Jump to content

Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/England: Difference between revisions

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
Line 12: Line 12:
== England ==
== England ==
<!-- New AFDs should be placed on top of the list, directly below this line -->
<!-- New AFDs should be placed on top of the list, directly below this line -->
{{Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Garden_Mania}}
{{Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Colin_Bunyan}}
{{Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Colin_Bunyan}}
{{Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/John_Gillmore}}
{{Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/John_Gillmore}}

Revision as of 19:39, 2 January 2024

Shortcut
Deletion Sorting
Project

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to England. 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|England|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.
There are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.
Removing a closed AfD discussion
Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.
Other types of discussions
You can also add and remove other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to England. For the other XfD's, the process is the same as AfD (except {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName}} is used for MFD and {{transclude xfd}} for the rest). For PRODs, adding a link with {{prodded}} will suffice.
Further information
For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.

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

Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at:
Purge page cache watch
Scan for England related AfDs

'Scan for England related Prods'

'Scan for England related TfDs'


England

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

The result was redirect‎ to Marian Foster. There's not a clear consensus for a merge, but history remains if one evolves. Star Mississippi 23:18, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Garden Mania

Garden Mania (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)

Seems like a promotion for BBC radio programmes. Funky Snack (Talk | Contribs) 21:09, 26 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • I actually think the sources would have to improve for it to be kept. Consider whether the sources are about Marian Foster or about Garden Mania. For instance, this doesn't mention Garden Mania at all and is clearly about the person. Primary sources don't count towards notability either. Secondary sources on the programme could exist, though. Geschichte (talk) 17:06, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Missed getting sorted into deletion sorting lists and merge vs keep not clear yet.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Skynxnex (talk) 21:37, 2 January 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, 9 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

The result was keep‎. The WordsmithTalk to me 02:18, 24 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Colin Bunyan

Colin Bunyan (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 radio presenter with no sufficient links. Links mainly point towards biography profiles and/or programme pages. Funky Snack (Talk | Contribs) 21:08, 26 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, do not agree with nomination statement. J97736 (talk) 16:01, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Missed getting sorted into deletion sorting lists and minimal participation.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Skynxnex (talk) 21:33, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Weak keep: There are independent sources here, not great ones (the picture of the presenter preparing a meal is irrelevant and the stuff about the takeaway feels WP:REFBOMBy) but they exist all the same. I've added a new link to information about the presenter's programme ending. I'm on the fence with this one, so may be swayed to change my !vote. Flip Format (talk) 15:58, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: Seems to fail WP:GNG, the individual does not have any real sufficient notability. The sources are also mediocre and as stated by Funky, point toward biography channels or program pages such as the BBC ones. Noorullah (talk) 02:14, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: There is no issue with notability as he has been active in local radio for nearly 50 years, and there are now several independent references.Rillington (talk) 02:43, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:28, 9 January 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) 21:38, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. radio presenter for over 50 years and long serving BBC staff member. J97736 (talk) 15:34, 22 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep. TLA (talk) 12:08, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

John Gillmore

John Gillmore (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 radio presenter with no significant references Funky Snack (Talk | Contribs) 21:05, 26 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, do not agree with nomination statement. J97736 (talk) 15:58, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Missed getting sorted into deletion sorting lists.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Skynxnex (talk) 21:33, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: !votes would be made stronger by engaging with notability guidelines.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Eddie891 Talk Work 23:17, 9 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment: Surely who was active in local radio for 38 years would be seen as notable? Plus there is a clear consensus for this article to be kept. Rillington (talk) 02:33, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: @Eddie891: I respectfully disagree. When the nominator has not made a case for deletion, only thrown in an unexplained adjective, there is nothing to argue against. Geschichte (talk) 08:17, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    When the nominated says, that there are ‘no significant references’, you could discuss significant references in response. To be clear, I'm not saying that the nomination is 'better', just that the only engagement with actual notability guidelines seemed to be saying he's notable for being active in his job, which isn't particularly relevant. It's not so much about 'arguing against' someone, but about discussing what notability criteria Gillmore does or doesn't meet, imo. Eddie891 Talk Work 12:46, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was no consensus‎. Star Mississippi 01:16, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Allan Beswick

Allan Beswick (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 radio presenter with nothing of note. Possible self-promotion Funky Snack (Talk | Contribs) 21:01, 26 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Missed getting sorted into lists and minimal participation.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Skynxnex (talk) 21:30, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Draftify: There is a lot of unsourced information to go through here, and the article may be able to be rescued if someone has the time to go through it and find sources for what can be sourced (and remove what can't be) - draftify is my preference, so that any usable content is retained while the article is repaired and potentially moved back to mainspace. The presenter is well-known enough regionally that there is a chance of a viable article here. Flip Format (talk) 16:00, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: This article is less clear-cut when compared to the AfD regarding Colin Bunyon, especially when you consider Flip Format points, and I have already removed some of the unsourced material and associated padding. Notability is satisfied due to length of time on-air but the article could do with additional references to satisfy these concerns. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rillington (talk • contribs) 02:53, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:28, 9 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment: I have now changed my vote from weak keep to keep following the removal of unsourced material, and also due to the article having multiple independent references. Rillington (talk) 02:37, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: I don't think "possible self-promotion" is a valid reason for deletion. This ought to be discussed/ investigated first via the Talk page? The article page statistics here show that most edits have been made by named accounts. Who's being accused here? Martinevans123 (talk) 09:48, 13 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. ✗plicit 10:55, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Josh Brown (figure skater)

Josh Brown (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; no medal placements at any senior-level skating competitions. Bgsu98 (Talk) 11:33, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 07:38, 9 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 07:46, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 08:47, 23 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

The result was delete‎. ✗plicit 09:49, 22 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mark Edwardson

Mark Edwardson (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)

Retired television and radio reporter who has subsequently gone into local politics at a very low level. Does not meet WP:NPOL at this level (no "significant press coverage", just routine local arguing). WP:BEFORE also does not reveal any significant coverage for his television or radio activities beyond routine coverage of him existing and passing mentions in articles about other things. Flip Format (talk) 10:56, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 07:37, 9 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 07:46, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. Politicians at the town and county council levels do not automatically pass WP:NPOL just for serving at that level — the only level of local office in England that automatically guarantees a Wikipedia article to all holders across the board is the narrow tier of directly-elected big city mayors, while the test most local officeholders have to pass is that their careers in politics have generated a hell of a lot more press coverage than has been shown here. Meanwhile, his prior career in journalism is staked solely on the presence of a staff profile on the self-published website of his own former employer, which means he hasn't been shown to pass inclusion criteria for journalists either. Bearcat (talk) 23:57, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete This article has been around a long long time, but I would have voted !delete on its previous problematic pre-political incarnation as well for failing GNG. Standing as a local councillor does not bootstrap it unfortunately. SportingFlyer T·C 13:19, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was redirect‎ to How to Think Like a Mathematician. (non-admin closure) asilvering (talk) 06:19, 8 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kevin Houston (mathematician)

Kevin Houston (mathematician) (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)

Senior lecturer at the University of Leeds. His only mention I found in the news is a passage in a BBC article where he is interviewed for being part of a campaign wanting to replace pi with tau. No other mention could be found. His research output seems rather limited and he doesn't hold a major position in his institution. The subject does not fulfill the notability requirements. Broc (talk) 15:50, 25 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I had some doubts when creating this AfD exactly because I thought the book he wrote could be notable, but I couldn't find any source that would show the notability of the author. I would also be in favor of creating an article for the book and redirecting the page of the author to it. --Broc (talk) 18:25, 25 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Any editors volunteering to create a new article for this one to be Merged or Redirected to?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:42, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

The result was keep‎. Reading S Marshall's comments as a non-bolded keep, there is consensus here. (non-admin closure) Schminnte [talk to me] 17:28, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Skinny Food Co

Skinny Food Co (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)

Promo piece, fails WP:NCORP ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 22:07, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Both would be considered reliable I believe, but The Times reference would not be considered WP:CORPDEPTH. The Lancashire Telegraph is borderline WP:CORPDEPTH as it does go beyond a routine announcement by providing background on the company. Are there any others as even if these both were found sufficient, not sure they would be enough for notability. --CNMall41 (talk) 20:47, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The Daily Mirror is also a British national newspaper, much less reliable than The Times (cf WP:DAILYMIRROR) and I would be suspicious of anything controversial that it said, but I would think it's reliable for the uncontroversial claims in this article, which is again already listed as a source. The article seems to be about the founders, but it's got quite a bit of depth about the business.—S Marshall T/C 22:31, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for reviewing and notifying of the deletion proposal. I tried to only use secondary sources that meet the standards for credibility. Although I do agree with you that some feel promotional, as far as I could tell none were advertorials, product placements etc, and were more just positive skewed coverage. I did try and balance the article and remove any overall bias in the article by proactively seeking out critical sources also.
Westenders (talk) 12:36, 2 January 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, 8 January 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 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

The result was keep‎. Consensus is that the article needs work, but this should be fixed by improvement, not deletion. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 09:51, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Arthur Colborne Lankester

Arthur Colborne Lankester (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)

Nothing in this article can be verified. The only source I can find in relation to the existence of this individual is this journal article and a few forum and self published articles related to this individual published after 2022 (which I assume were taken from the journal article). Sohom (talk) 16:00, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. CptViraj (talk) 16:23, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Religion, Medicine, India, and England. Deltaspace42 (talk • contribs) 16:48, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Google Books tells me more about Alice Grace Fox Lankester than about her husband from the history books (ISBN 9780252098802 p. 314, UIP); and the other result is literally a professional directory (Churchill Medical Directory) that gives me this person's telephone number in 1962 (Walton-on-Thames 24862), a bunch of post-nominals, two medical medals, a hospital superintendency, and "Director H.E.H. the Nizam's Med. & Sanit. Dept.". However "nothing in this article can be verified" is simply untrue. I followed up on the source for the tuberculosis programme, for one, and there it was in the source. It's also in the Medical Directory entry as "Special Deputation for Tuberc. Inquiry, Govt. India". The CMS sources cited are not findable by me, but I did find other CMS sources at least listing this person as a missionary, verifying at least that fact in the article too. There is a handful of little sources that do join up. A detailed obituary would definitely swing it, although I've only found a 1-sentence death listing so far. Uncle G (talk) 17:46, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • @Uncle G I agree the "Nothing in this article can be verified." is hyperbole on my part. However, I would assume that there would be a non-zero number of sources on the "Serai System" being talked about here. I haven't been able to find any sources from that period talking about this system that this person invented/created (which makes up a large portion of the article as well as the claim to notability for this individual). Sohom (talk) 18:30, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      • The Ebrahimi reference goes to some length to describe the Serai system in historical context, the role Lankaster played in developing it and disseminating it, and its origins in the locally recognizable architectures being adapted for a different use and a medical social function. There is a non-zero number of sources. Please see section 4 of the Ebrahimi article. [3]https://brill.com/view/journals/ehmh/79/1/article-p67_003.xml?language=en
      • Breamk (talk) 02:07, 8 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
        • That source is fairly persuasive. Peer-reviewed on-topic journal; in-depth discussion; credentialed historian of architecture. I only looked for sources on the person rather than on that specific work. But there's a lot on the work from that source that complements the rather more sparse sources on the life that together give us enough about life and works to make an in-depth article, which I think can get us over the bar. You can expand upon the wife from the aforementioned UIP book, by the way. A quick look for the hospital shows several mid-20th-century sources mentioning the brother Cecil Lankester in association with it. So there are two things already that the article has scope for further expansion upon. Uncle G (talk) 08:21, 9 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 23:36, 8 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep: weak, but sources below meet GNG. (edited 20:35, 26 January 2024 (UTC), see comment below)
  • Delete: see below. 09:29, 16 January 2024 (UTC)
Source eval:
Comments Source
Meets SIGCOV 1. Ebrahimi, Sara Honarmand (2022). "Medical Missionaries and the Invention of the "Serai Hospital" in North-western British India". European Journal for the History of Medicine and Health. 79: 67–93. doi:10.1163/26667711-bja10013.
Fails WP:IS 2. ^ Jump up to:a b "Beginnings in India, by Eugene Stock (1917)". anglicanhistory.org. Retrieved 2023-12-09.
Fails WP:IS 3. ^ Jump up to:a b c Oxenham, John (1918). Vernon Harold Starr 1882-1918 and after. London: Church Missionary Society. p. Chpt 2. Retrieved 8 January 2024.
Meets SIGCOV (See below) [4] 4. ^ Jump up to:a b c Lankester, Arthur (1920). Tuberculosis in India its prevalence, causation and treatment (Accessed via googlebooks ed.). London: Butterworth and Co. p. 317. Retrieved 8 January 2024.
Fails WP:IS 5. ^ Jump up to:a b Church Missionary Society (1894). "Register of Missionaries (1804-1894)". Church Missionary Society Periodicals.
Fails WP:IS 6. ^ Lankester, Arthur Colborne (1895). "Annual Medical Mission Breakfast". British Medical Association: 77–81 – via Church Missionary Society Periodicals.
Brief mention, (better link [5]) 7. ^ "From Tomb to Hospital: Pakistan Army's Conservation of Peshawar's Heritage Monument". Pakistan Defence. 2023-05-20. Retrieved 2023-12-09.
Fails WP:IS 8. ^ Lankester, Arthur (1912). "The Needs of the N. W. Frontier". Mercy and Truth 16. 16: 297.
Fails WP:IS 9. ^ Jump up to:a b "The Annual Meeting". Preaching and Healing: The Report of the CMS Medical Mission Auxiliary for 1905-1906: 24. 1906.
Fails WP:IS 10. ^ "Keswick Convention Medical Mission Meeting". Mercy and Truth. 106: 296. 1905.
Fails SIGCOV 11. ^ "Henry Martyn-Clark 1857 - 1916". Henry Martyn-Clark 1857 - 1916. Retrieved 2023-12-09.
 // Timothy :: talk  08:24, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@TimothyBlue The 3rd source you mention is written by the subject of this article, "Arther Lankester". That (imo) should be in the "Fails WP:IS" category. Sohom (talk) 08:57, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:50, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A comment by a grandson
At the age of 82, I am Arthur Lankester's eldest surviving grandchild. I remember him well. I have a type-written copy of his autobiography. I turned that into a paper back book, a copy of which which is now held in the Church Mission Society Crowther library in Oxford.
I realise that I suffer from having a conflict of interest, as does the autobiography. However, it seems a pity if the best available source has to be largely ignored. My initial reaction on reading the article's text and the reasons for deletion was that it seemed a pity to throw away this information but that, unless the text of the article can be made more accurate, it would be best to delete the article.
I need to learn much more about the Wikipedia editing process but it appears to me that the main reasons proposed for deletion are that he was not sufficiently notable, the lack of independent sources, and that the article is an orphan.
Notability I am obviously biased here but he founded the Mission Hospital in Peshawar and was very much involved in the founding of the Osmania hospital in Hyderabad. He was awarded the Kaiser-i-Hind medal (Second class in silver) in 1908. (See the Indian Medical Gazette, August 1908 Page 317.) In his position of Director of Medical and Sanitary Services for Hyderabad, he was effectively in charge of the health services of a small country. His book "Tuberculosis in India" is still an important text and the Wikipedia Article could (if corrected provide useful background material to this subject.) (By the way, his job in Hyderabad was not a Government of India post as is stated in the article; he was recruited by the Nizam and his staff.) (See the Englishman's Overland Mail for 5 February 1920, the Times Obituary of 21 November 1963.)
Independent Sources Google provides plenty of sources about his work in Peshawar; there is even a picture of a memorial to him in the Burg Said Khan, which later became the hospital chapel. Of particular note are articles by Dr Ali Jan, a prominent local historian in Peshawar. I will produce a list. There is rather less written about his work in Hyderabad but the best article is in the Englishman's Overland Mail of 5 Feb 1920.
I do not fully understand the problem of the article being "an orphan". Once a Wikipedia page had been produced there are many web pages that could be linked to it.
I apologise for my poor understanding of how Wikipedia works and will return when I have more references. Jim462 (talk) 18:21, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Jim462 I think if you can find links/clippings/evidence to some of the articles by Dr Ali Jan and the obituary, we could put this over notability. Based on https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5183017/?page=1 the Indian Medical Gazette source counts as a mention. Searching Dr. A. C. Lankester shows us some sources, however, I'm unsure if they are related to your grandfather? For example, I found this article in the The Lancet on p191-121 is this about the subject or somebody else ? Sohom (talk) 18:45, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
https://www.google.co.in/books/edition/The_East_and_the_West/ejEMAAAAIAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=Dr.+A.+C.+Lankester&pg=PA222&printsec=frontcover is also another source I found which seems to be a mention of the subject. Sohom (talk) 08:06, 21 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
https://www.google.co.in/books/edition/Proceedings_of_the_Church_Missionary_Soc/860_AQAAMAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=Dr.+%22A.+C.+Lankester%22&pg=PA118&printsec=frontcover is another one as well. Sohom (talk) 08:08, 21 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm, https://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctv27qzr8k provides some context about him and his work on Tuberculosis in India (I think). Sohom (talk) 08:20, 21 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist to see if additional sources are accessible.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:36, 22 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Draftify Hi User:Jim462, I'm writing as a history professor and I know something about the history of British India. I think your grandfather was a historically interesting, notable figure. The problem with this article is that it is essentially original research (WP:OR) combined with a single good secondary source (Ebrahimi 2022). (The Pakistan Defense article link is broken.) I suspect if you did some reading in the historical literature on medicine in British India you would find more references to him, which would support a Wikipedia page on him. Alternatively, you could write a brief paper about him for a historical journal based on your own research - he has other publications in his own lifetime besides those mentioned here - but that original research cannot be the basis for a Wikipedia page. Llajwa (talk) 18:52, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Some more IS references to him by historians, on JSTOR:
  • BRIMNES, NIELS. “Vikings against Tuberculosis: The International Tuberculosis Campaign in India, 1948-1951.” Bulletin of the History of Medicine, vol. 81, no. 2, 2007, pp. 407–30. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/44452113. Accessed 26 Jan. 2024. "The first extensive discussion of tuberculosis in India was written by Dr. Arthur Lankester in 1920, and he estimated that..."
  • [Mentioned by User:Sohom above] VENKAT, BHARAT JAYRAM. “To Cure an Earthquake.” At the Limits of Cure, Duke University Press, 2021, pp. 23–76. JSTOR, https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv27qzr8k.5. Accessed 26 Jan. 2024. "Arthur Lankester , who appears later in this chapter, took a slightly diff er ent view, contending..."
  • Bottomore, Stephen. “Early Missionary Filming and the Emergence of the Professional Cameraman.” Beyond the Screen: Institutions, Networks, and Publics of Early Cinema, edited by Marta Braun et al., Indiana University Press, 2016, pp. 19–26. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt1bmznbd.5. Accessed 26 Jan. 2024. "Stock noted of Cash’s film of Dr. Lankester of Peshawar that “... the sudden sight of Dr. Arthur Lankester walking down the Khyber Pass among the camels will not soon be forgotten by those who were present that night”. Eugene Stock, The History of the Church Missionary Society ... vol. 4 (London: CMS, 1916), 503."
Also see:
  • Rao, B. Eswara. “From Rajayak s(h)Ma (‘Disease of Kings’) to ‘Blackman’s Plague’: Perceptions on Prevalence and Aetiology of Tuberculosis in the Madras Presidency, 1882–1947.” The Indian economic and social history review 43, no. 4 (2006): 457–485. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/epdf/10.1177/001946460604300403. "In 1915, the Government of India circulated to all the Presidencies a compre- hensive report submitted by Arthur Lankester on the prevalence of the disease along with certain suggestions..."
  • Venkat, Bharat Jayram. “A Vital Mediation: The Sanatorium, before and after Antibiotics.” Technology and culture 60, no. 4 (2019): 979–1003. https://muse-jhu-edu.revproxy.brown.edu/article/741380. "As a result of the Lucknow resolution, an ex-medical missionary and Director of the Medical and Sanitation Department for the Nizam of Hy- derabad named Arthur Lankester traveled across Burma and India for eleven months collecting evidence concerning the prevalence of tuberculo- sis on the subcontinent. In particular, Lankester drew on the accounts of women medical missionaries and physicians, whose work in the zenanas made them among the vanguard in detecting tuberculosis among Indians. His informants assured him that there was “scarcely a zenana . . . which has not some case of tuberculosis!”20 Reinforcing the importance of missionary intervention, he noted that women confined to zenanas were usually un- able or unwilling to leave their home in order to seek medical treatment."
Llajwa (talk) 19:03, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The world expert on tubercolosis under the British Raj seems to be this UCLA historian: [[6]], who discusses Arthur Lankester in two of his publications I cited above - if you email him at the address given, he might be interested in corresponding with you. Llajwa (talk) 19:30, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I should get back yo my own work but I've been reading Venkat's prizewinning book on tuberculosis, At the Limits of Cure, which discusses Lankester's work in chapter one - it's quite fascinating. It's free on JSTOR. I hope you will make your grandfather's autobiography available online. Llajwa (talk) 19:49, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: I admit I want to keep this article. Strike my delete above based on:
  • Meets SIGCOV: [7]
  • Meets SIGCOV: [8]
  • Meets SIGCOV: [9]. The article alone doesn't meet SIGCOV, but the film it mentions would meet probably meet SIGCOV so together I think this passes.
I didn't look at others because this was enough for me to think it meets WP:N. I rarely use the sources must exist claim, but in this case there probably is more out there. The above discussion I think shows persons interested in the subject and willing to discuss sources and improve the article. If we applied the standards we use for athletes and entertainers to academics this would be a speedy keep.
@Jim462:, I hope your family is happy and blessed. Greetings from Los Angeles,  // Timothy :: talk  20:35, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for this Timothy. I will continue to follow this up. I have had copies printed of his 220 page autobiography so with that I have not, until now, needed to research him on other sources. The conflict of interest rules of Wikipedia make it difficult for me to correct the page. (As just one little example, my grandparents had 4 children, not one child as stated in Wikipedia. - my father Stephen born in Hyderabad, my uncles Christopher and Arthur Hugh, and my aunt Dorothea all 3 of whom were born in Peshawar.)
Sources about his time in Hyderabad are more difficult to find than those about Peshawar. For example, when ACL left Hyderabad Mr R I R Glancy the Minister of Finance wrote on 23 March 2020 commenting that ". . . the regard of the people which was strikingly exhibited in your election to the Chair of the Hyderabad Municipality, an honour, so far as I am aware, never before awarded to a European. yours sincerely, R I R Glancy". I am sure that this is true but I am equally sure that it will never appear in Wikipedia.
It should only take me a few days to obtain external evidence to prove that ACL was a sufficiently significant figure. The simple facts that he was awarded the Kaiser J Hind Medal (silver) (for his work in Peshawar) and that he was essentially the minister of health for a small country should be enough. However, achieving a full and accurate article will be more dificult.
Regards, John Lankester Jim462 (talk) 18:27, 27 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I personally would also support draftification/userification (to Jim462 if they are fine with it, else I'm willing to take a stab at it as well). I think I see enough sources to not support outright deletion. The current article, however, needs to be completely rewritten, based on my understanding, the subject is not that well known for his missionary pursuits, but rather for his medical pursuits with his most notable contribution being not the serai system (as the article current claims), but rather the fact that he conducted the first study on the prevalence of tuberculosis in India and was amongst the first to experiment and develop various methods of treating and preventing the spread of the disease in India. Sohom (talk) 12:53, 27 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I have some sympathy with the implication that the Wikipedia page over-emphasises the aspect of the serai hospital. ACL's own words on this subject were a comment on the founding of his first hospital in Peshawar (the predecessor of the current Mission Hospital).
    I was taken by Yahyah Khan to one of these serais which had become vacant and could be rented at a cheap rate. It consisted of a central office room and one large and one smaller courtyard, both surrounded by rooms, connected together by a broad passage in winch was the tomb of a former Moslem Saint. There was a wide opening to a main road of the City. This seemed to me quite ideal for my immediate purpose, and I lost no time m acquiring it. It had been long used as a halting-place by the very people whom I hoped to reach, so was familiar ground to them. Dirty and untidy as were all the rooms they were soon transformed by free use of whitewash: mud floors replaced by cement, and worn woodwork repaired and painted. There was one large room which was transformed into a quite serviceable operating theatre. The smaller serai was a quadrangle surrounded by about 25 rooms; these needed only cleansing and re-flooring, without structural alteration, as it was my intention to let diem be used by whole families with their sick relatives, from which they would not wish to be separated. This was a most successful plan, though not ideal from the strictly “hospital” point of view, and I reproduced it in the new hospital, erected later on. There was a convenient covered space in one corner of the mam serai where patients could gather; and upper storey rooms for use by the resident house-surgeon. Other amenities included a square tank at one corner of the enclosure, with water laid on for washing.
    I agree that ACL's most important work was on Tuberculosis in India. However his missionary work was also important as it founded the existing Mission Hospital. Dr Ali Jan, a prominent local historian in Peshawar, has commented to me that ACL was a "legendary figure" in Peshawar. ACL also made an important contribution in Hyderabad in combating the 1919 influenza epidemic and in some of the planning for the current Osmania Hospital. Jim462 (talk) 15:31, 27 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you for your comments. I need to study Wikipedia processes in more detail, and how draftification/userification works especially in an area where one has a conflict of interests. John Lankester Jim462 (talk) 15:46, 27 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment i’m open to correction on this, but my understanding is that you have the right to edit this article freely, according to the rules and norms of Wikipedia, like any other editor, as long as your relationship to the subject is disclosed, as it is. You are free to correct errors of fact, if you have documentation to support it, and also to remove incorrect or uncertain information which lacks adequate sourcing. Llajwa (talk) 17:35, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - many people are notable not for one thing, but for a body of work(s). Easily passes SIGCOV of people who lived pre-Internet. I would not oppose userfication. Bearian (talk) 15:11, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was soft delete‎. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Liz Read! Talk! 03:15, 8 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Everyone Matters Schools Trust

Everyone Matters Schools Trust (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 have carried out WP:BEFORE for this article about a multi-academy trust, and added an interview. I do not see enough reliable secondary sourcing for the article to meet WP:NCORP or WP:GNG. If it continues to grow and attracts more coverage it may become notable, but at the moment it looks WP:TOOSOON. Tacyarg (talk) 02:29, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education, Schools, and United Kingdom. Tacyarg (talk) 02:29, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and England. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:34, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, unless significant, independent coverage found. Sources are reliable and independent, but WP:PRIMARY. The organisation doesn't fulfil the alternative notability criteria of WP:NONPROFIT as it is local in scope; neither does it pass WP:SIRS as the coverage in Educate magazine relies heavily on an interview with one of the founders of the Trust (now resigned) but still the headteacher of one of the Trust's schools see WP:PRIMARYNEWS and is not completely independent of the Trust. Leaves GNG, which isn't satisfied either as the Educate source doesn't provide SIGCOV of the Trust, it's about the interviewee, Ian Young's teaching background, views and vision. Possible redirect to Rainford High School the original school within the Trust before its name was changed, but another senior school, Up Holland High School joined the Trust today, somewhat complicating things. Rupples (talk) 11:50, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. Consensus here is slim, especially with the nom being discounted since having been blocked. However this is a BLP without good sourcing, and therefore edge to delete. Star Mississippi 22:35, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jana Amin

Jana Amin (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)

Failure of WP:BLP and WP:N. Sources are not independent, half are related to her entrepreneur mother, whose biography itself is not notable.

Source evaluation:

  • el Kaliouby, Rana; Coleman, Carol (2000). Girl Decoded. Penguin Random House.
Book from her mother.
  • "Changing the narrative around Muslim Women and supporting girl's education with Jana Amin, Egyptian-American Advocate (#16)"
Podcast involving her.
  • Changing the narrative, one Muslim woman at a time | Jana Amin | TEDxYouth@BeaconStreet
TEDx involving her.
  • "Affectiva Co-Founder Rana el Kaliouby on How She Built a Tech Startup as a Single Mom 5,000 Miles From Home"
Interview of her mother.
  • "Rana el Kaliouby decodes her memoir "Girl Decoded""
Book about her mother.
  • "UNGA 2020: 'I began my activist journey by telling the story of Muslim women I knew'"
Interview with her about her TEDx.
  • Amin, Jana (17 December 2019), Changing the narrative, one Muslim woman at a time, retrieved 2021-03-25
Her TEDx talk.
It is very likely self-published (https://egyptianstreets.com/submit-an-article/). Also, see an excerpt of the article:
Amin is not just an inspiring women’s rights activist of our time, but also a young woman of action whose life is centered on learning, commitment and determination, and passionately works to ensure that visions, policies and even academia are turned into real tangible solutions..
  • "Protecting progress for girls' education — Assembly | Malala Fund"
Blog post by her.
  • Hung, Madeleine A.; Kim, Joyce E. (September 15, 2023). "Harvard Students Launch Fundraisers for Morocco Earthquake Relief".
One namedrop of her. Local college newspaper.

Given this and the overall interconnection between promotional pages, I think a WP:TNT delete is needed. बिनोद थारू (talk) 23:21, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. I have looked at the sources, and I substantially agree with the assessment that बिनोद थारू has given. There are citations to pages that don't even mention Jana Amin, pages that barely mention her in passing, and pages that are either certainly or probably not independent of her. There is no evidence at all of satisfying Wikipedia's notability guidelines. JBW (talk) 17:02, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep because The National (Abu Dhabi) is a reputable newspaper and being prominently interviewed in it should be enough to establish WP:N, especially when also backed by Egyptian Streets which is a large blog in Egypt, plus being allowed to write for the Malala Fund and speak at TEDx: OK so not every TEDx speaker automatically has WP:N but a TEDx speaker who's also been in some country's major daily newspaper and another country's major blog is more likely to be. I agree that the article should be improved (we could cite the Borgen Project magazine article instead of just the front of the Collateral Repair Project for a start, although we'd first need to check why Wikipedia is blacklisting Borgen Project URLs, I wonder if this is an error). But I don't see the need to WP:TNT this article. (Potential Wikipedia:CONFLICT disclosure: her mother and I were in the same lab as PhD students. I think the points I made are still valid; a second opinion to check this would be nice) Silas S. Brown (email, talk) 22:49, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Add sources to further establish notability: NowThis News - How Nawal El Saadawi Shook Up the Patriarchy in Egypt featured Jana; also the Italian version of Elle (magazine) ran an article on her; also Marie Claire Arabia (which does not currently have a Wikipedia article, but has been cited several times by various Wikipedia articles so appears to be a recognised source) had an Arabic article featuring her. Silas S. Brown (email, talk) 14:05, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 22:19, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 21:36, 13 January 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) 02:17, 21 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

The result was redirect‎ to Bumper Films. Liz Read! Talk! 22:01, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rocky Hollow

Rocky Hollow (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. Tagged for notability since 2022 DonaldD23 talk to me 23:17, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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

The result was draftify‎. Daniel (talk) 20:46, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lewis Nolan (footballer)

Lewis Nolan (footballer) (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)

Young footballer made a brief debut in a cup game but is yet to attract any significant coverage. He was covered in a local paper and on his club website but it's not enough. Currently TOOSOON so should likely be draftified or deleted. MarchOfTheGreyhounds 21:35, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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

The result was merge‎ to Dodgy. Liz Read! Talk! 02:00, 11 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nigel Clark

Nigel Clark (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)

Clark is a member of a notable band (Dodgy), but there's no evidence he's notable independently. As per WP:BANDMEMBER, band members need to be individually notable beyond just being in the band DeputyBeagle (talk) 15:25, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Natg 19 (talk) 23:08, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

The result was Draftify‎. The article is now located at Draft:Lucas Sant. North America1000 11:10, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lucas Sant

Lucas Sant (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)

Player has made one appearance in a cup game but does not yet have significant coverage, as far as I can see. It is a case of TOOSOON and the article should probably be draftified. MarchOfTheGreyhounds 10:30, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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

The result was delete‎. The WordsmithTalk to me 17:46, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

T.S. Idiot

AfDs for this article:
T.S. Idiot (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 be mostly an autobiography created by a user with the name of this person. Although this person is a performer, there is a lack of notability. No wider impact of significant secondary sources beyond self-promotion and marketing. Seaweed (talk) 15:40, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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

The result was keep‎. Hey man im josh (talk) 15:11, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Edward FitzClarence, 6th Earl of Munster

Edward FitzClarence, 6th Earl of Munster (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)

Does not cite any sources, does not appear to be notable, pretty clear violation of WP:NOTINHERITED microbiologyMarcus (petri dish·growths) 14:27, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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

The result was redirect‎ to Adam and the Ants#Members. Liz Read! Talk! 04:34, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Terry Lee Miall

Terry Lee Miall (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)

BLP, fails GNG and NBIO. Sources are a database record on AllMusic, an article with name mentions, and a dead link. BEFORE found name mentions but nothing meeting WP:IS WP:RS with WP:SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indeph. No objection to a redrect to Adam and the Ants#Members where the subject is listed.  // Timothy :: talk  06:15, 27 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Doubtful on whether there is anything worth merging. He was later a plumber and joined a non-notable local band, neither of which is relevant to the history of Adam and the Ants. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 18:38, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. ✗plicit 23:42, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Boxford Rovers Football Club

Boxford Rovers Football 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)

Amateur football club playing at level 16 of the English football pyramid, well below the level at which clubs are deemed notable. Of the references, only this is an independent, non-database source (the Nayland & Wiston site cited does not mention the club, just the location if plays at). I will leave it to the closing admin to decide whether the deprodder needs a good trouting. Number 57 00:40, 27 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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

The result was redirect‎ to List of cities in the United Kingdom. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 12:09, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of cities in England

List of cities in England (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:REDUNDANTFORK created by copying from List of cities in the United Kingdom over the longstanding redirect and removing content perceived as not England-related. The achieved result fails WP:SUMMARYSTYLE and the page should also not exist per WP:PAGEDECIDE (several related topics, each of them similarly notable, can be collected into a single page, where the relationships between them can be better appreciated). The vast majority of the cities are in England so this will always be heavily duplicative and reducing the prose will also not produce anything useful because the English cities can be viewed together, separated from non-English cities, simply by sorting the table.
I note that List of cities in Wales and Cities of Scotland exist, but these countries were not always part of the United Kingdom. [see comment below before laughing please] The latter, which is a valid article, reasonably covers the topic of Scottish cities in general and throughout history; for example it has content about historic capitals. The Welsh list seems mostly redundant however, but this AfD is not about that page. —Alalch E. 21:15, 26 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography, Lists, United Kingdom, and England. —Alalch E. 21:15, 26 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Alalch E, England wasn't always part of the United Kingdom either. It's not massively unreasonable to have a list of cities in a country. Whether or not this list is actually needed, it does meet WP:CLN.—S Marshall T/C 21:30, 26 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes I retract that pointless remark, I honestly don't remember why I made it. The rationale here is, as I believe can be read from the sane part of the nomination: the list isn't needed, it's a redundant fork and the topic is covered better according to the longstanding organization in which England's cities are listed among the UKs cities. Edit: Oh, I remember why I made it: Because of the historical capitals content in Cities of Scotland that wouldn't fit well in List of cities in the United Kingdom. (Just a silly sentence to come up with coming from that line of thought.) —Alalch E. 21:47, 26 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    The editor interested in developing the nominated list is now updating figures (example edit). So this list will have one set of figures (presumably the better, more up-to-date, figures) and the UK list will have another. If the lists are to be harmonized it would need to be done manually. That's almost twice the work for the same result in terms of utility for the reader. (What could be done is selective table row transclusion however for automatic WP:SYNC.)—Alalch E. 22:09, 26 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Like Scotland, England has historical capitals. Colchester under the Romans; I think I'm right in saying that Athelstan's capital was Winchester?; York, of course, in the Danelaw; then London.—S Marshall T/C 23:13, 26 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It's not the same page, though. It's a different page listing all the cities in England and a bit of history on English city status. England also has historical capitals, such as York, noted on the page under history. England wasn't part of the United Kingdom until its foundation in the 1700s, like Wales and Scotland. Many of England's cities, if not most outside of industrial heartlands, were formed before this period, many in which going back to the Roman era and before.
If Wales and Scotland have pages like this, surely England can. 86.183.219.17 (talk) 03:04, 27 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
example markup

transclusion source: 

...
|-<section end="SK 1366" /><section begin="SK 1367" />
|[https://nasledje.gov.rs/index.cfm/spomenici/pregled_spomenika?spomenik_id=44878 SK 1367]
|[[File:Gracanica 1.jpg|100x100px]]
| <noinclude>style="background:#add8e6;" |</noinclude>[[Gračanica monastery]]<noinclude>*</noinclude>
|[[Pristina]]
|[[Gračanica, Kosovo|Gračanica]]
|25 October 1947
|4 June 1990
|[[File:Unesco Cultural Heritage logo.svg|45px]] [[World Heritage Site]]
|-<section end="SK 1367" /><section begin="SK 1368" />
...

transclusion target 

{{#lst:Immovable Cultural Heritage of Exceptional Importance (Serbia)|SK 1367}}
Do you think it's a good idea? I'm not so sure. It will remove the need to maintain two population data sets, but it could make editing more difficult, and cities are fluid, they can lose the status and new settlements can gain the status; edits to accord for such changes could break transclusion, and few editors are familiar with H:LST. Also, more importantly, perhaps, the tables in Cities of Scotland and List of cities in Wales would need to be reformatted to match the UK list and I am not so sure about doing it boldly. Some of the information in the tables would definitely be lost, for example, the nickname column in the Scottish cities' table. The images too. Something to think about. In the long term. In the meantime, this page should be redirected back.—Alalch E. 15:20, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
If you want to update the page list, then feel free to do so. It doesn't mean the page should be deleted. Also, there are clear differences on both pages. Check the history section, for example. It goes into detail about English city status and the historical capitals of England. 2A00:23C7:69B4:7101:30E5:833F:ED18:44AE (talk) 16:54, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It's not about updating, it's about synchronization. About the prose: The prose is also duplicative from what I can tell. —Alalch E. 17:06, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting as I don't see a consensus here yet. I am interpreting User:S Marshall's comments as an unbolded "Keep", please correct me if I'm wrong on this. The issue of whether or not this subject warrants a standalone list seem fundamental and more opinions on this topic would be welcome.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:02, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:22, 9 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect. There's a 72% overlap between the two, which is not going to change, because that's how many cities are in each. One is entirely contained in the other, unlike with Texas and the US. There is no list specifically for Metropolitan France, or for the Contiguous United States, probably because of the amount of overlap.
Speaking of the France list, it has a column for subdivision (not region comma subdivision), allowing users to sort by their subset of choice. The UK list should be reworked to focus on comparability and sortability: one line per entry instead of three, split columns to contain only one type of data, etc. Then the list would only be two mouse-scrolls long. Wizmut (talk) 18:12, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was no consensus‎ due to lack of participation, with no prejudice against an immediate renomination at AfD. Daniel (talk) 19:38, 22 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Borough of Wandsworth Rifle Club

Borough of Wandsworth Rifle 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 club. Hundreds of such clubs exist in the UK, and I cannot see why this one is particularly notable. Other than Wikipedia mirrors and some directories, can only find one external source about the club here.

Article is also completely unsourced and has been since 2009. Elshad (talk) 13:15, 25 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 06:25, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: The article has been largely unsourced since its inception, but that does not appear to be for want of extant sources. A search of the British Newspaper Archive turns up more than 100 articles, out of which a strong Wikipedia article could undoubtedly be built. As for the claim that "Hundreds of such clubs exist in the UK, and I cannot see why this one is particularly notable", the first sentence of the article appears to hold the answer: "the Borough of Wandsworth Rifle Club is one of the oldest clubs belonging to the National Small-bore Rifle Association". Indeed, it appears to date to 1903. --Usernameunique (talk) 06:49, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 06:45, 8 January 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, NotAGenious (talk) 12:26, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

The result was keep‎. Liz Read! Talk! 01:40, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

William Tash

William Tash (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 indication of notability DrowssapSMM 23:06, 23 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: This isn't appropriate for soft-deletion as the primary contributor is still actively editing the article. Relisting to form consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 22:11, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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

The result was keep‎. This is more of a procedural Keep because after going to a lot of trouble editing this article and putting together a source table, the nominator twice said they wanted to Keep this article.

Please do not start an AFD discussion unless you are seeking to delete an article. It's not an appropriate vehicle to encourage other editors to find new sources for you. Liz Read! Talk! 22:23, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

World Jewish Relief

World Jewish Relief (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've been editing this page for a couple of days mostly removing excessive external links to the organisation's website, boldly removing unsourced or improperly sourced content, verifying what I can and tagging what I can't verify. Then, I tried to improve the page by incorporating some secondary and tertiary sources but I've drawn a blank. I am confident that at this point I have explored WP:ATD but after putting together the source assessment table below it's become clear to me that there isn't actually enough significant coverage in independent secondary sources to form an objective overview of this British charity. I contemplated doing prod but doing so would have sent other editors on a wild goose chase for reliable secondary sources which I don't want to do. So I've arrived at the conclusion that AfD is the only way forward.𝔓420°𝔓Holla 16:13, 23 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Source assessment table
Source Independent? Reliable? Significant coverage? Count source toward GNG?
https://register-of-charities.charitycommission.gov.uk/charity-search/-/charity-details/290767/governance I think the charities register functions like Companies House in that organisations have to submit their own details but I could be wrong. Yes It's a legally binding document No Just a registry ✘ No
https://archive.org/details/menofvision00amyz/page/99/mode/2up No In this interview https://portal.ehri-project.eu/units/us-005578-irn504457-irn507288 this book's author discusses joining the "Jewish Relief Unit of the Jewish Committee for Relief Abroad, sponsored by the Central British Fund for German Jewry". Therefore, this source isn't independent because she's writing about an organisation that she was a member of. Yes I've had a good flick through the book and it's very well written, very thorough and well citated. Yes The book goes into a lot of depth about this organisation's formation. It's just a shame it's not independent. ✘ No
https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2020/jan/05/windermere-children-arek-hersh-survivor-bbc-drama Yes It's The Guardian Yes It's The Guardian No I added this source for verification purposes but it doesn't actually mention World Jewish Relief. ✘ No
http://www.wjr.org.uk/about-us/ No One of many links to the organisation's website that I removed from the page. ~ Organisation's websites are reliable up to a point but we can't use them to support notability. Yes There's lot's of coverage about the organisation's history on their website but it's not independent and can't support notability ✘ No
https://search.worldcat.org/title/31047514?oclcNum=31047514 No World Cat lists this books publisher as (you guessed it) World Jewish Relief. ~ Probably reliable up to a point but because it's not independent it's not reliable enough to support notability Yes It's a book about the organisation. ✘ No
https://www.gale.com/intl/essays/amy-zahl-gottlieb-central-british-fund-world-jewish-relief-first-ten-years No I added this source because it's easier to verify than checking Gottlieb's book out of a library but when I researched the author I realised that the author was part of the "Jewish Relief Unit of the Jewish Committee for Relief Abroad, sponsored by the Central British Fund for German Jewry" Yes I'm not disputing this historian's research skills and literary prowess. It's just a shame it's not independent because WP requires independent secondary sources to verify notability. Yes It's incredibly detailed and very well-referenced. ✘ No
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{source assess table}}.
𝔓420°𝔓Holla 16:13, 23 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 17:24, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Neutral I will admit that independent sources about this subject are hard to come by by simply Googling the subject. However, I find it hard to believe that this orgnisation previously known as Central British Fund for German Jewry has no significant coverage. We're talking about an organisation that played a significant part in helping (and I'm choosing my words wisely) establish the state of Israel and save the lives of hundreds if not thousands of children before and during World War Two many of whom became notable people and made notable contributions in their own right. Now it may be that World Jewish Releif is the wrong namespace and perhaps Central British Fund for German Jewry might be a better location for this entry. I just find it hard to believe that an organisation with so much historical significance hasn't had anything written about it by any historians.𝔓420°𝔓Holla 17:50, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Keep I'm sure we can find pre-internet sources. No Swan So Fine (talk) 22:41, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep‎. (non-admin closure) Schminnte [talk to me] 17:40, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

David R. Inglis

David R. Inglis (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 academic, sources online are partly about a different guy who worked on the atom bomb. Andre🚐 08:07, 22 December 2023 (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, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Arbitrarily0 (talk) 03:13, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. The article was in terrible shape (I have trimmed a lot of unsourced and unverifiable information), and there were fewer reviews of his books than I might have expected. But I think there's still a case for WP:AUTHOR, WP:PROF#C1 (citation counts 304 for Culture and everyday life, 292 for An invitation to social theory, 207 for "The body in sociology", and 164 for The uses of sport) and maybe for WP:PROF#C8 (supposed founder of a notable journal). —David Eppstein (talk) 22:32, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist, I think it would be helpful if the nominator reviewed the article since it's been improved.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 05:56, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

The result was no consensus‎. Arbitrarily0 (talk) 04:25, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Raiter

Michael Raiter (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)

Faiils WP:BIO. Sources are mainly primary. LibStar (talk) 05:13, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 06:22, 27 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 08:59, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete -- As far as I can see, the subject fails WP:BIO and I don't see any other notability criteria that are met. I don't see that WP:BOOK is met. A reading of the award process (self-nomination and an entry fee required) and its criteria does not convey obvious notability. Qflib, aka KeeYou Flib (talk) 02:45, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak keep - he's a well-known Anglican evangelist and preacher in Australia, was principal of a Bible College in Australia too which has notability in other countries. If there's no consensus to keep then please merge to Melbourne School of Theology to preserve the history of the article. Cavepavonem (talk) 10:51, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    "well-known Anglican evangelist and preacher in Australia, was principal of a Bible College" are not criteria for notability. LibStar (talk) 11:34, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. The only applicable notability guideline is GNG, it requires in-depth coverage in multiple independent reliable sources, and we do not have that. All the blathering in earlier contributions to this discussion about how we should ignore the guidelines and consider him notable because he's notable is content-free, circular, and should be disregarded. —David Eppstein (talk) 19:12, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist to consider Merge option.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 08:44, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

The result was keep‎. TLA (talk) 03:58, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Arthur Meaby

Arthur Meaby (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 notable individual, lack of independent SIGCOV GraziePrego (talk) 02:59, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 02:16, 27 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Redirect to Youth Hostels Association (England & Wales): Fails GNG and NBIO. Single source in article is OBIT, with all the normal issues that go with using OBITs as sources. BEFORE showed nothing that meets WP:IS WP:RS with WP:SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth. Ping me if SIGCOV sources from WP:IS are added to the article. GNG requires multiple, IS, SIGCOV, sources.  // Timothy :: talk  18:32, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • There is absolutely nothing wrong with using obits in national newspapers as sources. Not sure why you think there is. By capitalising, you seem to be suggesting that the page you want is WP:OBIT, which I'm sure isn't it given it has no relevance to this article. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:30, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 02:15, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep: I expanded the article and added more sources. Although I would like to see additional sources (especially on his work designing railroad carriages), I am convinced that Meaby is notable and worthy of coverage beyond the suggested link to the organization's article. I also agree that a bi-line obituary in The Guardian pretty much proves notability. Rublamb (talk) 17:55, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist, to consider recent expansion/addition of sources by Rublamb.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 02:43, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

The result was delete‎. I see a consensus to Delete.

But my personal opinion is that commenters here did not pay enough attention to improvements to the article since its nomination and the assault was just two sentences in the Personal life section while the Career section was the bulk of the article. But I'm here to enact the consensus of editors in a AFD discussion. Forgive me this lapse of decorum to share my view. Liz Read! Talk! 21:40, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Grace Jabbari

Grace Jabbari (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 a semi-procedural nomination. This person is only really notable for the relationship and subsequent assault trial of Jonathan Majors, which makes this a WP:BLP1E. I'm not comfortable about a redirect because of privacy concerns. I declined an WP:A7 tag because it's blatantly the wrong criteria, although WP:IAR / WP:BLPCRIME might apply, I'd rather have a discussion about it first. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 12:50, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Keep - Her role in the criminal proceeding is relevant. She has a whole career ahead of her and may become even more notable in the future. If this discussion concludes in deletion, the content should be downloaded or something for when her article could be re-published. Kirby777 (talk) 13:07, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: to brief of a mention. If anything, it is too soon for a page.
Wikisteveb4 (talk) 15:54, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:04, 26 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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

The result was a redirect to Esken#Stobart_Rail_&_Civils. ‎Two votes for a redirect is a consensus in my books. Please, feel free to take some material from this article and place it into the Esken page. TLA (talk) 07:36, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

XYZ Rail & Civils

XYZ Rail & Civils (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)

After researching this company and reading the sources, it fails WP:CORP etc. It's not a notable company. Devokewater 14:31, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Merge and delete redirect: Given that all the information in the current article is poorly sourced to non-independent places, and I can't find anything much in Google beyond job adverts and routine press-releases, delete is a reasonable option, but it would be sensible to check if anything needs merging to Esken#Stobart Rail & Civils first. The notability of XYZ, if it has any, is as an offshoot of the Stobart group, so it's better dealt with at Esken. Elemimele (talk) 17:16, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 19:44, 26 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Elemimele: I'm afraid it's either Merge or Delete, but not both. Per WP:COPYWITHIN, any content copied from the source must be preserved in a page history attributable to the original contributor. Why would you object to the source page remaining as a redirect to the target? Owen× ☎ 22:20, 26 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@OwenX: What I meant was merge whatever material is useful from this article into the Stobart Rail and Civils paragraph of Esken, and replace the article we're discussing with a redirect. Of course the material should be credited. I am not a deletionist, but I think our readers are much better served by having reasonably in-depth articles on the overall subject, rather than umpteen tiny articles on little fractions of a subject. The lots-of-little articles approach rarely provides proper context and overview. It would be much better to cover this as part of the overall Stobart article. Elemimele (talk) 10:53, 27 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. With editors arguing for a Deletion, Merge or Keep, I see no consensus here yet.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:55, 2 January 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) 22:06, 9 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete: the repeated cycle of insolvencies and change of ownership has generated a fair amount of routine trade press coverage, but nothing in terms of SIGCOV for this non-notable company of 127 employees and minus £4.4m in net assets. I don't know if the time it spent under the roof of the Esken/Stobart conglomerate justifies a redirect to Esken#Stobart_Rail_&_Civils, but I figure that's an acceptable outcome too. Owen× ☎ 23:16, 9 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was no consensus‎. There is still significant disagreement about the quality of the sourcing here. While prima facie I find the delete arguments slightly more compelling relative to our P&G's, the keep arguments have significant more support. Closing as no consensus as a reflection of this, I didn't consider relisting as it has already been relisted once and it appears we are at a stalemate of sorts. Daniel (talk) 19:18, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wilf Billington

Wilf Billington (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:ATHLETE. Deltaspace42 (talk • contribs) 08:55, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Article is still lacking in sources giving sigcov. Dougal18 (talk) 12:01, 23 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
See below. GiantSnowman 12:12, 26 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per WP:BASIC which allows us to combine multiple independent sources discussing this goalkeeper who was active from the late 1940s through to the early 1960s in both England and Australia, now added to the article. Most focused piece is an obituary in a local newspaper in Cumbria, England (which includes a quote from Billington but also multiple paragraphs with facts about his life). As mentioned above, the 1955 Derby Evening Telegraph article offers a paragraph recognising Billington as one of manager Bill Shankly's best signings who had developed into a "sound and reliable goalkeeper"; the 1955 Lincolnshire Echo article recognising him as one of the best goalkeepers in the Football League is not in-depth, but is evidence that he was highly regarded. In addition, the ups and downs of his career (and his activities post-retirement) were followed closely in Australian soccer newspapers and magazines from 1959 through 1966, with the pinnacle of his career the 1963 NSW Grand Final when South Coast United shut out favourites APIA, 4–0 in front of a crowd of 30,000+ at Sydney Stadium. Also WP:HEY. Cielquiparle (talk) 23:26, 25 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
WP:BASIC also states "trivial coverage of a subject by secondary sources is not usually sufficient to establish notability". None of the sources except the cumbriacrack obit covers Wilf Billington in detail. I'm not sure why Don Revie's opinion on goalies two leagues below him and praise for Billington's abilities is relevant but there is no sigcov there. Occasional mentions in magazines is not his Aussie career being "followed closely"'. He also can't get sigcov from mentions in stories about his son's football career. Dougal18 (talk) 16:46, 26 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: To review sourcing added during this discussion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 09:37, 26 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Is Cumbria Crack RS? We don't get any details on specific authors, and they have a page for submitting your own sports reports to them...
The Derby Evening piece is two sentences of pure transactional/local interest news. It's among nine other such "profiles" on that page documenting "today's visitors to the baseball ground".
HEY doesn't mean anything if the sources of the expansion are trivial mentions. The global community came to a strong consensus that sports biographies must have a piece of IRS SIGCOV cited in the article, and this has been upheld in hundreds of AfDs at this point despite claims of BASIC. JoelleJay (talk) 16:47, 26 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
NSPORT / SPORTCRIT is a sub-guideline of NBIO / NBASIC; it does not have the authority to overrule the authority on which it is based! (i.e. SPORTCRIT does not have more power than NBASIC); per the creator of SPORTCRIT: "SPORTBASIC #5 was never intended, nor should it be misused, to trump or overrule the more general, overarching rule" / "SPORTBASIC #5 creates a very strong prohibition on sports bios sourced only to databases. However, in limited circumstances where a well-rounded biography can be created using multiple non-database sources, NBASIC provides a very limited saftey valve". BeanieFan11 (talk) 17:21, 26 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You forgot the part where he said Such circumstances are very rare, and I've only come across one circumstance in the past two years where I concluded that it was appropriately applied., which indicates that the claim of NBASIC put forth 99% of the time would not be sufficient to overcome SC5. And that one instance didn't even have consensus support that NBASIC should be applied, as it closed NC. As it is intended (and as was understood by editors at the RfC, where this "escape clause" was not codified) to be applied, there is a clear prohibition on the flimsy sourcing most often asserted for NBASIC. JoelleJay (talk) 03:11, 27 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. Liz Read! Talk! 21:49, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ellie Hack

AfDs for this article:
Ellie Hack (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)

Was a soft deletion but was recreated. Hack fails GNG with a lack of significant coverage. Dougal18 (talk) 15:55, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Weak Keep" There is one feature article in She Kicks magazine; all other sources of length are from the various teams so are not independent. She Kicks probably would not be enough for me except that I found many mentions where she made the only goal and/or the winning goal of the match. This coverage is from reliable independent sources. I realize these are mentions, not significant coverage (which is why I am not bothering to add to the article), but they demonstrate ongoing coverage of her career as well as the key role she has on these teams. If the decision is not to keep this article, may I suggest moving it to the draft space for more development? I suspect there are more sources, I just have not figured out what British newspapers or magazines cover women's football. Rublamb (talk) 23:10, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @Rublamb, the She Kicks page is a routine transactional announcement and does not contribute to notability (all signings/departures are reported, and these are derived from press releases from the football clubs so are not independent anyway). Match reports are also considered routine game coverage and discounted by NSPORT. JoelleJay (talk) 03:15, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep There are sufficient third person sources to justify that this article has notability. Dwanyewest (talk) 22:11, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Debate is leaning delete but relisting for another 7 days in case additional sources appear and to see if further contributors assist with forming a clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 18:13, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 18:12, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep - Pro player. Carrite (talk) 23:11, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Draftify: Subject currently lacks the needed WP:SIGCOV to have a mainspace article now. We keep articles because they pass the WP:GNG, not because they have a pro career or because they are a young player. It is reasonable to believe that this subject may receive additional coverage in the near future though, so putting this in draft space to allow interested editors to work on it seems like a fair solution. Let'srun (talk) 14:37, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. I don't think there's any point in draftifying a one-sentence-plus-infobox stub article just in case more sources might appear soon. It's easy to recreate if they do. -- asilvering (talk) 03:00, 7 January 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! 22:32, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete: Still playing for the Lewes football club per recent websites, but simply confirming she exists isn't enough. These are simply match reports on the team's website. Oaktree b (talk) 02:04, 8 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - there's (at least) two half-decent references in the article. She get's other coverage for matches, such as this. Nfitz (talk) 00:25, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    That is a one-sentence mention in a match play-by-play. It does not count toward GNG. JoelleJay (talk) 02:54, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I never said it counted towards GNG, at least by itself. I did say there's two others. Nfitz (talk) 17:44, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete or Draftify (if that's what you want to do). The best source has three non-quote sentences and the rest of the sources are one sentence passing mentions in game recaps. That is not enough to satisfy WP:GNG. BeanieFan11 (talk) 04:16, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. This is a WP:Biography of a living person and I hope everyone realises that while articles from mainspace often get deleted, these WP:Articles for deletion discussions remain accessible on the Internet forever, permanently linked to their name. To the article creator and re-creator @Dwanyewest: Although you are probably have the best intentions in your advocacy of this player on Wikipedia, you also have to consider that an underdeveloped stub about a football player is sure to be a lightning rod for controversy, and triggering this type of extended discussion where various editors debate and dissect their existing media coverage simply fuels more chatter on the Internet that isn't all that positive. The fact that one of the most active Wikipedia editors from WP:WikiProject Football and associated task forces is recommending that this article is not only deleted but also "salted" underscores that another possible consequence is that the player would essentially not be eligible for their own Wikipedia article in the future. I'm not sure what the right solution is here – I initially recommended draftification to allow the article creator and other editors to further develop the article and publish it in the future when more meaningful coverage about the player is found – but if there aren't enough editors to get behind that, then maybe the solution is to simply delete it, just so we can put this protracted discussion to rest and try to minimise any further embarrassment and annoyance to the living person(s) to whom this name belongs. Cielquiparle (talk) 05:01, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: The first reference contains the only secondary source comment that her training is “regular”.
    #2, an interview, is entirely non-independent, #3 is very brief and non-independent, #4 brief routine mention of facts, #5 first three paragraphs are facts, not secondary source content, until paragraphs 4-5 that are direct quotes from her coach, not independent, and too close, #6 is sideline routine coverage of the game.
    #7&8 are just data, primary source material.
    everything reported could be summarises as facts in a table, there is no in depth independent secondary source coverage. SmokeyJoe (talk) 08:31, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: Fails GNG and NBIO. Agree with SmokeyJoe's source eval above. Sources in the article and found in BEFORE are mill sports news, database listings/name mentions, nothing that meet WP:IS WP:RS with WP:SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth.  // Timothy :: talk  08:59, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - I agree with the source analyses above by SmokeyJoe and JoelleJay. I don't think that SALT is needed at this stage, though. That said, Hack is clearly not in the public eye given that she has only played 2 games this season and 8 the season before in a second tier semi-pro league. She is still young so if she does work here way up to WSL and put herself in the public eye (and gain the WP:SIGCOV that would usually come with) then maybe we can look at restoring this in future, although I would prefer Draft and AfC at that stage, personally. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 14:58, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was no consensus‎. North America1000 10:13, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

International Christian Medical and Dental Association

AfDs for this article:
International Christian Medical and Dental Association (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. No WP:SIGCOV found on a WP:BEFORE. Only sources listed are the company's website. ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 08:05, 14 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Although participants here argue to Keep this article, we need some independent, secondary sources supplying SIGCOV to verify at least some information in this article. That's the standard for all article subjects, even the most worthy organizations. Otherwise, this Wikipedia article is just an extension of the company's website.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 19:09, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Further comment -- The question should be "Is it notable?" (I say YES) and "Is there a potential redirect target?", to which I would answer that there is not. In response to the relisting comment, I would suggest that even passing references may verify the truth of a website. It there is nothing else, a brief description with a link to the website should probably be acceptable, in this case listing national member organisations for which WP has articles (and are presumably notable). This makes it more than a mere extension of the organisation's website. It may technically be a company, but is in essence a membership association. Peterkingiron (talk) 12:38, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 04:07, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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

The result was no consensus‎. clpo13(talk) 19:49, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Stephen Baysted

Stephen Baysted (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)

Subjects fails WP:GNG and WP:NBIO. Just another run-of-the-mill video game employee lacking in notability and failing to assert notability. As for reliable sources, he only has one outside this article, but that does not assert notability as well. Article has been created by the subject, a clear-cut COI case. Despite being PROD deleted in 2009, this article has since been recreated in 2011; despite this, issues still remains unaddressed since 2020.

This subject's bio is unsourced, nothing is except credits for his work consisting of those from official websites and IMDB, which is neither a reliable source. SpacedFarmer (talk) 21:47, 6 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The WordsmithTalk to me 23:06, 13 December 2023 (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, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment: The current sourcing is not good. The Sound Architect and M Magazine are mostly interviews (primary sources). The "Contributors" source is of course primary, as is the University of Chichester page. I am therefore instating the {{primarysources}} tag. Behind the Audio leans towards acceptable whereas BBC Radio 3 seems to confirm WP:MUSICBIO#12. Geschichte (talk) 11:14, 21 December 2023 (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) 03:45, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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

Others

Categories

Deletion reviews

Miscellaneous

Proposed deletions

Redirects

Templates

See also

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Deletion_sorting/England&oldid=1193236031"