 16:34, 27 November 2018, due to persistent sock puppetry, necessitating restrictions on editing to autoconfirmed or confirmed users. These recurring issues underscore significant non-compliance with Wikipedia's content policies, including verifiability, reliable sourcing, and adherence to copyright law. Given the repeated infractions and the need for administrative intervention, deletion of the article is justified to uphold the quality and integrity of the encyclopedia. Furthermore, an attempt to clean up criticism was made in the past, which can be another sign of advertising and an effort to maintain a good reputation for the brand, which was removed from the article. LearnologyX (talk) 17:08, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletions

• Wawa Zainal (via WP:PROD on 9 September 2023)

Aayush Chandra Regmi

Aayush Chandra Regmi (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Fails WP:GNG ―Panamitsu (talk) 22:38, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: PROMO for a non-notable healer. I don't find any sources discussing them; what's given now appears to be PR items. There are zero hits in Google. Oaktree b (talk) 23:53, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: a promotional article, a blog, and an article in NEpali that I can't judge. Pretty marginal. No WP:GNG. Ira Leviton (talk)
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Health and fitness, and Nepal. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:03, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: No pin of notability. Doesn't meet WP:GNG. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 10:59, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. I found that this article is promotional in nature with no significant coverage in reliable and independent sources to establish notability. Best Regards! Fade258 (talk) 15:44, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Speedy Delete: per Wikipedia:Fringe theories FuzzyMagma (talk) 19:26, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Nepal Janahit Party (via WP:PROD on 5 February 2024)

Opay

Opay (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Fails WP:NCORP. While on first glance there is significant coverage, all of it is press release, churnalism, routine announcements, or otherwise sources that fails WP:ORGCRIT. Even Forbes was generated by the company itself and the rest look like a well-run press campaign. Absent in-depth independent coverage, I do not see how this meets notability guidelines. CNMall41 (talk) 17:01, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Finance, Companies, Egypt, Nigeria, and Pakistan. CNMall41 (talk) 17:02, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment first of all, if you were a member of the Wiki project Nigeria. You will know that Opay is a notable bank. Talking about the sources, Opay is not a company that goes to the news to create well run press campaign. The news generates content base on the company notability as a global bank. To all the WP you cited, they all said a company is presumed to be notable which they gave their reasons and I don’t see how does the company fails to meet them. The article subject even also, passed WP:GNG.--Gabriel (talk to me ) 17:31, 5 June 2024 (UTC).[reply]

Thanks, Gabriel601. Unfortunately, notability is not based on knowledge of WikiProject Nigeria, nor is it based on it being a global bank. NCORP (And GNG) require significant coverage in reliable sources, independent of the subject. Are you able to point out the references that meet WP:ORGCRIT? I will take another look and if they meet the criteria withdraw the nomination. --CNMall41 (talk) 18:41, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I know too well notability is not based on WikiProject Nigeria, nor it being a global bank. But I am still surprise about what you are saying about it not being significant in a reliable source, independent of the subject. I have to start reading Wikipedia:Trivial mentions to understand what is significant coverage and reading WP:IIS to understand what is independent and I don't see how Opay fails to meet them. CBN stops Opay, Palmpay, others from onboarding new customers Is this not an independent source ? Because it's not talking about Opay directly but a Central bank stoping them. And when talk about significant coverage in reliable sources they are many out there on Google. It's a bank, so I don't think we should be expecting more than anything else than the government interaction. There is no difference between Opay, Kuda Bank and Moniepoint Inc. that was nominated for an AFD but was keep. Gabriel (talk to me ) 20:29, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: So while reviewing AFCs, I encountered this draft and wanted to decline it. However, due to the Opay's operations in Nigeria and Egypt (in addition to Pakistan), I refrained from making a definitive judgment, as I was uncertain about the extent of coverage in sources from these 02 countries. But as far as Pakistani sources are concerned, the organization does not meet WP:NORG as I could not find sig/in-depth coverage in Pakistani RS. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 18:42, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Where does wikipedia state that if you can't find RS in Pakistani an article should be deleted? I have never even been to Pakistan so I didn't focus to write anything much about it. And from what I have seen so far I don't think the popularity it has gained in Nigeria, Pakistani nor Egypt are far better than it, so I didn't focus to get RS from those country.--Gabriel (talk to me ) 19:10, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Gabriel601, My assessment was based on the Pakistani sources cited in the article. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 19:16, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Because your assessment was based on the Pakistani sources made you voted delete. That sounds so funny, meanwhile, the sources from even the Pakistani section are not just mere blogs but newspapers which are qualified to verify if a statement is right according to WP:NEWSORG and WP:REPUTABLE. Gabriel (talk to me ) 19:32, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Gabriel601, Instead of spending your time mocking me, why not suggest some strong coverage that you believe can help establish WP:GNG? Simple! —Saqib (talk I contribs) 19:40, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am not mocking you. I am just trying to understand your point which doesn't seem to be clear by Wikipedia. Because wikipedia is not just base on only Pakistani RS if that has been a reason you have been declining other editors article. Just like you said you would have declined Opay base on the Pakistani RS. Gabriel (talk to me ) 19:48, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Gabriel601, That's not quite what I meant but I don't think I need to explain further. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 19:59, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ahmed Mohiyuddin

Ahmed Mohiyuddin (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

I couldn't even find ROTM coverage, much less sig/in-depth coverage, so clearly fails GNG. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 14:46, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 14:46, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Police-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:49, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fouzia Bhatti

Fouzia Bhatti (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

I am unable to find sig,/in-depth coverage on the subject in RS. The BLP appears to be PROMO and contains WP:OR. The fact that 85% of the content was added by two SPAs John maxel & Mehermehemehr suggesting a potential COI. Courtesy thanks to @Crosji: for flagging this BLP. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 22:13, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 22:13, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Women, and Poetry. Shellwood (talk) 22:51, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: Various social media sites are about all that pop up and there seems to be someone in the WHO with a similar name, neither of which helps for notability Oaktree b (talk) 23:14, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fashion Central

Fashion Central (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

This is clearly PROMO, created by a now blocked sock puppet. It hasn't received sig/ in-depth coverage in RS, aside from some churnalism or paid coverage. Furthermore, it is not even a magazine as the article claims, but rather a boutique or maybe some e-commerce store. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 12:02, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 12:02, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fashion and Websites. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:24, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ustani Jee

Ustani Jee (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Fails to meet GNG as i couldn't find sig/in depth coverage such as reviews etc. All I could find is coverage with trivial mentions or some ROTM coverage like this and this..The page was previously nominated for deletion but was saved because socks associated with Pakistanpedia voted to keep it. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 10:14, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 10:14, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak Delete Someone can recreate this if needed. It's been six years since the last AFD, you'd think there would have been some references found by now if this was notable. Royal Autumn Crest (talk) 10:18, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:47, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep: coverage shows some media attention. If judged insufficient, redirect to Angeline Malik#As a director. Opposed to deletion. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 11:06, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment A redirect per Mushy Yank's recommendation seems like a reasonable compromise. Royal Autumn Crest (talk) 18:30, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - redirect: Redirect per Mushy Yank's recommendation looks good. Cossde (talk) 13:17, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

SadaPay

SadaPay (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Every reference is PR and churnalism. Every reference is a PR announcement. Fails WP:NCORP and the key tenet of WP:V. This is WP:ADMASQ. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 05:21, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Finance, Business, Pakistan, and Turkey. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 05:21, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: Fails WP:NCORP. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 08:34, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep: I've nominated for deletion the BLP of the founder of Sadapay, but I believe this article about the company should be kept. Considering the sign./in-depth press coverage the company has garnered - such as Pakistan Today, Pakistan Today, Bloomberg. Express Tribune - the company may meet WP:GNG. Fwiw, it is Pakistan's most-funded fintech. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 11:30, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Every single reference is regurgitated PR. With this referencing it fails. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 12:05, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Timtrent, Well the coverage provided by Pakistan Today consists of investigative stories rather than press releases. And, Bloomberg typically doesn't cover Pakistani companies unless they are making some impacts. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 12:14, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  The first Pakistan Today ref is a lightly-rephrased press release. Compare this and this. The second, of course, is an entirely-routine funding announcement failing WP:ORGTRIV. —Cryptic 14:15, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Cryptic, Alright, you've sold me. Count me in! —Saqib (talk I contribs) 15:23, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  @Saqib Did you mean only to strike your !vote and not enter a different opinion? 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 16:31, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - the subject meets the WP:ORGCRIT. Mfarazbaig (talk) 13:41, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  @Mfarazbaig The references must show this. They do not. Your argument is WP:ILIKEIT which carries no weight in this discussion 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 16:23, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Two years ago we deleted this because it was almost entirely unsourced and the only sources anybody could find were press releases and routine announcements. Now we have a new article with mostly those same sources in them - not even new marketing material and reports of funding, but the same ones that were available and rejected before. The few that postdate the deletion are no better: Ref 7 is an announcement of an acquisition consisting almost entirely of quotes with the remaining two sentences verbatim from a press release; ref 8 is better-written, but still an announcement of the same acquisition and still routine; and ref 9 is an unreliable piece by a "Forbes contributor". The lack of improvement is so stark that I seriously considered G4ing it again. Delete. —Cryptic 14:15, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep just a quick browse I found references articles that are not press release.--Cube b3 (talk) 15:09, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Well, then, tell us what they are and we can consider them. I'm willing to be convinced. I'm even, within reason, willing to help you convince me! But with neither evidence nor analysis, bare assertions like yours and Mfarazbaig's (the article creator) above are worth nada. —Cryptic 20:16, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    @Cube b3 I'm in total agreement with @Cryptic on this. Convince us. Otherwise this is a worthless !vote, which I am sure is not what you intended. I did a search, quite a detailed one, and found none. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 11:50, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment: Any editor may, during this discussion,especially when they declare that they have foiund good new references, improve the article and ask for it to be reconsidered under Wikipedia:The Heymann Standard once improved. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 17:50, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Brandon Timinsky

Brandon Timinsky (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

The subject is known for founding SadaPay but lacks sig./in-depth coverage from RS. The available sources appear to be either unreliable or paid coverage. I had same concerns back in 2020 and persist to date. Fwiw, the BLP was created by a SPA Llohcs who also edited BLPs of people related to SadaPay. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 17:40, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 17:40, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and Florida. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:42, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. ROTM entrepreneur. Fails WP:GNG. 188.29.129.61 (talk) 19:44, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: No independent coverage found for this person. all items are PR/promo items. I don't see notability outside of SadaPay, perhaps merge there if needed. Oaktree b (talk) 21:01, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: Promo puff. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 21:37, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: WP:ROTM serial entrepreneur, something that always suggests a fluff piece and a WP:BIO failure. And so it is 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 12:08, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Heer Da Hero

Heer Da Hero (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

I couldn't find much about this drama in RS except for some ROTM coverage like this in DAWN and coverage like this in Daily Times, which is churnalism and also falls under WP:NEWSORGINDIA. We need solid coverage to prove GNG, not just trivial mentions or ROTM coverage. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 16:36, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 16:36, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 16:44, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to Amar_Khan#As_writer: Coverage including some that contains critical assessment is imv enough to keep this but to avoid long discussions that have taken place during other Afds of Pakistani-related films/actors/series etc, I am suggesting this as alternative to deletion. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 17:45, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep meets WP:GNG. Coverage in Daily Times ([45]) and Dawn ([46]) is enough. Both are staff written articles. 188.29.129.61 (talk) 19:47, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • 188.29.129.61, I did include both of these coverage in my nomination, and I explained why they weren't sufficient to pass the GNG . —Saqib (talk I contribs) 20:32, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bad Gumaan

Bad Gumaan (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

I couldn't even find ROTM coverage, much less sig/in-depth coverage, so fails GNG. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 16:20, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 16:20, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 16:45, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to Momina Duraid#Television: Producer -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 17:53, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Shahzada Ahsan Ashraf

Shahzada Ahsan Ashraf (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Back in 2018, there was a brief discussion about whether caretaker cabinet level positions automatically confer WP:N. The consensus was that they do not, and one has to pass the GNG to have a bio. Based on that discussion, the subject of this BLP does not fall under WP:POLITICIAN and must meet GNG, which he currently does not. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 16:10, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 16:10, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and Politicians. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:46, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of programs broadcast by Hum TV

List of programs broadcast by Hum TV (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Fails WP:NLIST and is WP:NOTTVGUIDE. It has not "been discussed as a group or set by independent reliable sources" as references verify the shows but do not talk about the group as a whole. There are nine current programs that are sourced which can easily be placed in the Hum TV page if necessary. History of the page also shows this has been the target of socks and COI since 2017 from Hum TV. While not a reason to delete, the list only stands to promote the station. CNMall41 (talk) 18:31, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, Lists, Asia, Pakistan, Middle East, Europe, and United States of America. CNMall41 (talk) 18:32, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep: detailed article about a notable network: see WP:SPLITLIST. If a merge into the main article was an improvement, I would not be opposed but it would be an issue. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 19:13, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It is not a detailed article unfortunately. It is a list. If it is a problem to merge per SPLITLIST, then a redirect would work. However, it would need to be notable per NLIST to have a standalone page. I looked and could not find reliable sources that talk about the list as a grouping but I have been proven wrong before if someone can provide those sources. --CNMall41 (talk) 20:10, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I would tend to believe that, whenever the list format is appropriate, a list can be a detailed page on any given subject mentioned briefly in a section of another article. The subject is obviously a subtopic of Hum TV, it would be difficult to argue otherwise. See Template Main list (which uses the word Main where "Detailed" is to be understood). See also the template For Timeline, similar. If you want to redirect and merge, sure, if all agree and size is not an issue; but this type of page is pretty standard, though, by the way. Look at the categories and the pages they contain....

For sources, you have for example, https://internationalrasd.org/journals/index.php/pjhss/article/download/1259/936/9962 ; or see Forging the Ideal Educated Girl: The Production of Desirable Subjects in Muslim South Asia (2018). But I consider WP:SPLITLIST to be the applicable section of the guideline and the fact that it's a pretty standard approach to programs of notable networks should imv encourage us to keep that list. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 21:00, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"I would tend to believe that, whenever the list format is appropriate, a list can be a detailed page on any given subject mentioned briefly in a section of another article" - I like that thinking and generally it seems acceptable on its face. The problem is that the list must meet notability guidelines. If not, then it should stay mentioned briefly on the notable network page. Here there are only nine programs and they do not all appear to be original programs, just current programming. I do like "a pretty standard approach to programs of notable networks" as you mentioned above. They can easily be covered by the category as opposed to standalone list (for those that are "original programmin" - the rest are just TV Guide listings) in my opinion. --CNMall41 (talk) 22:09, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: WP:NLIST applies without any special exception and that in general lists of programs, where needed, can be handled within the article about the channel, and don't generally merit a stand-alone list article, unless such a list would pass the scrutiny per WP:NLIST. WP is not a WP:NOTDIRECTORY nor WP:NOTTVGUIDE —Saqib (talk I contribs) 19:59, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to Hum TV as WP:ATD. 2A00:23C6:139B:A101:78CA:7B5:3148:9172 (talk) 00:45, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep : I suggest to Keep the Article. As it a large number of notable program's are listed on it.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 2402:ad80:ab:6d1:1:0:713f:e3e2 (talk • contribs)

Arguments to avoid: WP:NOTINHERITED. --—Saqib (talk I contribs) 17:51, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Gul Wareen

Gul Wareen (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Disputed draftification. Moved to mainspace immediate after being declined and pushed back for further work. Since there is the potential for notability to be proven I suggest the outcome be to draftify. I have also nominated the picture currently featured since the licence is in doubt. Fails WP:NMUSICIAN as presented here. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 12:39, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: When I encountered this BLP, rather than immediately nom it for deletion, I decided to give it a chance by draftifying it. However, the BLPs creator Pashtonyar moved it back to the main NS after the review was declined. The subject does not satisfy the GNG as well NSINGER, and the BLP currently relies heavily on trivial mentions and ROTM coverage. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 13:42, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Bands and musicians, and Pakistan. Skynxnex (talk) 14:35, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: per Saqib. Cocobb8 (💬 talk • ✏️ contribs) 23:47, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Muhammad Saleem

Muhammad Saleem (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

fails general notability guideline and notability guidelines for people. likely autobiographical. ltbdl (talk) 06:47, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Pakistan. ltbdl (talk) 06:47, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators and Medicine. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:49, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: Fails WP:GNG. The BLP currently relies on unreliable sources. Created by a SPA so likely COI. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 08:18, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete fails WP:GNG. Good find. 86.130.244.141 (talk) 00:40, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ghulam Rasool Saeedi

Ghulam Rasool Saeedi (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

So earlier today, I moved this bio to the draft NS because I didn't find the subject WP:N enough. However, the creator Youknowwhoistheman moved it back to the main NS without any discussion. So, I think it's reasonable to nom. it for deletion. From what I can tell, the subject doesn't meet WP:GNG or even AUTHOR. Plus, this piece is just a Letter to the editor, so one should simply ignore it when establishing GNG. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 15:03, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 15:03, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep: Thanks for noticing, I think that before putting any new article in draft, it should be given time. So that it can be properly prepared. You put it in draft in a very short time without thinking. Secondly, always try to improve an article before putting it on deletion, rather than nominating it for deletion.

Now coming to the point, is this article really not passing the general notability of Wikipedia, WP:GNG? So, I think you should have done a little more in-depth study. If you search his name in Urdu and English, you will find mention of him in hundreds of books. And there are hundreds of books in which he is mentioned, but he has not come in the world of internet. Which is absolutely right according to Wikipedia policy, for more information you can read WP:Offline.

Yes, it definitely seems to me that the way you put the article in draft in a hurry, it seems as if you have some personal enmity with him.

Thanks, take care! Youknowwhoistheman (talk) 15:44, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Youknowwhoistheman, It's strange that everyone thinks I have some sort of agenda or personal enmity with them. Rest assured, I don't have any personal issues with the subject. He's deceased—may he RIP. Tbh, I didn't want to nominate this for deletion. I wanted to give this bio a chance, which is why I draftified it instead of AfD'g it. However, you moved it back to the main NS - leaving me no other option but to bring it here. So you need to avoid WP:ATA and prove that he either meets GNG or AUTHOR. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 16:03, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Yeah sure, it is left to other editors to decide. again, thanks you! Youknowwhoistheman (talk) 16:13, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors and Islam. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:28, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

* Keep. Meets Wikipedia's notability standards. There is an entry about this person in The Pakistan National Bibliography book from 1975 -- having a subject listed in a national book of biographies is always a good indicator of notability. Second, a Google Scholar search turns up his name referenced in a number of works. Finally, the citations provided in the article appear to be solid overall and support notability. --SouthernNights (talk) 20:56, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep per SouthernNights. WP:BEFORE was not done properly. A simple search in Urdu newspapers brings a lot of coverage: [47], [48]. Meets WP:NSCHOLAR. Bad nomination which should be withdrawn asap. 2A00:23C6:139B:A101:78CA:7B5:3148:9172 (talk) 00:43, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hellenized Middle East

Hellenized Middle East (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

"Hellenized Middle East" is a made-up term which is not used in scholarship on the Hellenistic Period (a search of google books shows a few uses referring to Greek presence in the Near East, but without any consistency [49]: one book on Gandharan Buddhism, a couple on the Middle Ages, one on Cavafy in the 19th century. This is not a term used with any consistency in scholarship). The article consists of a WP:OR map, which collapses Ashokan India into the Hellenistic world and a bunch of material largely mirrored from Hellenistic Period. Furius (talk) 00:44, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Egypt, Pakistan, Middle East, India, and Greece. Skynxnex (talk) 02:11, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as WP:SYNTH. Mccapra (talk) 04:45, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  You made this comment when the only section was the list of Hellenistic regions. Your claim that the Hellenistic Middle East as a concept is false, is incorrect, and not classified under WP:SYNTH. Aearthrise (talk) 12:47, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment: the main issue here is not the title, but the duplication of material that is already covered elsewhere. The topic itself appears to be legitimate, whatever title it's given, and unless there's a specific title that is generally applied to the topic, any reasonably descriptive title would do. There may well be better titles, but that would not be a justification for deletion: it would justify moving the article to another title. Replacing a map with a more accurate one would not be an argument for deletion. So the only remaining issue seems to be duplication of existing material in other articles.

It sounds as though most of this is covered under "Hellenistic Period", in which case a "technical merge" might be in order. By that I mean a basic review to make sure that any useful and verifiable material from here is included there or at other appropriate articles. If so, then simply indicate that the article was merged there, and then change this title into a redirect, as a plausible search formulation. There may also be some details here that ought to be mentioned in other articles, and aren't yet, in which case a full merge may be done. But even if everything is already fully covered, it would technically be a merge as long as one makes sure of that before changing this into a redirect. P Aculeius (talk) 09:34, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. WP:CFORK. Poor page with poor and unverifiable sources that do not help identify implications that is explicitly stated by the source. The creator of the page inserted opinion by using content from other pages and used it in a circular bit of logic. Page is WP:SYNTH. RangersRus (talk) 11:47, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  You made this comment when the only section was the list of Hellenistic regions. Your claim that the Hellenistic Middle East as a concept is false, is incorrect, and not classified under WP:SYNTH.

  As for the fork, I am working add more content into the Hellenistic regions section; the list came from Partition of Babylon, because it gave all of the regions that persisted throughout the cultural area's lifetime. Aearthrise (talk) 12:49, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  I have removed the "Fork" information borrowed from the Partition of Babylon page, which pertained to the first rulers of the regions, and now the Hellenistic regions list section only includes the region names and important cultural tidbits from those regions. Aearthrise (talk) 09:45, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Strange title, bizarre geographic scope, WP:OR and WP:SYNTH content, WP:CFORK.
  • Scholarship on ancient history uses "Near East" rather than "Middle East"; both terms are of course eurocentric, with "Middle East" reflecting Western European strategic concerns during the last years of the Ottoman Empire. Describing much of the area under Seleucid control in the hellenistic period as "hellenised" begs the question of whether that impact was more than superficial and brief.
  • The inclusion of all South Asia is bizarre; the Maurya empire is not usually described as hellenised (and the map shows it extending strangely east and south). Mapping Greece as hellenised is silly.
  • The text largely consists of an editor opining, without benefit of sources, on who became the ruler of which area after the death of Alexander, largely with no more substance than that. Any reader wanting to know about the area during the hellenistic period will be disappointed and frustrated; they will already be better served by Diadochi for successors and by Hellenistic period, including Hellenistic period#Hellenistic Near East, for the regions. NebY (talk) 14:00, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    You made this comment when the only section was the list of Hellenistic regions. Your claim that the Hellenistic Middle East as a concept is false, is incorrect, and not classified under WP:OR or WP:SYNTH.

    Further, you make an argument about "eurocentricity", but you forget that this is English wikipedia and Middle East is the English term for these areas. Aversion to the word "Middle East" is simply your opinion, and not a serious point.

    You also say that the map is bizarre because it includes South Asia and Greece; I argue the map is a good illustration of the area that generated cultural syncretism, especially for the allied and interinfluential nature of the region.

    For the last point, I circle you back to the first sentence of this response. Aearthrise (talk) 12:57, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment: someone seems to be working hard to improve the article currently, and the title has been changed, perhaps in response to what has been said so far here. Perhaps these edits will make a difference to whether this article should be kept or merged (I still don't think deletion is the correct means of dealing with a content fork, if it still is one after the current revision process is done). It may be a good idea to get Aearthrise's take on the content fork issue, and whether he or she has a plan to resolve that, or any of the other remaining issues mentioned in this discussion. P Aculeius (talk) 10:25, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Said editor has been adding material about citizenship in the Roman Empire and the Umayyad Caliphate. It's bizarre synth. Furius (talk) 21:24, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  @Aearthrise was notified about this discussion; I'm not sure why they've not engaged directly... Furius (talk) 21:26, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  You only notified me 7 days after you created this thread. Aearthrise (talk) 13:03, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting this once to get editors' assessment of article changes. But if there are editors who are opposed to Deletion, please suggest a simple alternative outcome that a closer can carry out. AFD discussions are not resolved by complicated rewriting scenarios. The options are limited with AFD closures and they are decided by consensus so if you are arguing for something complicated, you need to win over your fellow editors to your point-of-view which usually requires simplification.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:03, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• The topic is not entirely off (the argument that the Hellenistic period extends to the Arab conquests for the Roman East is certainly not new), but currently it reads like a hodgepodge of factoids without a clear plan in evidence, and there are a lot of red flags of bizarre factual inaccuracies (the map, Alexander's conquests 'in the 2nd century BC', the 'state of Judaea', to name a few glaring ones) that lead me to question whether the authors have the expertise required to do this correctly. I am thus also for delete; this should first be properly developed in someone's sandbox, beginning with gathering the relevant literature, before a move to mainspace.Constantine ✍ 12:49, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Your gripe here is that you believe that this article doesn't have a plan, and claim three "red flags" one being the map showing the region of cultural syncretism. Why is the map a red flag? It easily shows the area of the original regions in the Hellenistic Middle East, and the two cultural influences that made the most impact in the early days of the area, this is the area described by Ashoka of culturally allied lands.
  • For your other two "flags", it's a simple typo of 2nd century with "3rd" century BC, and writing the word "state of Judea" instead of "province of Judea". I implore you to give a real example of "factual inaccuracies" instead of claiming them from superficial semantics.
  • You also say that this article is a hodgepodge of factoids, but the evidence follows the theme of the Hellenistic cultural area and its unique cultural aspects; the section with the partition of Partition of Babylon region list can be refined, as right now it deals with the people who began ruling these regions and has some added information on the kingdoms, and Greco Buddhism. Aearthrise (talk) 13:21, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    The problem with the map is that it comes from a source for territories mentioned by Asoka as having been conquered by the dharma, but is being used to illustrate "the Hellenistic Middle East, Greece, and Ashoka's Empire in cultural syncretism, 260 BC". These are two very different things and there are no sources to support using the image for the latter. The idea that Ashokan India was part of the Hellenistic world (or the Middle East for that matter) is not mainstream. Furius (talk) 17:14, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    You're making two different points in this paragraph about the map:

    • One that Ashoka's declaration of whom he considers allies and peers in dharma, naming rulers of the Hellenistic Kingdoms, is not the same as a declaration of "cultural syncretism". I argue Ashoka's declaration is exactly evidence of the intercultural relation of Greeks and Indians of the time:

    Indian Cultural Heritage Perspective For Tourism (2008), L. K. Singh, page 34:

    The Edicts of Ashoka, which talk of friendly relations, give names of both Antiochus of the Seleucid Empire and Ptolemy III of Egypt. But the fame of the Mauryan Empire was widespread from the time that Ashoka's grandfather Chandragupta Maurya met Seleucus Nicator, the founder of the Seleucid Dynasty, and engineered their celebrated peace.

    Hinduism: Challenges | Interaction with Buddhism, Jainism and The Greeks (2024), Ashok Mishra, page 221:

    A mission was sent to the Hellenistic Kingdoms in the West, including Syria, Egypt, Greece. According to ancient sources, Ashoka sent a delegation of Buddhist monks to these regions, where they engaged in dialogues with the local people and established Buddhist communities.

    And Man Created God: A History of the World at the Time of Jesus (2013), Selina O'Grady, page 416:

    According to many scholars, it was the coming together of Indian and Greek culture that created the very conditions that would give birth to Mahayana Buddhism. It was here that Indian abstraction met Greek individualism to create a more personal, emotional religion that in its turn would profoundly influence the mergence of Christianity. This Indo-Greek syncretism was reflected in the great statues of Guatama Buddha that the Kushan rulers erected throughout their growing Empire.

    • Your second point, "The idea that Ashokan India was part of the Hellenistic world (or the Middle East for that matter) is not mainstream", is not claimed by the map at all; the map simply describes the area of cultural syncretism. There clearly had been a long intercultural influence of the Mauryans with Hellenistic States since Chandragupta married Princess Helena of the Seleucid dynasty.

    Indian History NCERT Notes Class 6-12 (Old+New) For Civil Services Examination (2023), Rajendra Prasad, page 46:

    Seleucus married his daughter Helena to Chandragupta Maurya. After Chandragupta, his son Bindusura became the ruler of the Mauryan Empire. During the reign of Bindusura, Antiochus, the ruler of Syria, sent dry figs, wine to Bindusura. Deimachus, an ambassador of Antiochus I was at the court of Bindusara. Ptolemy II Philadelphus sent an ambassador named Dynosis to he court of Bindusara.

    Indian Cultural Heritage Perspective For Tourism (2008), L. K. Singh, page 36:

    A "marital alliance" had been concluded between Seleucus Nicator and Ashoka's grandfather Chandragupta Maurya in 303 BC... This was a common practice for formalizing alliances in the Hellenistic world. There is thus a possibility that Ashoka was partly of Hellenic descent, if Chandragupta's son, Bindusura, was the object of the marriage. This remains a hypothesis as there are no known more detailed descriptions of the exact nature of the marital alliance, although this is quite symptomatic of the generally good relationship between the Hellenistic world and Ashoka.

  Aearthrise (talk) 10:58, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  The leap you make from "allies and peers in the dharma" to cultural syncretism is WP:SYNTH. None of your cited sources link the two things. O'Grady does talk about Indo-Greek syncretism, but she's talking about the Kushans. The caption does not mention what the map was actually drawn to depict at all. On your second point, depicting all these places in a single colour, together, without any borders presents them as a united region. Furius (talk) 12:05, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Your repeated claim of "synth" is totally unfounded, not only from earlier comments, but this one too. It's obvious from art, architecture, written records, that the Indian and Greek cultures influenced each other. That is the literal definition of "syncretism", and to deny so is to play a game of ignorance. Beyond that, to say O'Grady is referring to the Kushans is a total misreading of the quote; she mentions the Kushans only as an example of the presence of the aforementioned syncretism in the great statues of Gautama Buddha they erected.

  Furthermore, you say the map's caption does not mention what the map was drawn to depict; So what? You act like repurposing content for use in another topic is something wrong. Regardless of its origins, it's a clean map that helps illustrate the idea of the culturally allied region, which is the point of Ashoka's declaration of who he considers Dharmic peers.

  You say "On your second point". No, this was your second point Furius, and I responded to it by showing that your previous claim about the nature of the map was incorrect and your own invention: neither the map nor the caption claimed anything you said.

  Now, because you don't want to admit your error, you're changing the argument to that because the map represents the three named regions as one unit, it makes the map wrong. If I showed a map of World War II depicting the European allies as one unit (being the cleanest map found for use) to illustrate the early British contribution to the war, and wrote "map of Britain, France, and Poland in alliance, 1939" would you also say it is wrong and "Synth" because it includes a single color, borderless map of the allied countries? I wouldn't.

  As a closing comment: just today, I have encountered another map that has colors and borders. I've changed the map; so now, you don't even have this point to dispute. All of your points, the ones that led you to make this article deletion request, have been defeated. Aearthrise (talk) 22:16, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Well, good that you've changed the map. You say "It's obvious from art, architecture, written records, that the Indian and Greek cultures influenced each other." That's true.* That is why we have articles on Greco-Buddhism and Indo-Greek art (and Buddhist influences on Christianity on the limits of that syncretism). It remains very unclear what this article claims to cover that isn't already covered by those articles and by Hellenistic period. It remains unclear why there should be an article on cultural syncretism in the Hellenistic period that covers the Middle East (and India) but not Europe or the Mediterranean (as Hellenistic period does). It remains the case that "Hellenistic Middle East" is not a term that exists with a consistent meaning in scholarship (yes, google books shows that it does appear, but those citations are all using it to refer to different things from one another) Furius (talk) 00:16, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  You are reaching for straws and now making arguments from ignorance. You repeat the same silly phrasing "it remains" three times:

  "It remains very unclear what this article claims to cover that isn't already covered by those articles and by Hellenistic period."

  You are saying that because the Hellenistic period article exists, we should delete this article. Following your logic, we should also delete "Roman Africans" because the article shares points with Africa (Roman province) and Romanization (cultural). That's stupid.

  "It remains unclear why there should be an article on cultural syncretism in the Hellenistic period that covers the Middle East (and India) but not Europe or the Mediterranean (as Hellenistic period does)."

  You are saying this article should be deleted because it covers the specific Hellenistic Middle East area rather than including Europe or the Mediterranean. That's also stupid.

  "It remains the case that "Hellenistic Middle East" is not a term that exists with a consistent meaning in scholarship (yes, google books shows that it does appear, but those citations are all using it to refer to different things from one another)."

  You have not proven this point at all, and are just claiming it without providing any evidence. Clearly from the work on this article, this region is definable and has certain traits: it's an area of syncretism between Greek and Middle Eastern cultures. The area changed over time, in traits and even religion, and this article reflects that.

  If you want to disprove it, show what citations you're referring to that aren't consistent with the definition. Aearthrise (talk) 09:33, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  * It's moot, since the map has been changed, but what I've found synthetic is not the claim that these two cultures influenced one another in Central Asia, but that that syncretism between Greeks and India was characteristic of the Middle East as a whole, which is what a map captioned "Map of the Hellenistic Middle East, Greece, and Ashoka's Empire in cultural syncretism, 260 BC" implies; there's very limited evidence for Greco-Indian syncretism in Mesopotamia, Egypt, Anatolia (Ashoka sent some embassies, which none of the recipients considered important enough to record). Furius (talk) 00:16, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  If it's moot, then why are you arguing? Are you full of hot air and want to let it out?

  "...but what I've found synthetic is not the claim that these two cultures influenced one another in Central Asia, but that that syncretism between Greeks and India was characteristic of the Middle East as a whole,Map of the Hellenistic Middle East, Greece, and Ashoka's Empire in cultural syncretism, 260 BC" implies; there's very limited evidence for Greco-Indian syncretism in Mesopotamia, Egypt, Anatolia (Ashoka sent some embassies, which none of the recipients considered important enough to record)"

  This is another stupid comment, and not based in reality. There is nowhere in the phrasing "Map of the Hellenistic Middle East, Greece, and Ashoka's Empire in cultural syncretism, 260 BC" that says Indo-Greek culture was a characteristic of the Middle East as a whole. All it says, is that these regions are in syncretism, i.e. they influence each other. You're extrapolation that the caption implies everywhere in the Middle East had Indo-Greek culture is incorrect, and just another one of your misreadings. Aearthrise (talk) 09:44, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment a lot of these delete comments come from people *BEFORE* this page received so much content, namely Mccapra, RangersRus, and NebY; I was only notified 7 whole days after the creation of this deletion request. Furius originally claimed that Hellenized Middle East is a "made-up term not used in scholarship", although his search clearly showed more than 15 different citations of the term; nevertheless I changed the title to the more common "Hellenistic Middle East", with a plethora of citations. Furius also claims a lot of the material comes from Hellenistic period article, which is completely false. The majority of the content comes from books; the section with information from another article is the region list from the Partition of Babylon page and includes its citations. The map doesn't collapse the Hellenistic world into Ashoka's India, rather it illustrates the region of allied cultural syncretism that helped generate the Hellenistic Middle East. Aearthrise (talk) 13:38, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete and copy to a sandbox, per Constantine. --Kansas Bear (talk) 16:22, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Give a reason why instead of just saying "per Constantine", as his argument hinges on three "red flags": the map, and then two gripes about a typo and a word choice. Aearthrise (talk) 12:45, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

How about you read WP:BLUDGEON. --Kansas Bear (talk) 12:48, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I read it, are you claiming that my request for you to give an elaborated reason is "bludgeoning" you? Aearthrise (talk) 12:53, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You have commented on every delete mentioned here. That is WP:BLUDGEON.

Kurt Behrendt; Pia Brancaccio (2011). Gandharan Buddhism Archaeology, Art, and Texts. UBC Press. p. 10. Doesn't mention Mithraism, Greco-Buddhism, etc. WP:OR

Paul Cartledge (2006). Thermopylae The Battle That Changed the World. ABRAMS, Incorporated. p. 5. Doesn't support, "Alexandria in Egypt, Antioch in Syria, Persepolis in Persia, Bactra in Bactria (Afghanistan), and Sirkap in India became important cultural centers of Hellenistic culture". WP:OR

Ethel E. Ewing, William Oscar Emil Oesterley, James Talboys Wheeler are not WP:RS. "Indian History NCERT Notes Class 6-12 (Old+New) For Civil Services Examination" and travel guides are not considered WP:RS. --Kansas Bear (talk) 13:08, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your claims of "WP:OR" are nothing more than nitpicks on the lede of the article; you are saying that simply mentioning the examples of the Hellenistic religions Greco-Buddhism or Mithraism can't be done because the specific citation is not in the lede (despite the fact that these citations are already present further into the article). Furthermore, in regards to the citations for the cities, all the quotes together at the end sentence of the lede establish the importance of those named Hellenistic cities Alexandria, Antioch, Persepolis, Bactra, Sirkap. The single quote you mentioned only references Persepolis.

You claim Ethel E. Ewing, William Oscar Emil Oesterley, and James Talboys Wheeler are not reliable sources. What makes you say that they're not reliable sources of information? Be specific.

This is the section using the sources you claim are "not reliable": The Hellenistic Middle East was an area that facilitated the exchange of ideas between the cultures of Greece, Persia, Egypt, India, and Africa.^[1] Hellenistic culture was defined by its secular aspect, and facility to absorb elements from non-Greek sources such as local ideas and religion. Hellenists formed this diverse world culture.^[2][3]

Further you claim that "Indian History NCERT Notes Class 6-12 (Old+New) For Civil Services Examination" and "travel guides" are WP:RS, but don't give a reason why; disqualification of travel guides is not mentioned anywhere in the list of reliable source, so show that too.

It seems like you want to make an opinion, but not willing to provide good evidence to support it. Aearthrise (talk) 13:27, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep under current name (or possibly another). The conquest of Alexander the Great led to a significant Hellenic influence on the Middle East. This is worthy of an article on the spread of Greek culture in the Middle East. Peterkingiron (talk) 17:44, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Malaal-e-Yaar

Malaal-e-Yaar (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

I couldn't find sig/in-depth coverage except some ROTM coverage, so fails GNG. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 17:38, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 17:38, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:49, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - it's fairly easy to establish that this was a notable, high-profile production. There might not be any PhD thesis written about its impact on Pakistani literature in the long term, but that would be a bar to high. Most google hits are episodes or link to episodes, but see for example coverage such as [50], [51], [52], [53], [54], [55], [56], etc. --Soman (talk) 00:18, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Most, if not all, are unreliable sources and therefore not enough to establish GNG. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 10:06, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  That's not how notability works. It is different to judge potential sources for substantiating claims in the article mainspace, where unreliable sources may be called into question, as opposed to show media coverage to establish notability. Coverage in tabloids or low-quality sources can very well be used to imply notability. I'd counter-ask, what process of WP:BEFORE did you do perform before nomination for deletion? This was nominated, with a nearly copy-paste deletion rationale from a lot of Pakistan-related AfDs in the past days, within 5 minutes from another AfD. --Soman (talk) 11:57, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Just because I nominated a bunch of pages around the same time doesn't mean I didn't do my homework beforehand. And if my reasons for nominating are similar across different AfDs, it's because the issues with those articles are pretty much the same too. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 12:04, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep significant coverage on google. Significant coverage on google news about "Malaal-e-Yaar" & "Malaal e Yaar". Libraa2019 (talk) 14:16, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Libraa2019, WP:ATA. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 12:16, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to List_of_programs_broadcast_by_Hum_TV#Drama_series: I wouldn't be fiercely opposed to Keep, because there is some coverage (like this https://www.masala.com/tv-reviews/malaal-e-yaar-a-summary-of-the-show-to-date-292294, bylined review) but if all in all it seems insufficient, redirecting it seems a reasonable ATD. A line can be added in the target article. Or more. (It may go without saying but I am opposed to deletion of this) -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 21:31, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, voorts (talk/contributions) 04:01, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I don't see any consensus here yet.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:53, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Shaadi Impossible

Shaadi Impossible (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Fails to meet GNG as i couldn't find sig/in depth coverage such as reviews etc. All I could find is some ROTM coverage like this. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 17:34, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 17:34, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film and Television. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:49, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to List_of_programs_broadcast_by_TV_One_(Pakistan)#Telefilms: (Page for director is a Redirect) -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 21:42, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Toadette^Edit! 02:51, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Same rationale for almost every nomination. I am doubting WP:Before is done or not. Plenty of good refs which indicates notability [57], [58], [59], [60], [61], [62] Libraa2019 (talk) 20:08, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Libraa2019, But there's no mention whatsoever of the subject in sources # 1, 2 and 4, Source # 3, though OK for WP:V, but insufficient for GNG because its WP:ROTM coverage. As for source # 5, SomethingHaute is a WordPress blog per this, which isn't deemed a RS. Source # 6 is only a WP:TRIVIALMENTIONS. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 20:44, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:34, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kaafir (Pakistani TV series)

Kaafir (Pakistani TV series) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

I couldn't find sign/in-depth coverage, such as reviews. All I could find is some ROTM coverage like this, this and this. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 15:11, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 15:11, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:16, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep: could be reasonably redirected to the page about the director if the one-paragraph appraisal im Dawn Humayun Saeed’s negative role in Kaafir actually made one feel disgusted by his character. This drama proved how his star quality and ability to reach to the audience never fails. The good vs. evil; directed by Shahid Shafaat gave us the story Shahan Ali Khan (Humayun Saeed) who is living a dual life; in front of his family he pretended to be virtuous but resorted to his evil and malicious side when away from them. The twists were woven captivatingly into the narrative although the play did go a little over board with its bold dialogues and settings. and this review (https://www.thequint.com/entertainment/hot-on-web/zee-5-kaafir-dia-mirza-mohit-raina) for example are is not judged sufficient. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 13:30, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Mushy Yank, I'm fine with redirection. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 08:33, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Read the opening sentence, Zee 5's web series Kaafir is a historical drama that explores the inhuman situation of Pakistani prisoners in India. So it is a web series of Zee5, not related to ARY drama. Redirect is the way. 2A04:4A43:920F:F722:28B7:A2BE:8E49:C6C3 (talk) 19:40, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Thanks, 2A04:4A43:920F:F722:28B7:A2BE:8E49:C6C3, indeed, silly me. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 15:18, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:30, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep as per Mushy Yank provided source, also easily passes WP:NTV, broadcasted on national television channel ARY Digital. Libraa2019 (talk) 18:30, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Libraa2019, But NTV is an essay, not a policy. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 18:46, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Caution: Arguing with and sometimes just commenting on each individual who disagrees with you risks moving in a disruptive direction.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 19:33, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect per Saqib and Mushy. The Quint article is about a different web series and there is nothing in-depth in reliable refs. 188.30.176.151 (talk) 19:42, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ladoon Mein Pali

Ladoon Mein Pali (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

I couldn't even find ROTM coverage, much less sig/in-depth coverage, so clearly fails GNG. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 15:05, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 15:05, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 15:25, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to Waseem_Abbas#Television_serials: director -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 13:25, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Nominator appears to have copied and pasted the nominating rationale for another rush of AfD nominations, despite the numerous times others have cautioned the nominator about making a lot of nominations in a rush, so I am copying and pasting this relist remark.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 09:43, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Same rationale for almost every nomination. I am doubting WP:Before is done or not as received some coverage [63] [64] [65], [66]. Also it was broadcasted in 2014 and many Pakistani newspapers remove old coverage from their websites. Why a series broadcasted in 2014 need nomination discussion after more than a decade or their is some hidden agenda behind it. Libraa2019 (talk) 10:10, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Libraa2019, Let me evaluate each source individually.
    1. This coverage by Daily Times is limited to a single line which means it is ROTM and this makes it insufficient for establishing WP:GNG.
    2. Both Daily Pakistan's coverage (this and this) is merely WP:TRIVIALMENTIONS
    3. This Daily Times' coverage also merely WP:TRIVIALMENTIONS.
    I suggest you to please refrain from making WP:ATA and/or accuse me of being on some hidden agenda [67]—Saqib (talk I contribs) 11:21, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • I've strike off that comments so no need to highlight and as the admin said you copy pasted same wordings in almost every nomination, therefore it seems you have not done research before. The series broadcasted in 2014 is likely notable considering these sources as most of the newspaper remove that much old coverage and if it does'nt meet notability then why it was not nominated by you earlier and after a decade suddenly all of these AFD's. Libraa2019 (talk) 11:50, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      • Libraa2019, Is it against the rules if my rationale are same across all the nominations? By the way, my reasoning isn't copied verbatim if you look closely. Each article is evaluated individually and I've done my homework (WP:BEFORE) before hitting the AfD button. And that is why sufficient coverage in RS haven't been found yet which means my nominations are legit. And unless the sources are unreliable or dubious, old archives can typically be found, so your excuse doesn't make sense to me. Regarding why am I tossing these nominations out now? Simple. I've just decided it's high time we clean up the mess around here. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 12:23, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: input from disinterested parties would be helpful
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 15:29, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Benazir Bhutto Shaheed University of Technology and Skill Development

Benazir Bhutto Shaheed University of Technology and Skill Development (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Lacks sig/in-depth coverage so, fails WP:GNG. I don't see it passing WP:ORG either. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 09:21, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 09:21, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education and Schools. Shellwood (talk) 10:58, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - appears notable, see Jang, Urdu Point, Dawn, [68], Business Recorder, Urdu Point, Daily Outcome, Dunya, Jang, etc. Again, I'd like to stress that the nominator posted 7 AfD nominations with identical rationales with 2 minutes, no indication of any real WP:BEFORE being performed. --Soman (talk) 12:53, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Soman, Urdu Point and Daily Outcome are not even RS while the coverage in rest of the sources are not sig/in-depth. Do we need a standalone WP article on every university exists on this planet? Fails WP:NCORP IMO. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 13:08, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hey man im josh (talk) 17:41, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment: Does any law from the government or state say it's a public university? Charlie (talk) 04:41, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • CharlieMehta, This is what HEC says HEC NOC granted provisionally for 6 months upto June, 2017​. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 08:31, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:51, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Memoona Qudoos

Memoona Qudoos (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

At first glance, the actor appears to be well-known with numerous roles in television serials, films, and what not. However, upon closer inspection, it becomes evident that the subject only had minor roles in the majority of those television serials and films, thus failing to meet NACTOR. Anyone wishing to argue based on GNG must provide THREE, i repeat, THREE of the best coverages in RS -only. ROTM coverage like this, this and even INTERVIEWS like this is not enough to meet GNG. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 20:26, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 20:26, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Women, and Television. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:11, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep: She is notable. In this source her education and how she started is all mentioned [69] and her married life source in this [70].(BeauSuzanne (talk) 07:46, 16 May 2024 (UTC))[reply]
  • BeauSuzanne, Your comments sound WP:ATA. These coverages can be used for WP:V, but they're not enough to establish WP:GNG. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 09:46, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • I am not talking about WP:V. I am saying that it meets WP:NACTOR. It has mentioned her drama roles and her recent role of Shehna.(BeauSuzanne (talk) 19:15, 16 May 2024 (UTC))[reply]
      • BeauSuzanne, Could you provide evidence that the subject had major roles? —Saqib (talk I contribs) 19:34, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, _signed, Rosguill ^talk 13:57, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak keep because the interviews in rather reliable sources have a presentation that might show her roles are signficant. If not why not DRAFTITY until better sources are found, so as to avoid the risk of constant recreations/deletion and mutual frustration?-My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 13:40, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Mushy Yank, Roznama92News isn't even a RS. It's just one of the countless Urdu language newspapers circulated in Pakistan. And I wouldn't outright label the interview in The News as a paid placement since I lack evidence, but considering the nature of the questions posed by the interviewer, it's a plausible possibility. Anyhow, I'm fine with DRAFITIFICATION, though. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 14:28, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 04:41, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep: Clean up shouldn't be deletion. Appearing in multiple notable films meets WP:NACTOR though requires whether it is significant or not (though should be); it is a known role in the films. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 09:00, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • SafariScribe, Fwiw - In Pakistani TV dramas, supporting roles do not have the same level of significance as in Western or even Indian TV series. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 09:45, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Then a policy should be initiated in Wikipedia:Village pump. Fwiw also, supporting roles can be notable when it has been done for multiple times. Why then do you see a supporting actor or actress awards? Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 09:49, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    SafariScribe, But the fact is she hasn't even really had any supporting roles in the series she's been in so far. No one's provided any evidence for it, not even for dramas like GT Road, Guddu, Farq, Nikah, Kalank, Umm-e-Haniya, and Jaisay Aapki Marzi, which she's known for. So, it seems she's just part of the ensemble cast. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 10:18, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bhool (2019 TV series)

Bhool (2019 TV series) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

I couldn't even find ROTM coverage, much less sig/in-depth coverage, so fails GNG. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 19:12, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 19:12, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:31, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

*Keep - A WP:NTV series, substantial sources, free images available on Google search. Rather than WP:AfD, should have been tagged for "Additional Citations".Sameeerrr (talk) 22:01, 15 May 2024 (UTC) ( Blocked sockpuppet)[reply]

• • Sameeerrr, NTV is an essay and you have to provide WP:THREE best coverage that you believe is sufficient to meet GNG. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 09:44, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    I don't understand your approach of providing "THREE" best references. If we were supposed to provide the only three best references, then I wonder Wikipedia would have limited it WP:References section "To add Three Best sources" only. Sameeerrr (talk) 15:44, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    No, you do not "have to provide" three best sources. WP:THREE, meaning User:RoySmith/Three best sources, is not policy. The word three does not appear anywhere in Wikipedia:Citing sources, nor does it appear anywhere in Wikipedia:References dos and don'ts or Wikipedia:Notability. You keep telling people how things must be done around here, and you keep seeming to indicate that policy says things it does not. Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 22:45, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:42, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect to List_of_programs_broadcast_by_ARY_Digital#Drama_series -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 10:22, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep same rationale for almost every nomination. I am doubting WP:Before is done or not. Series received in-depth coverage [71], [72], [73], [74] Libraa2019 (talk) 09:34, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Libraa2019, I'd like to evaluate each source individually.
    1. This coverage is ROTM and lacks sig/in-depth on the subject, making it insufficient for establishing WP:GNG, though it may suffice for WP:V.
    2. I couldn't find any mention of the subject in this Dawn Images story.
    3. Similarly, the subject wasn't even mentioned in this The News story.
    4. While this Daily Times coverage looks good apparently, BUT it's worth noting that the author has only contributed three articles under their by-line. Given Daily Times acceptance of guest contributions, such articles might be guest contributions. Thus, while they can be used for WP:V, but they may not good enough for meeting WP:GNG. And lastly, please avoid WP:ATA. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 09:58, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • You mentioned that you could'nt find subject in provided source 2 and 3, i would like to clarify its also known as Daag as it was previouly titled Daag before release and producers change title afterwords. Libraa2019 (talk) 10:15, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      • Libraa2019, OK, I was unaware of this as it wasn't previously stated in the article. But nevertheless, provided coverage (this and this) is still ROTM coverage based on interviews -published in March 2019- to talk about the filming of the series. Remember Existence ≠ Notability. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 11:04, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 02:21, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Angna (TV series)

Angna (TV series) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Appears to fail WP:NTV and WP:GNG DonaldD23 talk to me 00:16, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Pakistan. DonaldD23 talk to me 00:16, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: Yes it fails to meet GNG because I couldn't find sign/in-depth coverage, such as reviews. Some ROTM coverage like this isn't sufficient. The article is based on several unreliable sources. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 10:00, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep While assessing the referencing of Pakistani dramas/series, the dynamics of Pakistani media industry should be considered wherein media groups have their own news and entertainment channels. Normally a news channel from one media group doesn't give coverage to a project of a rival channel unless it's a big hit. So for other dramas we have to rely on other industry sources which otherwise may not be good sources but are fair enough for a Pakistani drama. Muneebll (talk) 18:43, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  But still you have to demonstrate that this TV dramas meet GNG. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 19:19, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  That assessment is not based on Wikipedia policy or guidance. In order for an article to be kept it must be demonstrated that it meets WP:GNG at a minimum. Saying that one media group doesn't cover another one is not a reason to keep an article. DonaldD23 talk to me 22:36, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  And until we have coverage in multiple sources, we can't create an article. Oaktree b (talk) 13:16, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:55, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep: while this could be redirected to List_of_programs_broadcast_by_ARY_Digital#Long_format/Soaps, there seems to be coverage showing it's notable: https://www.hipinpakistan.com/news/1159511 ; https://www.bolnews.com/entertainment/2022/06/angna-handles-trauma-delicately-but-leaves-loose-ends/ and so on. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 09:57, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Mushy Yank, HIP is content farm website. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 10:02, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:30, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: As explained above, this series doesn't have coverage outside of the originating media organization, pretty much limiting any hope of GNG or other notability. I can't find sources about this we'd use either. Oaktree b (talk) 13:17, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Shoro (tribe)

Shoro (tribe) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Do we really need a standalone WP article on each and every tribe that exists on this planet? Fails WP:GNG. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 00:32, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 00:32, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It is a major tribe of the Sindh region of Pakistan. You should avoid speed nominating multiple articles without hesitation and get yourself familiarized with South Asian caste related articles. Perhaps engage in a talk page discussion first with major contributors. This tribe was involved in a rebellion against the Arghun Dynasty of Sindh. It is clearly relevant, at least for historical reasons. Sir Calculus (talk) 05:09, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As I mentioned on your talk page, I do agree that this would have needed a broader preliminary discussion. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 09:36, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ethnic groups-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 08:12, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:39, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. The article has adequate references. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 09:23, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If that were the case, I wouldn't have nominated this for deletion. --—Saqib (talk I contribs) 19:00, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Toadette^Edit! 00:00, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nomination any cited source does not show their notability. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2404:3100:1895:5625:1:0:DCDE:F606 (talk • contribs)
• Comment - not the worst I've seen. 16:27, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist. If you believe this article should be kept, please name the sources you believe establish GNG is met.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:38, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Soho (tribe)

Soho (tribe) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Do we really need a standalone WP article on each and every tribe that exists on this planet? Fails WP:GNG. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 00:32, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 00:32, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It is a tribe of the Sindhis in the southeastern region of Pakistan. You should avoid speed nominating multiple articles without hesitation and get yourself familiarized with South Asian caste related articles. Perhaps engage in a talk page discussion first with major contributors. It got international coverage for being the first tribe in Sindh to elect a woman as its head. I'd say for that alone it is notable. Sir Calculus (talk) 05:17, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ethnic groups-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 08:12, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:39, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep: Certainly enough in-depth coverage. Easily meets GNG. See 1 2 3 4 5. Clearfrienda ^💬 16:42, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • But the provided coverage isn't about the tribe itself; it's about people belonging to the tribe. This means the topic itself hasn't received the significant/ in-depth coverage required to pass GNG. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 18:33, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Toadette^Edit! 23:58, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 23:39, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Aamna Malick

Aamna Malick (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

This actress does not fulfill the criteria WP:ACTOR as I couldn't find any major roles in TV shows NOR does their coverage satisfy the basic WP:GNG. A significant portion of the sources referenced lack reliability . —Saqib (talk I contribs) 19:26, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 19:26, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Women, and Television. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 21:51, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:52, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep- per WP:BASIC, [75],[76],[77]

[78], [79] Otbest (talk) 18:07, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Otbest, I'm curious how a user who just began editing 2 days ago is already participating in AfDs. BTW, the references you provided aren't even RS. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 19:02, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 02:58, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment sourcing seems to be weak (mainly tabloids), but it looks like she may have some notable television credits?-KH-1 (talk) 01:40, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • KH-1, No. Only minor roles. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 08:24, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep: some of her numerous roles in notable productions look significant enough for her to pass WP:NACTOR -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 12:21, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • But I don't see any. If that had been the case, she would have definitely received some press coverage, at least some ROTM coverage at a minimum. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 18:29, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:20, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Coverage consists either of tabloid coverage (see WP:SBST) or WP:TRIVIALMENTIONs; no significant coverage. Dclemens1971 (talk) 11:07, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Uzma Beg

Uzma Beg (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

So at first glance, this BLP looks legit but upon but digging deeper, I couldn't find any major roles in TV shows or movies as required per WP:ACTOR. Also, when I tried to find more about the subject per WP:BEFORE, I didn't come across enough coverage to meet WP:GNG either. Plus, it's worth noting that this BLP was created back in 2021 by a SPA Sahgalji (talk · contribs) and has been mostly edited by UPEs so there's COI issues as well. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 18:30, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 18:30, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 19:04, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 19:04, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 19:04, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Radio-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 19:04, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of France-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 19:06, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 19:06, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 19:07, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Arab Emirates-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 19:07, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:00, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep: some of her roles in notable productions seem significant enough, so that she meets WP:NACTOR imv and deletion is not necessary. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 09:44, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Mushy Yank, In which shows, if I may ask? —Saqib (talk I contribs) 10:04, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

For example, Chupke Chupke, Pyari Mona, Hum Tum.-My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 13:50, 22 May 2024 (UTC) (Again, sorry but so many Afds related to Pakistan/TV series, I might not reply here any further, should you, as I expect, not find the sources to your liking for one reason or another or if clarifications are needed; it was already challenging for me to find time to check some of them and !vote).[reply]

It's not a matter of whether I like a source or not. It's obvious that the sources are clearly not reliable, no even for WP:V purpose. --—Saqib (talk I contribs) 16:36, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, _signed, Rosguill ^talk 14:10, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. In looking at the original article and the SPA creation & editing of this article, as well as other articles that mention the subject, it is likely this is an autobiography. 128.252.210.1 (talk) 16:25, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist. I am 100% certain that this is not an autobiography. Even if it were, that is not necessarily a valid deletion rationale. UPE might be an issue though.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:53, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Inadequate sourcing fails to directly details the BLP subject. The subject is verified but in my opinion (based on applied, presented and found reliable sources), doesn't meet GNG, ANYBIO or NACTOR. BusterD (talk) 22:20, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Larkana Institute of Nuclear Medicine and Radiotherapy, Larkana

Larkana Institute of Nuclear Medicine and Radiotherapy, Larkana (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

The press coverage received lacked depth or significance, failing to meet the WP:GNG. I don't see it passing WP:ORG either —Saqib (talk | contribs) 14:50, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. —Saqib (talk | contribs) 14:50, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 15:34, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Cavarrone 19:55, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment: I don't still get what you call PR. Though it may seem, but can't we check WP:BEFORE or any other way. This dawn.com author is a reporter per the articles written for the reliable news source. There is this from GBooks. In a search on news, I got many pop ups.here. All these are resourceful ways of checking the credibility of an article particularly to this one that focuses on Cancer(pharmaceutical) perhaps or whatever. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 12:34, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • SafariScribe, But it's mostly either trivial mentions or ROTM coverage. But GNG requires significant/in-depth coverage, which I haven't been able to find so far. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 18:25, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Procedural relist to rescue lost AfD
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 00:08, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sakib Salajin

Sakib Salajin (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Article does not meet notability guidelines of WP:POLITICIAN TheNuggeteer (talk) 07:36, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. TheNuggeteer (talk) 07:36, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Philippines-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 09:04, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete not seeing a GNG pass here either. Mccapra (talk) 11:55, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dean Ebarle

Dean Ebarle (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

I am unable to find enough coverage of the subject, a Filipino men's footballer, to meet WP:GNG or WP:SPORTCRIT. Contested PROD. JTtheOG (talk) 17:46, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Philippines. JTtheOG (talk) 17:46, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. GiantSnowman 18:18, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found please ping me. GiantSnowman 18:19, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Denice Zamboanga

Denice Zamboanga (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

An article on this mixed martial artist was deleted three years ago after Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Denice Zamboanga as failing to meet either mixed martial arts notability or general notability. At the time, there were also multiple drafts, probably because someone was trying to game the system. The originators were then blocked for sockpuppetry. This article does not differ materially from the deleted article. The subject still is not top-ten-ranked, and so does not meet mixed martial arts notability. The article does not speak for itself and explain how the subject meets general notability. The subject's association with the ONE Championship is now verified, but "so what?", participation in the ONE Championship is not grounds for notability. The article has been reference-bombed, but nothing in the article refers to significant coverage in an article that does not speak for itself. This article differs enough from the deleted article so that speedy deletion is not in order; but it does not differ enough from the deleted article to avoid deletion. Robert McClenon (talk) 04:44, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Women, Martial arts, and Philippines. Robert McClenon (talk) 04:44, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep: Sources 4, 8, 9, 20 and 24 are all RS that talks about her, the article seems to meet notability. Oaktree b (talk) 11:48, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Source #4 is her brother talking, and the subject is only namedropped. Source #8 interviews her, and almost entirely consists of quotes from the subject. Source #9 ... inquirer.net is a reliable source, but that's a scanty article consisting of five sentences aside from quotes from the subject, and that barely scrapes by if at all. #20 looks like a good source. #24 is scanty routine sports coverage. I'm not digging deeper one way or another, but they're weak reeds to hang a keep. Ravenswing 02:52, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Comments She has never met WP:NMMA. The first source mentioned above is an article about her brother, she is mentioned in passing because she was on the same fight card. The next three are pre-fight articles about her first match in the promotion's Grand Prix tournament (which would be typical coverage for any fighter). The final reference is a report on that fight, which she lost. Even if you believe that coverage is significant, it is all about one event. Didn't check other references, so I'm not voting yet. Papaursa (talk) 13:38, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Patrick Grogg

Patrick Grogg (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

I am unable to find anything approaching WP:SIGCOV for this footballer. Contested PROD. JTtheOG (talk) 21:45, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Philippines. JTtheOG (talk) 21:45, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. GiantSnowman 17:48, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found please ping me. GiantSnowman 17:56, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete—Not finding enough to meet WP:SIGCOV and nowhere near enough international experience to stand in for that. Anwegmann (talk) 22:26, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - Two of the sources are linking to the same webpage, the webpage itself is regular for soccer players, making it routine coverage, the other one only slightly mentions the player, therefore indicating no significant coverage. TheNuggeteer (talk) 9:30, 5 June 2024 (UTC)

Baris Tasci

Baris Tasci (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

I am unable to find anything approaching WP:SIGCOV for this footballer. Contested PROD. JTtheOG (talk) 19:33, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Philippines. JTtheOG (talk) 19:33, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. GiantSnowman 17:48, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found please ping me. GiantSnowman 17:55, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Syron Saut

Syron Saut (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

I am unable to find anything approaching WP:SIGCOV for this footballer. Contested PROD. JTtheOG (talk) 19:30, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Philippines. JTtheOG (talk) 19:30, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. GiantSnowman 17:48, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found please ping me. GiantSnowman 17:55, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

JW Marriott Panglao Island Resort & Spa

JW Marriott Panglao Island Resort & Spa (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

This under-construction hotel does not meet threshold for WP:GNG or WP:NBUILDING. All sources are WP:TRADES publications and thus do not contribute to notability. Any attribution of "five-star" status or "80 spacious guest rooms" or "luxurious amenities" is both promotional and premature. I'd recommend redirecting here but since this hotel won't be open for at least three years the redirect won't be of much use to searchers. Dclemens1971 (talk) 16:30, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Architecture and Philippines. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 17:34, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per PROMO, this isn't yet notable. SportingFlyer T·C 17:57, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. I think the references in the article establish notability. The nominator misunderstands the definition of trade publication. A trade publication serves readers in a particular industry. A magazine or newspaper directed towards a general business audience (Canadian Business, The Wall Street Journal, Crain's Chicago Business) does not have the potential conflict of interest that a single-industry publication such as The Inland Printer might have. Moreover, Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies) does not completely exclude trade magazines as sources. "Feature stories from leading trade magazines may be used where independence is clear." Of the references, Hospitality News Philippines is a trade publication serving the hotel and restaurant sector. Colliers is the research arm of a commercial real estate broker. The rest of the references seem to be general-audience publications, some with a focus on business, and several include a reporter's byline. The seemingly promotional text can probably be justified from the architectural plans and JW Marriott's reputation as a brand. Hotel stars, unlike Michelin stars, are generally self-awarded, so the developer's claim shouldn't be rejected as premature. A hotel's rating can decline over the years as it loses ground to newer and fancier competitors, or can improve after a significant renovation. Remember that the Hotel Pensylvania in Manhattan stopped being a full-service hotel in its final years, and many of the other hotels and former hotels in Wikipedia started out as the finest hotels in their city but were perceived as less attractive once other competitors arrived in the market. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 18:22, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Even if one rejects the TRADES premise, under WP:NBUILDING there is a requirement for "significant in-depth coverage by reliable, third-party sources to establish notability." The sources cited in the article are churnalism regurgitating AppleOne's press release, with no evidence of in-depth additional reporting. Such "significant in-depth coverage" would be highly unlikely for a single under-construction hotel that does not appear to have any architectural distinction. Under NBUILDING and PROMO, this article is WP:TOOSOON. Dclemens1971 (talk) 18:46, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - for all of the above, but mostly for the promo. There’s nothing “seemingly” promotional about it. It is promotional, and premature. KJP1 (talk) 19:13, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

p.s. Food and beverage outlets - in a hotel. Who knew! KJP1 (talk) 17:51, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete WP:PROMO for a standard Marriott which isn't even open yet. Nate • (chatter) 00:18, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Travel and tourism-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:22, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kenry Balobo

Kenry Balobo (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

I am unable to find enough coverage of the subject, a Filipino men's footballer, to meet WP:GNG or WP:SPORTCRIT. JTtheOG (talk) 07:02, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Philippines. JTtheOG (talk) 07:02, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. GiantSnowman 17:47, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found please ping me. GiantSnowman 17:54, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Eric Giganto

Eric Giganto (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

I am unable to find enough coverage of the subject, a Filipino men's footballer, to meet WP:GNG or WP:SPORTCRIT. All I found was this short piece. JTtheOG (talk) 04:10, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Philippines. JTtheOG (talk) 04:10, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete – Per nom. Svartner (talk) 19:03, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. GiantSnowman 17:47, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found please ping me. GiantSnowman 17:53, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yasmien Kurdi discography

Yasmien Kurdi discography (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Article was tagged as unreferenced since 2016. This is just an album listing which might violate WP:NOTDIRECTORY. Redirect to Yasmien_Kurdi#Discography as per WP:ATD at best. --Lenticel ^(talk) 23:39, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Albums and songs and Philippines. Lenticel ^(talk) 23:39, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge with Yasmien Kurdi#Discography: Not large enough to be disruptive to the main article/need to stand alone. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 07:12, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge with Yasmien Kurdi#Discography, Correct me if im wrong, but Yasmien Kurdi does not feel notable enough to have a discography article. TheNuggeteer (talk) 9:56, 5 June 2024 (UTC)

• Merge back as we usually due with such unreferenced lists or discogs. Bearian (talk) 14:25, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Light and Space Contemporary

Light and Space Contemporary (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Could not find reliable sources online, except for some (including sources used in this article) having short mentions on this subject. Sanglahi86 (talk) 08:19, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Visual arts, Museums and libraries, and Philippines. Sanglahi86 (talk) 08:19, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Florencio Badelic Jr.

Florencio Badelic Jr. (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

I'll admit that I'm a bit unsure about this article. There are a lot of citations in the article, but all of them are routine and/or match reports. There seems to be little or no WP:SIGCOV here. Anwegmann (talk) 00:15, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Philippines. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:11, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. GiantSnowman 18:30, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found please ping me. GiantSnowman 18:33, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep – Decent coverage in local media, even though it is from a not very popular football center, the article seems sufficiently based. Svartner (talk) 19:54, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  I don't disagree. There seems to be a lot of match reports in the mix, though, and little of substance. That said, I'm still unsure about the article as a whole. Thanks for the vote. Anwegmann (talk) 22:07, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:45, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of Adventist schools in the Philippines

List of Adventist schools in the Philippines (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Contested prod. Prod reason states "This list is made up of mostly schools that are not notable and also there are no references it has been like this from day one that it was created". As I am conducting a procedural AfD, I am neutral on the matter. --Lenticel ^(talk) 02:21, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Schools, Religion, and Philippines. Lenticel ^(talk) 02:21, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rename to List of Adventist universities in the Philippines. As far as sourcing goes, I wouldn't know what is available in reliability, but I figured reducing the list to be just the colleges and universities would be more suitable to WP:LISTN. Conyo14 (talk) 04:14, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:25, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete the majority of Seventh-day Adventist schools in the Philippines are not notable and never will be. And we do not need a separate list for Seventh-day Adventist colleges and universities in the Philippines, that is why we have List of Seventh-day Adventist colleges and universities. Catfurball (talk) 16:14, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Before a rename is considered, you have to put forth a good, policy-based argument on why this article should be Kept. A rename can be discussed after an AFD if this article is Kept.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:14, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - this is where a category is much more useful than a long list of which most schools are not notable. Bearian (talk) 15:34, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tan Yinglan

Tan Yinglan (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Factors do not appear to have meaningfully changed since the prior discussion. He's an active businessperson, and Insignia Ventures Partners may be notable but he does not appear so as an author. Star Mississippi 01:38, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Authors, Businesspeople, and Singapore. Star Mississippi 01:38, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lindelwe Lesley Ndlovu

Lindelwe Lesley Ndlovu (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Another in a questionable series of articles created by this user on African businessmen and companies. Sources in this one are all WP:TRADES, WP:INTERVIEWS, WP:TRIVIALMENTIONS,WP:PRIMARYSOURCES, or links to data aggregators and mass awards that don't confer notability in and of themselves. No WP:SIGCOV in secondary, independent, reliable sources. Nice resume (and the article reads like one), but not notable. Dclemens1971 (talk) 22:56, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: Non-notable business person, most coverage is what seem like non-RS, but I can't confirm which are or aren't. Happy to revisit if others can confirm the quality of the sources. Oaktree b (talk) 23:26, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Zimbabwe, Singapore, France, and England. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:12, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletions

Catherine Raper

Catherine Raper (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Ambassadors are not inherently notable. 3 of the 4 sources are primary from her employer. LibStar (talk) 04:47, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Bilateral relations, South Korea, Taiwan, and Australia. LibStar (talk) 04:47, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yeh Shu-hua

Yeh Shu-hua (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

No observed changes in notability for WP:GNG, WP:SINGER, WP:BANDMEMBER WP:SNG (WP:SINGER, WP:BANDMEMBER) since Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Yeh Shuhua in 2021. The previous AfD resulted in redirect, this is the revision prior to the AfD closure. Please note that there was previously a typo mistake refering SNG as WP:GNG in the initial revision, this has since been corrected on 2 June, a day later, with formatting adjustment to ensure I'm implying both SINGER and BANDMEMBER collectively in relation to SNG to avoid confusion. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 17:37, 1 June 2024 (UTC) ; edited 15:15, 2 June 2024‎ (UTC)[reply]

• I believe the references show that the subject meets the following criteria. The references has the person as the main subject and not just a passing mention as part of the group.

  1. Has been the subject of multiple, non-trivial, published works appearing in sources that are reliable, not self-published, and are independent of the musician or ensemble itself.

  A big difference from the other version is a reliance on published sources like news reports and magazines rather than Youtube videos. Firezzasd (talk) 18:10, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Don't see how "reliance on published sources like news reports and magazines" is of any differences to the pointers raised by Explicit in the previous AfD, pretty close in my opinion. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 18:41, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  can you link the previous AfD discussion, so I can see what points were raised? Firezzasd (talk) 18:48, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Already linked, above ^. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 18:49, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  The main difference is that discussion is from June 2021. There's more reporting on the subject in the last three years, as evident in the references. I think if the concern is independent notability, that's no longer an issue as compared to back then. Firezzasd (talk) 18:59, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  More as in? Other than 1 hosting news releases (pretty much routine), health issues (ref bombing), 1 cover magazine featured, endorsements for 1 bag brand (ref bombing) and shoe brand (ref bombing). And minus here and there compared to the deleted article due to no reliable sources available. So where exactly does WP:SINGER and WP:BANDMEMBER criteria is fulfiled? — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 07:15, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  I can see the evidence is kind of thin for WP:SNG, but like both you and Prince of Erebor already pointed out, there's more than enough to pass WP:GNG. Therefore, it should be a keep instead of a redirect. Firezzasd (talk) 15:17, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Women, Dance, South Korea, and Taiwan. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:24, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong Keep: I think the nominator is more likely arguing that Yeh Shu-hua does not demonstrate sufficient individual notability to have a standalone article and should be redirected, rather than filing for a deletion. Then I guess it would be more helpful if the nominator would elaborate on their rationale for considering the other four out of five members to have individual notability (Soojin debuted solo so I am not counting her), while singling out Yeh as lacking it. As a Taiwanese member whose career has been based in Korea, I have looked into sources covering her in both Chinese and Korean. I can't read Korean, so I could only run sources with a translator and it seems like there are quite a lot sources that cover Shu-hua personally, most notably is her solo work as the host of WORKDOL (see My Daily [ko][80] and Nate News[81], and I later also found coverage in Chinese sources, like Elle[82] and ETToday [zh][83]) and appearances in variety shows. (See Segye Ilbo[84], Global Economy Newspaper [ko][85], Zum [ko][86], etc.) I do read Chinese though, and found a lot more sources with SIGCOV about her career, personal life and controversies. (See Elle[87], GQ Taiwan[88], SET News[89], Nownews[90], United Daily News[91], Jusky [zh] [92], Storm Media [zh][93], TVBS News[94] etc.) There are also media coverage on some of her solo works in Taiwan, such as participating in the Taiwanese game show Mr. Player [zh] (see Liberty Times[95] and China Times[96]), a recent travel program with Bolin Chen, (see Oriental Daily News[97]), or performing at Golden Wave At Taiwan. (See Mirror Media[98] and ETToday[99]) Considering the sources already presented in the article and provided by Cunard in the previous AFD, as well as the additional ones I have listed out, I think it is more than enough to show that the subject person has well passed GNG. The SIGCOV on the subject person's solo works are also sufficient to demonstrate the individual notability. So it is a quite obvious pass of both GNG and BANDMEMBER in my opinion. —Prince of Erebor（The Book of Mazarbul） 10:37, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Read through the majority of the linked news articles above, still couldn't find where is the individual notability as a SINGER and BANDMEMBER.

  1. Routine coverage and/or summary of her appearance in Workdol's episode
  2. Another routine coverage and/or summary of her appearance in Workdol's episode
  3. Digest/rundown/roundup's news article of her
  4. Another routine coverage and/or summary of her appearance in Workdol's episode
  5. Gossip coverage on her attitude on Civilization Express
  6. Just a photo coverage of her aheading to Music Bank
  7. Routine coverage and/or summary of her appearance on Knowing Bros, as part of promotion with (G)I-dle
  8. Another digest/rundown/roundup's news article of her
  9. Yet another digest/rundown/roundup's news article of her
  10. An article about her debut with (G)I-dle, pretty much yet another digest/rundown/roundup's news article of her
  11. Yet another digest/rundown/roundup's news article of her
  12. Yet another digest/rundown/roundup's news article of her
  13. Coverage of her Instagram post, yet another digest/rundown/roundup's news article
  14. Coverage on Song Yuqi and Minnie, she mentioned in WP:PASSINGMENTION
  15. Coverage of her Instagram post, basically a gossip coverage
  16. Routine coverage and/or summary of her appearance in Mr. Player's episode
  17. Same as #16, basically a copy-paste plus-minus coverage
  18. Routine coverage of her returning to work after illness
  19. Routine coverage on Golden Wave at Taiwan concert, she is mentioned in PASSINGMENTION as (G)I-dle is performing there
  20. Routine coverage on her special MC/host apperance on Golden Wave at Taiwan concert (the same event as #19)

  In relation to "[the] rationale for considering the other four out of five members to have individual notability", I'm not sure why I'm even answering this question when a quick scan through each (Cho Mi-yeon, Minnie, Jeon So-yeon, Song Yuqi) already given the obvious answer of meeting GNG and/or BLP and/or SINGER and/or BANDMEMBER criteria. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 12:58, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  @Paper9oll: Hi Paper9oll! Hmm... I believe it is necessary to clarify your expectations for individual notability in order to reach a consensus here. I am not particularly familiar with (G)I-dle, as far as I know, the key difference between Yeh and the other members is that she did not have any individual musical releases. (If I remember correctly Yuqi had her article before releasing her first solo single though) However, I don't think debuting solo is a crucial criterion for determining individual notability, and it is not explicitly stated in BANDMEMBER either. (Ryujin and Lia come to mind as a counterexample.) Aside from this, I do not think the media coverage of Minnie and Yuqi should differ significantly from that of Yeh. I also found it difficult to agree with about half of the summaries you provided. For instance, I cited sources mentioning Yeh hosting Workdol, participating in variety programs, and co-hosting an upcoming travel program with Chen Bolin (the latter was mistakenly labeled as covering her returning from illness). I was intending to emphasize Yeh's solo activities, which I see as demonstrating her individuality, rather than the overall notability. I am also slightly puzzled by how these can be considered routine coverage, or else an actor's entire filmography can be viewed as just their "another day of work" as well. Another key point of disagreement is the categorization of the Chinese sources covering her biography as news digests. SIGCOV never emphasizes that the subject person has to be a unique or major topic of the source, but rather require the source to address the subject person directly and in detail only. These few sources are entirely about Yeh's biography, even the title singled her out instead of referring her as a group. I guess there isn't really room of argument that those sources are direct and detailed addresses. I think this level of SIGCOV on Yeh's early life, career, and personal life far exceeds the requirements of GNG. While I may concede that Yeh's lack of a solo debut could be seen as not meeting BANDMEMBER for individual notability, it is still unconvincing to dismiss the aforementioned sources as run-of-the-mill. I agree to disagree, but respectfully I think the subject person has undoubtedly fulfilled GNG. —Prince of Erebor（The Book of Mazarbul） 14:53, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  @Prince of Erebor Maybe my standards are higher, I still don't see how she is meeting SNG (SINGER and BANDMEMBER) criteria. Maybe the previous AfD should have resulted in passing for GNG but failure for SNG i.e. keep instead of redirect, I would expect the same for this i.e. passing for GNG but failure for SNG unless other editor(s) changes the !vote scale or if the closer has other POVs, I believe this would be keep closure. I mistakenly written GNG instead of SNG previously until I realised that I'm trying to refer to the latter instead of the former as when I'm re-reading through your replies, I kept seeing GNG concerns even though this isn't my point of concern. However for the others (G)I-dle's members, they met both GNG and SNG hence this wasn't a typo. Regardless, I'm not expecting a consensus between us anyway since this is AfD. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 15:24, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  @Paper9oll: Oh, I do understand more of your arguments now though. Because assessments on NBLP standards can vary, but GNG should be very straightforward and I was really head-scratching when my sources were denounced as they are clearly providing SIGCOV to the subject person. In my opinion, the subject person has passed both GNG and SNG as she has demonstrated individual notability with her solo works. I agree to disagree on SNG as stated in my previous reply, regarding the determination of the individual notability stated in BANDMEMBER, and I agree that we have very different sets of bars and expectations. But I think the subject person has undeniably passed GNG, and because since the beginning of this discussion (I think) Firezzasd and I were building our points on how Yeh should have already passed GNG, (that was literally why I went for Strong Keep) I think the consensus should head to a keep as well. GNG is also a notability guideline after all, and an article can be kept simply by meeting those criteria. —Prince of Erebor（The Book of Mazarbul） 16:34, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete or redirect: per nominator. Still no substantial evidence of individual notability. Per WP:BANDMEMBER, to the extent that every idol may have some advertisement or hosting gigs but it isn't exceptionally notable here either.Evaders99 (talk) 02:56, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  @Paper9oll: Sorry, but to be fair, I think you should leave the typo and retain GNG in your nomination statement. Because that was where the discussion was heading (otherwise it is misleading to all editors who are joining the discussion) - that I agree the subject person may not necessarily have fulfilled BANDMEMBER and there may not be consensus, but has way too many sources that significantly cover her personally, and GNG should be a good reason to keep this article. @Evaders99: I think a redirect is not a bad option either, but I think you may have some reconsiderations on GNG and WP:BASIC, which were the core rationales of the discussion Firezzasd and I were establishing (instead of SNG/BANDMEMBER) before considering ATDs. —Prince of Erebor（The Book of Mazarbul） 04:21, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  @Prince of Erebor I believe that I had already explained that earlier i.e. I'm not concerned on GNG but rather SNG, in fact I have been communicating where exactly is SNG met right from the start regardless to you or Firezzasd while yes there is a typo error however it has never deviated the discussion from the question i.e. me asking repeatedly on meeting SNG criteria. Why SNG because she is commonly known as a singer per MOS:ROLEBIO as supposed to any other sub roles derived from her main role. Regardless, whether she met GNG but failed SNG is ultimately, the closer decision to decide on, however if you have any concerns on the closing result i.e. it wasn't your expected outcome then you can go to WP:DRV to file for re-review provided the rationale is aligned with DRV guidelines. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 13:03, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• @Paper9oll: No, you are completely missing my point. I was trying to communicate with you in a more mild way, instead of directly throwing a guideline at you. The fact that you simply wrote out SNG into GNG is a violation of WP:REDACT. You have made it clear that you have made a typo and you are in fact referring to SNG, and I am happy to see a continued discussion basing on your actual arguments. But I have also made it clear that we (or at least I) were replying to your GNG concerns. As I said, that was literally why I went for Strong Keep and where I was building half of my arguments on. The flow of the discussion now is completely twisted and it looks like we were mistakenly addressing something else, and no new editors would be able to follow up our concerns on the subject person already passing GNG. Yet, it was your typo to begin with, not us. I guess it is both part of a guideline and basic courtesy that if you wish to update your original comments, you may consider adding something like "(Typo edit: SNG)", instead just blatantly writing out. There is no point of discussing when others were making an argument, you just chime in and say "sorry, typo" to collapse others' arguments. Also, I do not think a DRV would be my concern. I am not really concerned about the fate of this article, because both a Keep or a Redirect would do in my opinion, and I am pretty sure this discussion would be relisted for at least another week with more editors joining and most likely would end up being a No Consensus. Therefore, to favour the future discussions for the upcoming weeks, I think a restoration of the typo is necessary. —Prince of Erebor（The Book of Mazarbul） 13:49, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  @Prince of Erebor Duly noted that your reasoning is basing on GNG as you have a different viewpoint i.e. the subject meets GNG in which I had also agreed on in the subsequent replies. Imo, there isn't any confusion happening as your replies and also Firezzasd's replies shows that your are stating that the subject meets GNG already in which my defence is on "what about SINGER and BANDMEMBER?" while there may be a typo however I don't see how this has affected the AfD overall since the replies made were constructive i.e. mainly "subject already met GNG", there is no hardline rule that states that editor(s) must only reply to the concerns (i.e. restrictly !vote and/or discuss around SINGER and BANDMEMBER) raised by the nominator. Hopefully, this explanation resolves any of your concerns made. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 14:25, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• @Paper9oll: My only concern was that I am afraid there may be confusion for newcomers, as they may not be aware that GNG was also discussed previously. I saw that you have listed the typo out to clear the confusion, and I think that is sufficient in my opinion. Thanks! —Prince of Erebor（The Book of Mazarbul） 14:30, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep: Per Prince of Erebor. Subject passes WP:GNG. Firezzasd (talk) 15:23, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep: Definitely passes WP:GNG, has 6M followers on instagram and searching her name up in Chinese gives you a ton of results, whether traditional or simplified. 48JCL^{[citation needed][dubious – discuss]} 20:55, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to (G)-Idle : per nom. Not independently notable enough as a singer in MOS:ROLEBIO per WP:SINGER and WP:BANDMEMBER Shenaall (talk) 07:50, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Korean excrement balloon incident

Korean excrement balloon incident (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

I nominated for deletion; think the content of the article should be merged into Balloon propaganda campaigns in Korea. Reasoning: there's just not much else to say about this incident other than what's in the few news articles about it. It falls into the context of the balloon propaganda campaign, and doesn't have enough separate notability imo. 104.232.119.107 (talk) 01:20, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Korea-related deletion discussions. 104.232.119.107 (talk) 01:20, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• No, multiple news sources have had articles about it, including Reuters, (https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/south-korea-alert-balloons-dropping-trash-north-2024-05-29/) BBC, (https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c4nn2p32zrzo.amp) CNN, (https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2024/05/29/asia/north-korea-trash-balloons-intl-hnk) CBS, (https://www.cbsnews.com/amp/news/north-korea-south-korea-trash-balloons/) and NBC. (https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/rcna154435) — Preceding unsigned comment added by MountainDew20 (talk • contribs) 00:54, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  For others reading, note that I had posted on the talk page with the deletion nomination because I am an IP user and can't create pages. This user created the deletion discussion page, and I'm not sure if they saw my post (verbatim matches the current deletion nom rationale) before making this comment.

  Now direct response to this comment: my point is not that the event doesn't have coverage, my point is that the event is not independently significant enough from the Balloon propaganda campaigns page to merit its own article. WP:NOPAGE is relevant I think here.

  Note WP:NSUSTAINED and WP:NTEMP. I think you can make an argument that we should wait a bit more to see if coverage is separate enough: maybe this sparks a huge diplomatic incident with significant consequences. But I'm doubtful that will happen; worse events have happened with basically zero meaningful change to inter-Korean relations. 104.232.119.107 (talk) 01:24, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep: I pull up coverage in Reuters, NBC News, The Independent and what's given now in the article. This incident seems to be notable. Oaktree b (talk) 01:42, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  There is more to say, as the balloons also contained CD's and leaflets, in addition to all the other stuff mentioned [100]. Oaktree b (talk) 01:44, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Separately notable from what's in the Balloon propaganda campaigns in Korea article? And to clarify, I wasn't trying to say the excrement balloon article can't be expanded more. I was trying to say that, based on the news articles, there's not much more to say that differs from the balloon propaganda campaigns in Korea article. The overlap is really significant. 104.232.119.107 (talk) 02:00, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Or !merge, I'm not fussed about it. Oaktree b (talk) 03:27, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge: WP:NEVENTS applies, but without getting too into the weeds wrt that guideline, this event belongs contextually at Balloon propaganda campaigns in Korea#North Korean counter-campaigns as this is a direct response to recent South Korean balloon campaigns, with North Korea stating that it would retaliate against the "frequent scattering of leaflets and other rubbish" in border areas by activists in the South. // "Mounds of wastepaper and filth will soon be scattered over the border areas and the interior of the ROK and it will directly experience how much effort is required to remove them"[101]. Also: the article name is really not ideal as under 10% of the balloons appear to have contained excrement. ^~Hydronium^~Hydroxide^~(Talk)~ 02:52, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge: Per WP:NEVENTS and WP:NOPAGE. Also, WP:NOTNEWS given that this happened just yesterday. Dclemens1971 (talk) 04:03, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge; not independently notable enough. Zanahary (talk) 05:58, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, North Korea, and South Korea. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:27, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge as despite coverage from major media companies, it's yet another example of WP:NOTNEWS and WP:LASTING. Duke of New Gwynedd (talk | contrib.) 18:48, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge - while it is marginally notable, a merger back would allow for better context. Bearian (talk) 15:12, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of battles in Penghu

List of battles in Penghu (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Unsourced and very short (4 entries) list without much context. I don't think there's much reason for it to exist as its own article, as opposed to those events being described in the Penghu article. toweli (talk) 13:17, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Military, Lists, China, and Taiwan. toweli (talk) 13:17, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Catherine Raper

Catherine Raper (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Ambassadors are not inherently notable. 3 of the 4 sources are primary from her employer. LibStar (talk) 04:47, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Bilateral relations, South Korea, Taiwan, and Australia. LibStar (talk) 04:47, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yeh Shu-hua

Yeh Shu-hua (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

No observed changes in notability for WP:GNG, WP:SINGER, WP:BANDMEMBER WP:SNG (WP:SINGER, WP:BANDMEMBER) since Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Yeh Shuhua in 2021. The previous AfD resulted in redirect, this is the revision prior to the AfD closure. Please note that there was previously a typo mistake refering SNG as WP:GNG in the initial revision, this has since been corrected on 2 June, a day later, with formatting adjustment to ensure I'm implying both SINGER and BANDMEMBER collectively in relation to SNG to avoid confusion. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 17:37, 1 June 2024 (UTC) ; edited 15:15, 2 June 2024‎ (UTC)[reply]

• I believe the references show that the subject meets the following criteria. The references has the person as the main subject and not just a passing mention as part of the group.

  1. Has been the subject of multiple, non-trivial, published works appearing in sources that are reliable, not self-published, and are independent of the musician or ensemble itself.

  A big difference from the other version is a reliance on published sources like news reports and magazines rather than Youtube videos. Firezzasd (talk) 18:10, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Don't see how "reliance on published sources like news reports and magazines" is of any differences to the pointers raised by Explicit in the previous AfD, pretty close in my opinion. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 18:41, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  can you link the previous AfD discussion, so I can see what points were raised? Firezzasd (talk) 18:48, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Already linked, above ^. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 18:49, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  The main difference is that discussion is from June 2021. There's more reporting on the subject in the last three years, as evident in the references. I think if the concern is independent notability, that's no longer an issue as compared to back then. Firezzasd (talk) 18:59, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  More as in? Other than 1 hosting news releases (pretty much routine), health issues (ref bombing), 1 cover magazine featured, endorsements for 1 bag brand (ref bombing) and shoe brand (ref bombing). And minus here and there compared to the deleted article due to no reliable sources available. So where exactly does WP:SINGER and WP:BANDMEMBER criteria is fulfiled? — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 07:15, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  I can see the evidence is kind of thin for WP:SNG, but like both you and Prince of Erebor already pointed out, there's more than enough to pass WP:GNG. Therefore, it should be a keep instead of a redirect. Firezzasd (talk) 15:17, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Women, Dance, South Korea, and Taiwan. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:24, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong Keep: I think the nominator is more likely arguing that Yeh Shu-hua does not demonstrate sufficient individual notability to have a standalone article and should be redirected, rather than filing for a deletion. Then I guess it would be more helpful if the nominator would elaborate on their rationale for considering the other four out of five members to have individual notability (Soojin debuted solo so I am not counting her), while singling out Yeh as lacking it. As a Taiwanese member whose career has been based in Korea, I have looked into sources covering her in both Chinese and Korean. I can't read Korean, so I could only run sources with a translator and it seems like there are quite a lot sources that cover Shu-hua personally, most notably is her solo work as the host of WORKDOL (see My Daily [ko][102] and Nate News[103], and I later also found coverage in Chinese sources, like Elle[104] and ETToday [zh][105]) and appearances in variety shows. (See Segye Ilbo[106], Global Economy Newspaper [ko][107], Zum [ko][108], etc.) I do read Chinese though, and found a lot more sources with SIGCOV about her career, personal life and controversies. (See Elle[109], GQ Taiwan[110], SET News[111], Nownews[112], United Daily News[113], Jusky [zh] [114], Storm Media [zh][115], TVBS News[116] etc.) There are also media coverage on some of her solo works in Taiwan, such as participating in the Taiwanese game show Mr. Player [zh] (see Liberty Times[117] and China Times[118]), a recent travel program with Bolin Chen, (see Oriental Daily News[119]), or performing at Golden Wave At Taiwan. (See Mirror Media[120] and ETToday[121]) Considering the sources already presented in the article and provided by Cunard in the previous AFD, as well as the additional ones I have listed out, I think it is more than enough to show that the subject person has well passed GNG. The SIGCOV on the subject person's solo works are also sufficient to demonstrate the individual notability. So it is a quite obvious pass of both GNG and BANDMEMBER in my opinion. —Prince of Erebor（The Book of Mazarbul） 10:37, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Read through the majority of the linked news articles above, still couldn't find where is the individual notability as a SINGER and BANDMEMBER.

  1. Routine coverage and/or summary of her appearance in Workdol's episode
  2. Another routine coverage and/or summary of her appearance in Workdol's episode
  3. Digest/rundown/roundup's news article of her
  4. Another routine coverage and/or summary of her appearance in Workdol's episode
  5. Gossip coverage on her attitude on Civilization Express
  6. Just a photo coverage of her aheading to Music Bank
  7. Routine coverage and/or summary of her appearance on Knowing Bros, as part of promotion with (G)I-dle
  8. Another digest/rundown/roundup's news article of her
  9. Yet another digest/rundown/roundup's news article of her
  10. An article about her debut with (G)I-dle, pretty much yet another digest/rundown/roundup's news article of her
  11. Yet another digest/rundown/roundup's news article of her
  12. Yet another digest/rundown/roundup's news article of her
  13. Coverage of her Instagram post, yet another digest/rundown/roundup's news article
  14. Coverage on Song Yuqi and Minnie, she mentioned in WP:PASSINGMENTION
  15. Coverage of her Instagram post, basically a gossip coverage
  16. Routine coverage and/or summary of her appearance in Mr. Player's episode
  17. Same as #16, basically a copy-paste plus-minus coverage
  18. Routine coverage of her returning to work after illness
  19. Routine coverage on Golden Wave at Taiwan concert, she is mentioned in PASSINGMENTION as (G)I-dle is performing there
  20. Routine coverage on her special MC/host apperance on Golden Wave at Taiwan concert (the same event as #19)

  In relation to "[the] rationale for considering the other four out of five members to have individual notability", I'm not sure why I'm even answering this question when a quick scan through each (Cho Mi-yeon, Minnie, Jeon So-yeon, Song Yuqi) already given the obvious answer of meeting GNG and/or BLP and/or SINGER and/or BANDMEMBER criteria. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 12:58, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  @Paper9oll: Hi Paper9oll! Hmm... I believe it is necessary to clarify your expectations for individual notability in order to reach a consensus here. I am not particularly familiar with (G)I-dle, as far as I know, the key difference between Yeh and the other members is that she did not have any individual musical releases. (If I remember correctly Yuqi had her article before releasing her first solo single though) However, I don't think debuting solo is a crucial criterion for determining individual notability, and it is not explicitly stated in BANDMEMBER either. (Ryujin and Lia come to mind as a counterexample.) Aside from this, I do not think the media coverage of Minnie and Yuqi should differ significantly from that of Yeh. I also found it difficult to agree with about half of the summaries you provided. For instance, I cited sources mentioning Yeh hosting Workdol, participating in variety programs, and co-hosting an upcoming travel program with Chen Bolin (the latter was mistakenly labeled as covering her returning from illness). I was intending to emphasize Yeh's solo activities, which I see as demonstrating her individuality, rather than the overall notability. I am also slightly puzzled by how these can be considered routine coverage, or else an actor's entire filmography can be viewed as just their "another day of work" as well. Another key point of disagreement is the categorization of the Chinese sources covering her biography as news digests. SIGCOV never emphasizes that the subject person has to be a unique or major topic of the source, but rather require the source to address the subject person directly and in detail only. These few sources are entirely about Yeh's biography, even the title singled her out instead of referring her as a group. I guess there isn't really room of argument that those sources are direct and detailed addresses. I think this level of SIGCOV on Yeh's early life, career, and personal life far exceeds the requirements of GNG. While I may concede that Yeh's lack of a solo debut could be seen as not meeting BANDMEMBER for individual notability, it is still unconvincing to dismiss the aforementioned sources as run-of-the-mill. I agree to disagree, but respectfully I think the subject person has undoubtedly fulfilled GNG. —Prince of Erebor（The Book of Mazarbul） 14:53, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  @Prince of Erebor Maybe my standards are higher, I still don't see how she is meeting SNG (SINGER and BANDMEMBER) criteria. Maybe the previous AfD should have resulted in passing for GNG but failure for SNG i.e. keep instead of redirect, I would expect the same for this i.e. passing for GNG but failure for SNG unless other editor(s) changes the !vote scale or if the closer has other POVs, I believe this would be keep closure. I mistakenly written GNG instead of SNG previously until I realised that I'm trying to refer to the latter instead of the former as when I'm re-reading through your replies, I kept seeing GNG concerns even though this isn't my point of concern. However for the others (G)I-dle's members, they met both GNG and SNG hence this wasn't a typo. Regardless, I'm not expecting a consensus between us anyway since this is AfD. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 15:24, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  @Paper9oll: Oh, I do understand more of your arguments now though. Because assessments on NBLP standards can vary, but GNG should be very straightforward and I was really head-scratching when my sources were denounced as they are clearly providing SIGCOV to the subject person. In my opinion, the subject person has passed both GNG and SNG as she has demonstrated individual notability with her solo works. I agree to disagree on SNG as stated in my previous reply, regarding the determination of the individual notability stated in BANDMEMBER, and I agree that we have very different sets of bars and expectations. But I think the subject person has undeniably passed GNG, and because since the beginning of this discussion (I think) Firezzasd and I were building our points on how Yeh should have already passed GNG, (that was literally why I went for Strong Keep) I think the consensus should head to a keep as well. GNG is also a notability guideline after all, and an article can be kept simply by meeting those criteria. —Prince of Erebor（The Book of Mazarbul） 16:34, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete or redirect: per nominator. Still no substantial evidence of individual notability. Per WP:BANDMEMBER, to the extent that every idol may have some advertisement or hosting gigs but it isn't exceptionally notable here either.Evaders99 (talk) 02:56, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  @Paper9oll: Sorry, but to be fair, I think you should leave the typo and retain GNG in your nomination statement. Because that was where the discussion was heading (otherwise it is misleading to all editors who are joining the discussion) - that I agree the subject person may not necessarily have fulfilled BANDMEMBER and there may not be consensus, but has way too many sources that significantly cover her personally, and GNG should be a good reason to keep this article. @Evaders99: I think a redirect is not a bad option either, but I think you may have some reconsiderations on GNG and WP:BASIC, which were the core rationales of the discussion Firezzasd and I were establishing (instead of SNG/BANDMEMBER) before considering ATDs. —Prince of Erebor（The Book of Mazarbul） 04:21, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  @Prince of Erebor I believe that I had already explained that earlier i.e. I'm not concerned on GNG but rather SNG, in fact I have been communicating where exactly is SNG met right from the start regardless to you or Firezzasd while yes there is a typo error however it has never deviated the discussion from the question i.e. me asking repeatedly on meeting SNG criteria. Why SNG because she is commonly known as a singer per MOS:ROLEBIO as supposed to any other sub roles derived from her main role. Regardless, whether she met GNG but failed SNG is ultimately, the closer decision to decide on, however if you have any concerns on the closing result i.e. it wasn't your expected outcome then you can go to WP:DRV to file for re-review provided the rationale is aligned with DRV guidelines. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 13:03, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• @Paper9oll: No, you are completely missing my point. I was trying to communicate with you in a more mild way, instead of directly throwing a guideline at you. The fact that you simply wrote out SNG into GNG is a violation of WP:REDACT. You have made it clear that you have made a typo and you are in fact referring to SNG, and I am happy to see a continued discussion basing on your actual arguments. But I have also made it clear that we (or at least I) were replying to your GNG concerns. As I said, that was literally why I went for Strong Keep and where I was building half of my arguments on. The flow of the discussion now is completely twisted and it looks like we were mistakenly addressing something else, and no new editors would be able to follow up our concerns on the subject person already passing GNG. Yet, it was your typo to begin with, not us. I guess it is both part of a guideline and basic courtesy that if you wish to update your original comments, you may consider adding something like "(Typo edit: SNG)", instead just blatantly writing out. There is no point of discussing when others were making an argument, you just chime in and say "sorry, typo" to collapse others' arguments. Also, I do not think a DRV would be my concern. I am not really concerned about the fate of this article, because both a Keep or a Redirect would do in my opinion, and I am pretty sure this discussion would be relisted for at least another week with more editors joining and most likely would end up being a No Consensus. Therefore, to favour the future discussions for the upcoming weeks, I think a restoration of the typo is necessary. —Prince of Erebor（The Book of Mazarbul） 13:49, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  @Prince of Erebor Duly noted that your reasoning is basing on GNG as you have a different viewpoint i.e. the subject meets GNG in which I had also agreed on in the subsequent replies. Imo, there isn't any confusion happening as your replies and also Firezzasd's replies shows that your are stating that the subject meets GNG already in which my defence is on "what about SINGER and BANDMEMBER?" while there may be a typo however I don't see how this has affected the AfD overall since the replies made were constructive i.e. mainly "subject already met GNG", there is no hardline rule that states that editor(s) must only reply to the concerns (i.e. restrictly !vote and/or discuss around SINGER and BANDMEMBER) raised by the nominator. Hopefully, this explanation resolves any of your concerns made. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 14:25, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• @Paper9oll: My only concern was that I am afraid there may be confusion for newcomers, as they may not be aware that GNG was also discussed previously. I saw that you have listed the typo out to clear the confusion, and I think that is sufficient in my opinion. Thanks! —Prince of Erebor（The Book of Mazarbul） 14:30, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep: Per Prince of Erebor. Subject passes WP:GNG. Firezzasd (talk) 15:23, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep: Definitely passes WP:GNG, has 6M followers on instagram and searching her name up in Chinese gives you a ton of results, whether traditional or simplified. 48JCL^{[citation needed][dubious – discuss]} 20:55, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to (G)-Idle : per nom. Not independently notable enough as a singer in MOS:ROLEBIO per WP:SINGER and WP:BANDMEMBER Shenaall (talk) 07:50, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wun-Chang Shih

Wun-Chang Shih (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Fails WP:NSKATE; bronze/silver medals at the national championships do not meet the requirements of WP:NSKATE. No international medal placements at all. Google search turns up nothing outside of wikis and scoring databases. PROD removed without explanation. Bgsu98 (Talk) 11:23, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Skating, and Taiwan. Bgsu98 (Talk) 11:23, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep: Plenty of Chinese sources with SIGCOV (eg, Liberty Times[122], [123], Central News Agency[124], My Formosa [zh][125]). His coaching career has also received media coverage (eg, TVBS News[126], Mirror Media[127], Central News Agency[128], [129]) —Prince of Erebor（The Book of Mazarbul） 09:17, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 12:51, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep, per Prince of Erebor. /Julle (talk) 00:08, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - Plenty of sources for SIGCOV.WP:GNG applies.BabbaQ (talk) 18:53, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of Thai representatives at international male beauty pageants

List of Thai representatives at international male beauty pageants (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

This page seems to be almost exclusively cited to a random Facebook fanpage "ThailandBeautyQueen" and is probably the WP:OR of the account who inserted the links in a series of November 2023 edits, subsequently blocked as a sockpuppet of User:Benebimo. There is no way to improve this without starting over with real sources, it should be WP:TNT. ☆ Bri (talk) 14:58, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Lists of people, Beauty pageants, and Thailand. Shellwood (talk) 16:39, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Matt Hunt (journalist)

Matt Hunt (journalist) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

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

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

Satja Nai Chum Joan (Suea Sung Fah III)

Satja Nai Chum Joan (Suea Sung Fah III) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Appears to fail WP:NTV and WP:GNG DonaldD23 talk to me 14:56, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Thailand. DonaldD23 talk to me 14:56, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment: Looking up สัจจะในชุมโจร turns up lots of coverage (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL), though as is usual for entertainment news, a lot of it is based on supplied PR material. --Paul_012 (talk) 05:36, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:29, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Miss Cosmo International 2024

Miss Cosmo International 2024 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Doesn't meet WP:EVENT Claggy (talk) 22:06, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. Claggy (talk) 22:06, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Beauty pageants and Vietnam. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 22:49, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete A clear case of WP:TOOSOON. Page could be recreated once the event has been held, however. TH1980 (talk) 00:55, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  It would be held. Just like in any other international pageant that is going to happen within the year, it's not too soon to create an article for this. Example of which is Miss Universe, which would be held in September/November (even if there's no clear date yet but there's an article for that. So, I'd disprove of that. I'd retain it.

  Suggestions would only include a few more citations and reliable references from the media/news. Take these into consideration before even deleting this. Thank you. Japemizen627 (talk) 07:23, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No please don't delete the page. The event will be held soon in October

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:52, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of Vietnam representatives at international male beauty pageants

List of Vietnam representatives at international male beauty pageants (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Irrelevant and random list of pageant contestants has stood unreferenced for going on a decade. (Last referenced version was November 2015). Better to start over, if someone cares to. ☆ Bri (talk) 02:49, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete there have been recent updates, but unsourced updates about competitions such as Mister Tourism World (which are redlinks) do not engender confidence. Due to the potential of WP:BLP violations, this should be blown up per nom. Walsh90210 (talk) 03:11, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Lists of people, Beauty pageants, and Vietnam. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:22, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Article has been PROD'd so not eligible for Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:18, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:28, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per WP:NOTDIRECTORY. Mccapra (talk) 06:14, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Cầu Diễn station

Cầu Diễn station (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Zero sources to meet the GNG. The source cited doesn't mention this station. The only others I could find list it as one among several stations [130][131] and say nothing more. No significant coverage. Toadspike [Talk] 15:10, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please redirect this to Line 3 (Hanoi Metro). Toadspike [Talk] 15:17, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Stations, Transportation, and Vietnam. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:09, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge the position data, etc. to Line 3 (Hanoi Metro) and redirect there if sources cannot be found (they're most likely to be in Vietnamese, so do check in that language). There is no reason to delete the information present in the article which will be useful if it is expanded in future. Thryduulf (talk) 18:48, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge there isn't enough coverage (or content) for a separate article from Line 3 (Hanoi Metro) yet, but there might be in the future. Walsh90210 (talk) 23:18, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. I added some references from the corresponding article in Vietnamese. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 00:12, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment. All these metro station articles can be expanded (and their references improved) using the information already present in the corresponding articles in Vietnamese and other languages. Reviewing relevant articles in other languages is an important part of WP:BEFORE. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 01:49, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Per my talk page: I checked the Vietnamese Wikipedia articles for most of these nominations and their sourcing was no better. In this example, there is a map from Hanoi Metro [132], which isn't an independent source and has no information to boot, and this source [133], which doesn't mention the station at all.

  Source review on enwiki: Four sources never mention this station [134][135][136][137] (yes, I even watched the full 56-second video). There is also an article which lists the names of eight stations but says nothing more about this station [138].

  I assume good faith when people say sources exist somewhere, but in this case there are even fewer sources there and none are useful for notability. I do not appreciate the casting of aspersions about my BEFORE checks. Toadspike [Talk] 06:53, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  I'll go further than Toadspike. You are completely out of line, Eastmain. You make a habit of dumping any source you find online and then saying keep without actually reading them, and have an idea of what constitutes significant coverage that is utterly out of line with community consensus. Your AfD match rate is below 60%, while Toadspike is at nearly 90%. If anyone needs to improve their behavior at AfD, it is you (I'm at 83%, if you're wondering). Trainsandotherthings (talk) 21:26, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:35, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. Appears to have sufficient coverage to satisfy WP:GNG. -- Necrothesp (talk) 10:59, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per WP:HEY. Metro stations that have tens of thousands of riders annually are almost always notable. Bearian (talk) 16:43, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • I have to object to the claim that WP:HEY applies. The article has 5 sources for one sentence of prose content, and as Toadspike notes, there isn't coverage there. In fact, none of them even show the station is open, much less has "tens of thousands of riders". There is no improvement that suggests any outcome other than a redirect should happen. Walsh90210 (talk) 18:54, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Still divided between Keep and Merge/Redirect. Rather than close as No Consensus, I'm relisting once more.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:00, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment on the talk pages of the articles, not here. If you agree with the proposed deletion, you don't have to do anything. If you think the article merits keeping, then remove the {{prod}} template and make an effort to improve the article so that it clearly meets the notability and verifiability criteria.