Jump to content

Wikipedia:Requests for deletion

From Simple English Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Revision as of 08:15, 17 July 2024 by FusionSub (talk | changes) (move 1 trim 1)
Shortcuts
If you think a page should be deleted, read the deletion policy to make sure.
Then follow these instructions on how to request a page for deletion. To find more information on what discussed deletions and quick deletions are:
PLEASE READ THIS

Before nominating: checks and alternatives

Shortcut

Prior to nominating article(s) for deletion, please be sure to:

A. Read and understand these policies and guidelines
  1. The Wikipedia deletion policy, which explains valid grounds for deletion.
  2. The main four guidelines and policies that inform deletion discussions: notability (WP:N), verifiability (WP:V), reliable sources (WP:RS), and what Wikipedia is not (WP:NOT)
  3. Subject-specific notability guidelines, which can be found at Category:Wikipedia notability guidelines
B. Carry out these checks
  1. Confirm that the article does not meet the criteria for quick deletion.
  2. If there are verifiability, notability or other sourcing concerns, take reasonable steps to search for reliable sources. (See step D.)
  3. Review the article's history to check for potential vandalism or poor editing.
  4. Read the article's talk page for previous nominations and/or that your objections haven't already been dealt with.
  5. Check "What links here" in the article's sidebar, to see how the page is used and referenced within Wikipedia.
  6. Check if there are interlanguage links, also in the sidebar, which may lead to more developed and better sourced articles. Likewise, search for native-language sources if the subject has a name in a non-Latin alphabet (such as Japanese or Greek), which is often in the lead.
C. Consider whether the article could be improved rather than deleted
  1. If the article can be fixed through normal editing, then it is not a candidate for RfD.
  2. If the article was recently created, please consider allowing the contributors more time to develop the article.
  3. If an article has issues try first raising your concerns on the article's talk page, with the main contributors, and/or adding a cleanup tag, such as {{notability}}, {{hoax}}, {{original research}}, or {{advert}}; this ensures readers are aware of the problem and may act to fix it.
  4. If the topic is not important enough to merit an article on its own, consider merging or redirecting to an existing article. This should be done particularly if the topic name is a likely search term.
D. Search for additional sources, if the main concern is notability
  1. The minimum search expected is a normal Google search, a Google Books search, a Google News search, and a Google News archive search; Google Scholar is suggested for academic subjects.
  2. If you find a lack of sources, you've completed basic due diligence before nominating. However, if a quick search does find sources, this does not always mean an RfD on a sourcing basis is unwarranted. If you spend more time examining the sources, and determine that they are insufficient, e.g., because they only contain passing mention of the topic, then an RfD nomination may still be appropriate.
  3. If you find that adequate sources do appear to exist, the fact that they are not yet present in the article is not a proper basis for a nomination. Instead, you should consider citing the sources, or at minimum apply an appropriate template to the page that flags the sourcing concern. Common templates include {{unreferenced}}, {{refimprove}}, {{third-party}}, {{primary sources}} and {{one source}}.

Discussed deletion

Put the deletion tag on the article.
  1. Click "Change source" at the top of the page to be deleted.
  2. In the edit box, add this tag: {{rfd|REASON}}. Put it at the top of the page, above the rest of the text. Then, replace the text "REASON" with a short reason why the page should be deleted. Do not be too specific here. You can add more details on the discussion page (see below).
    • It is a good idea to write a change summary to let others know what you are doing. You can say "nominating for deletion", "requesting deletion", or something like that.
  3. Click "Save changes" at the bottom to save the page with the deletion tag at the top.
    • You can also check the "Watch this page" check box to add the page to your watchlist. This lets you know if the page for deletion has been changed. If the deletion tag is removed any time before the discussion is closed, it should be put back.
Create a discussion page.
  1. If the deletion tag has been added to the page, a box should appear at the top of the article with a link saying "Click here to create a discussion page!" Click that link.
  2. You should be taken to a page starting with "Creating Wikipedia:Requests for deletion/Requests/..." along with the current year and the name of the article to be deleted. In the edit box, the following tag should have already been added: {{RfD/Preload/Template}} . Replace the text PLACE REASON HERE with a more detailed reason why the page should be deleted.
    • It is helpful to include links to the various policy pages about Wikipedia (that begin with Wikipedia:). Here are some examples of this: "This article is [[Wikipedia:COMPLEX|not easy to understand]]" or "Not a [[Wikipedia:notable|notable]] topic''. This will make others more aware of why the page is not acceptable under Wikipedia's policies.
  3. Click "Save changes" to save the new discussion page when you are done.
    • A change summary you can write for this page is "creating discussion page", "starting deletion discussion", or something like that.
    • As with the page for deletion, you can check the "Watch the page" box. This will let you know if someone else has replied to your discussion.
List it here
  1. Copy the title of the discussion page to the clipboard. You can do this by dragging the mouse over the text from "Wikipedia" to the end of the page title to highlight it, then right-clicking and selecting "Copy".
  2. Go to the list of deletion requests, and click "change source" beside the words "Current deletion request discussions".
  3. At the top of the list of discussions, paste the title from the clipboard (right-click and select "Paste"). Add a pair of curly brackets before and after the title to make a template that will copy the content of the discussion page onto the main deletion page, like this:
    {{Wikipedia:Requests for deletion/Requests/2024/(name of page to be deleted)}}
  4. Finally, click "Save changes" to add the discussion to the list. If the page saves successfully, you should see your deletion discussion at the top of the list. And that's it!

If this is too complicated for you, there are some gadgets like Twinkle that you can use. This allows you to do it faster.

Quick deletion

See also: Wikipedia:Deletion policy § Quick deletion

If you think a page has nonsense content, add {{non}} to the top of the page.

If you think a page does not say why the subject is important, add {{notable}} to the top of the page.

If you think a page should be deleted per other quick deletion rules, add {{QD|reason}} to the top of the page.

Notifying the user

Generally, you should try to be civil and tell the user that created the page to join the discussion talking about the page. This can be done by adding {{subst:RFDNote|page to be deleted}} ~~~~ to the bottom of their talkpage.

Discussions

See also: Wikipedia:Deletion review
  • The discussion is not a vote. Please make suggestions on what action to take, and support your suggestion with reasons.
  • Please look at the article before you make a suggestion. Do not make an opinion using only the information given by the nominator. Looking at the history of the article may help to understand the situation.
  • Please read other comments and suggestions. They may have helpful information.
  • Start your comments or suggestions on a new line. Start with * and sign after your comment by adding ~~~~ to the end. If you are responding to another editor, put your comment directly below theirs and make sure your comment is indented (using more than one *).
  • New users can make suggestions, but their ideas may not be considered, especially if the suggestion seems to be made in bad faith. The opinion of users who had an account before the start of the request may be given more weight or importance.
  • Suggestions by users using "sock puppets" (more than one account belonging to the same person) will not be counted.
  • Please make only one suggestion. If you change your mind, change your first idea instead of adding a new one. The best way to do this is to put <s> before your old idea and </s> after it. For example, if you wanted to delete an article but now think it should be kept, you could put: "Delete keep".
  • If you would like an article to be kept, you can improve the article and try to fix the problems given in the request for deletion. If the reasons given in the nomination are fixed by changing, the nomination can be withdrawn by the nominator, and the deletion discussion will be closed by an administrator.
  • Try to avoid confusing suggestions, such as delete and merge.
  • Requests for deletion is not a war zone. You can click here for more information, although the page is not in Simple English.

Remember: You do not have to make a suggestion for every nomination. You should think about not making a suggestion if:

  1. A nomination involves a topic that you do not know much about.
  2. Everyone has made the same suggestion and you agree with that suggestion.
  • All times are in UTC.

Current deletion request discussions

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The outcome of this request for deletion was to  Delete.  MathXplore (talk) 02:31, 25 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hyperdimensal Wave-Impact Hypothesis

Hyperdimensal Wave-Impact Hypothesis (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Cactusisme has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: discussion like article Cactus🌵 spiky ouch 07:51, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

Discussion

This request is due to close on 07:51, 24 July 2024 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The outcome of this request for deletion was to  Delete.  MathXplore (talk) 05:57, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Vineet Budki

Vineet Budki (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

2607:F140:6000:806A:755A:8FB:CCBA:6EB4 has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: The subject does not seem to be notable per WP:GNG. No in-depth coverage of the subject in independent, reliable sources. 2607:F140:6000:806A:755A:8FB:CCBA:6EB4 (talk) 04:34, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

Discussion

This request is due to close on 04:34, 23 July 2024 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The outcome of this request for deletion was to  Keep. — *Fehufangą ♮ ✉ Talk page 08:04, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

MouseHunt

MouseHunt (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

QuantumFoam66 has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Short article that hasn't been edited for over 11 years, and just shouldn't be on Simple English Wikipedia, just because, I said so. QuantumFoam66 (talk) 23:35, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

Discussion

This request is due to close on 23:35, 22 July 2024 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The outcome of this request for deletion was to  Keep. --Auntof6 (talk) 04:40, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Two hundred thousand articles

Wikipedia:Two hundred thousand articles (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

OurRisingTide has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Outdated, not necessary, and not helpful. OurRisingTide (talk) 22:02, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

Discussion

  •  Keep - no valid reason given as to why this useful and informative page should be deleted. Nom hasn't explained why this page is outdated, why it's not necessary and why it's not helpful (fyi the page includes a purge button which debunks the outdated claim), I would assume the page is an orphan and so I would certainly support it being included in many more pages but I see no valid reason as to why it should be deleted. –Davey2010Talk 00:27, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Archive. While the page is slightly outdated by the fact that we are in -articles till 200K there is no real reason to delete the page.- FusionSub (Talk page) (Contributions) 08:49, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This request is due to close on 22:02, 22 July 2024 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The outcome of this request for deletion was to  Delete.  MathXplore (talk) 05:58, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Party of Lincoln

Party of Lincoln (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Sakura emad has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: again same as this one why should call republican party by individuals name? as joe biden (2005) said "i do not work for president of USA, I work for america". then why should we do this? 🌸 Sakura emad 💖 (talk) 21:10, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

Discussion

This request is due to close on 21:10, 22 July 2024 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The outcome of this request for deletion was to  Delete.  MathXplore (talk) 06:00, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Party of Trump

Party of Trump (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Sakura emad has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: i don't know how evident is this for republican (1854; 170 years) party to be called party of trump.

the only proof i have is an aljazeera article 🌸 Sakura emad 💖 (talk) 20:59, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

Discussion

Administrator note: @Me Da Wikipedian:: I have declined your QD request. A title alone can't be called a hoax; that would require some actual text. Since this is a redirect, there is no text that can be considered a hoax. --Auntof6 (talk) 05:02, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No, the hoax is that it is redirecting (impling that the terms are similar the same) to that article. @Auntof6 Me Da Wikipedian (talk) 13:20, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Me Da Wikipedian: That's not what a hoax is. -- Auntof6 (talk) 17:33, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
A hoax is a "publicised falsehood". That the Republicans were the party of Trump before Trump existed is a falsehood, is it not.@Auntof6 Me Da Wikipedian (talk) 17:36, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
We're talking about a redirect, not an article. Redirects don't necessarily mean that two topics are the same. They can be between related topics, nicknames (which may apply in this case), or alternate names for something. -- Auntof6 (talk) 18:20, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This request is due to close on 20:59, 22 July 2024 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The outcome of this request for deletion was to  Delete.  --Auntof6 (talk) 04:38, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

EBC Financial Group

EBC Financial Group (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Fehufanga has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Winner of the "Best CFD Broker" and "Most Trusted FX Broker" categories of the World Finance awards, but besides this I find nothing that supports the notability of the subject (and of the award's merit). The sources in the article aren't reliable either or do not give an in-depth look on why the subject is notable. I had to use EBC Financial Group -inurl:ebc.com -inurl:ebcfin.com -inurl:ebcfin.co.uk -inurl:wikipedia.org -inurl:linkedin.com -inurl:instagram.com -inurl:facebook.com in the Google search to exclude most of the unusable sources. — *Fehufangą ♮ ✉ Talk page 07:43, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

Discussion

This request is due to close on 07:43, 22 July 2024 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The outcome of this request for deletion was to  Delete.  MathXplore (talk) 11:47, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Australian states clickable

Template:Australian states clickable (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Auntof6 has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Unused template created in March 2024 by a school IP that is currently under a long-term block. -- Auntof6 (talk) 09:23, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

Discussion

i see then  Delete 🌸 Sakura emad 💖 (talk) 09:13, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This request is due to close on 09:23, 21 July 2024 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The outcome of this request for deletion was to  Delete. w:WP:SOFTDELETE MathXplore (talk) 11:45, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Documentation/doc/see also

Template:Documentation/doc/see also (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Auntof6 has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Nominating two related unused templates. Both were created in 2007 One is linked (not transcluded) by the other, but the only other link for each is to a user work page. The two templates are:

-- Auntof6 (talk) 09:21, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

Discussion

This request is due to close on 09:21, 21 July 2024 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The outcome of this request for deletion was to  Delete.  MathXplore (talk) 11:42, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Alexándre Kataoka

Alexándre Kataoka (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

2607:F140:6000:802A:4826:95E5:9FF0:8A18 has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: A surgeon who seems to lack notability 2607:F140:6000:802A:4826:95E5:9FF0:8A18 (talk) 05:03, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

Discussion

  • Quick Delete A4
Cactus🌵 spiky ouch 07:32, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This request is due to close on 05:03, 21 July 2024 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The outcome of this request for deletion was to  Delete.  MathXplore (talk) 11:39, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Twosday

Twosday (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

2607:F140:6000:802A:4826:95E5:9FF0:8A18 has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Non-notable topic, routine date. Unlike the last day of a century, etc., it had no effect on society. 2607:F140:6000:802A:4826:95E5:9FF0:8A18 (talk) 04:19, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

Discussion

This request is due to close on 04:19, 21 July 2024 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The outcome of this request for deletion was to  Delete.  MathXplore (talk) 11:36, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

LMC 163007

LMC 163007 (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

FusionSub has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Another one of those stars articles, can't be G4'd since it wasn't deleted at the big RfD (according to the logs) so RfD it is. - FusionSub (Talk page) (Contributions) 08:05, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

Discussion

This request is due to close on 08:05, 20 July 2024 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The outcome of this request for deletion was to  Delete. I will remove transclusions in the near future. --Auntof6 (talk) 04:37, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Post-close note by closing admin: While processing this request, I found Template:Indefblockedip, which was a wrapper template for the Blocked user template. Since it wasn't being used by anything, I deleted it also under WP:QD#G8. --Auntof6 (talk) 07:28, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Template:Blocked user

Template:Blocked user (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request
Template:Locked global account (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete)

Fehufanga has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: See the category for locked accounts and the enwiki discussions: Locked global account and Blocked user. I don't think there's a point in tagging and/or tracking blocked and locked users with their respective templates. It's not that hard to check that user is (b)locked by just checking their contributions page. I suggest that these templates be deleted. I'm slightly more reluctant with substituting these templates before deleting them. The only template that I think is fine to keep is {{WMF-legal_banned_user}}. — *Fehufangą ♮ ✉ Talk page 04:34, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

Discussion

This request is due to close on 04:34, 20 July 2024 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The outcome of this request for deletion was to  Delete.  MathXplore (talk) 11:35, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of programmes broadcast by Fresdeder

List of programmes broadcast by Fresdeder (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Cactusisme has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Notable (same as Wikipedia:Requests for deletion/Requests/2024/Fresdeder ) Cactus🌵 spiky ouch 04:16, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

Discussion

This request is due to close on 04:16, 20 July 2024 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The outcome of this request for deletion was to  Delete. w:WP:SOFTDELETE for Fresdeder MathXplore (talk) 11:51, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fresdeder

Fresdeder (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request
List of programmes broadcast by Fresdeder (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Cactusisme has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Notable? Cactus🌵 spiky ouch 03:28, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

Discussion

This request is due to close on 03:28, 20 July 2024 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The outcome of this request for deletion was to  Delete.  MathXplore (talk) 11:31, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Gallery/aux

Template:Gallery/aux (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Auntof6 has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Nominating an unused template that was created on 10 February 2010‎. I'm not sure what the template is/was for. For what it's worth, English Wikipedia's version doesn't seem to be used, either; it seems to have been used by an old version of Template:Gallery. Auntof6 (talk) 06:14, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

Discussion

This request is due to close on 06:14, 19 July 2024 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The outcome of this request for deletion was to  Delete.  MathXplore (talk) 11:28, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox Australian Members of Parliament Lists

Template:Infobox Australian Members of Parliament Lists (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Auntof6 has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Nominating an unused infobox template that was created on 6 March 2024‎‎‎‎. We don't seem to have any articles that it would apply to. Note: If template is kept, we should import the doc page. Auntof6 (talk) 06:07, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

Discussion


This request is due to close on 06:07, 19 July 2024 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The outcome of this request for deletion was to  Delete.  MathXplore (talk) 11:26, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox Grand Lodge

Template:Infobox Grand Lodge (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Auntof6 has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Nominating an unused infobox template that was created on 15 July 2023‎‎‎. We don't seem to have any articles that it would apply to. Note: If template is kept, we should import the doc page. Auntof6 (talk) 06:06, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

Discussion

This request is due to close on 06:06, 19 July 2024 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The outcome of this request for deletion was to  Delete.  MathXplore (talk) 11:24, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox swimming pool

Template:Infobox swimming pool (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Auntof6 has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Nominating an unused infobox template that was created on 15 June 2024‎‎. We don't seem to have any articles that it would apply to. Note: If template is kept, we should import the doc page. Auntof6 (talk) 06:03, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

Discussion


This request is due to close on 06:03, 19 July 2024 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The outcome of this request for deletion was to  Delete.  MathXplore (talk) 11:23, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox water ride

Template:Infobox water ride (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Auntof6 has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Nominating an unused infobox template that was created on 1 July 2023‎. We don't seem to have any articles that it would apply to. Note: If template is kept, we should import the doc page. Auntof6 (talk) 06:01, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

Discussion

This request is due to close on 06:01, 19 July 2024 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The outcome of this request for deletion was to  Keep. Non consensus to delete. Renaming is outside the scope of this discussion and can be handled separately. --Auntof6 (talk) 04:27, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Video games about personifications of death

Category:Video games about personifications of death (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

QuantumFoam66 has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Non-defining, small, and dull category. it contains 3 different Sims games, though, A personification of death (the Grim Reaper) does not have a major role in any of them/ QuantumFoam66 (talk) 00:55, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

Discussion

This request is due to close on 00:55, 19 July 2024 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The outcome of this request for deletion was to  Keep. No consensus to delete. --Auntof6 (talk) 04:21, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Video games about terrorism

Category:Video games about terrorism (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

QuantumFoam66 has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: This is a non-defining trait, looks more like a list of random games really. As we intended not to add the "Video games featuring female protagonists" to Simplewiki, perhaps we should also avoid non-defining categories like this one. However, Simplewiki also has a category for the same but with movies. QuantumFoam66 (talk) 23:31, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

Discussion

This request is due to close on 23:31, 18 July 2024 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The outcome of this request for deletion was to  Delete.  MathXplore (talk) 11:21, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Polina Sidikhina

Polina Sidikhina (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

73.170.137.168 has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Not notable because does not meet WP:NBIO. 73.170.137.168 (talk) 18:46, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

Discussion

This request is due to close on 18:46, 18 July 2024 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The outcome of this request for deletion was to  Delete.  MathXplore (talk) 03:04, 26 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Javed Haider Zaidi

Javed Haider Zaidi (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Fehufanga has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Claims to be notable but no sources really support this. The sources in the article do not clearly indicate that the subject is notable. Some are YouTube videos, whose reliability is dubious at best as they appear to be lectures given by the subject. Some appear to be written by the subject, some are not in-depth enough. — *Fehufangą ♮ ✉ Talk page 07:51, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

Discussion

@Fehufanga Wikiislams (talk) 08:20, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Wikiislams You don't have to ping me. That article is nowhere near in-depth enough to establish the subject's notability. It does not explain why the subject is notable, it looks like routine coverage of an event to me. — *Fehufangą ♮ ✉ Talk page 08:38, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Administrator note: User blocked/locked. MathXplore (talk) 09:47, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 Comment: User blocked as block evasion Cactus🌵 spiky ouch 01:15, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Administrator note: Comment struck out because this user is apparently the same as Wikiislams. --Auntof6 (talk) 09:48, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Administrator note: User blocked/locked. MathXplore (talk) 08:05, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 Comment: users first edit Cactus🌵 spiky ouch 03:59, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
most important biography 2401:4900:802E:CB28:0:0:A22:5630 (talk) 11:06, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
How? Cactus🌵 spiky ouch 11:08, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 Editor note: IP is part of globally blocked range.- FusionSub (Talk page) (Contributions) 12:17, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Administrator note: User blocked/locked. MathXplore (talk) 14:24, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
yes, don't delete 110.226.231.90 (talk) 08:48, 25 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Let me just say that it's hilarious seeing the keep !votes coming in lacking any explanation on why the subject should be considered notable. He's notable just because he is. — *Fehufangą ♮ ✉ Talk page 08:53, 25 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Fehufanga Want to close it, attracting may Ips and socks. Cactus🌵 spiky ouch 08:54, 25 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Cactusisme I opened this discussion which makes me involved, I shouldn't be the one closing and deleting it. — *Fehufangą ♮ ✉ Talk page 08:55, 25 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I mean any admin. Cactus🌵 spiky ouch 08:56, 25 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
like @Macdonald-ross Cactus🌵 spiky ouch 08:56, 25 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Keep Javed Haider Zaidi's Biography.
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.


This request is due to close on 07:51, 18 July 2024 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The outcome of this request for deletion was to  Delete.  --Auntof6 (talk) 02:49, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Promo Direct

Promo Direct (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

172.56.43.105 has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: The sources provided don't show notability. 172.56.43.105 (talk) 05:45, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

Discussion

This request is due to close on 05:45, 18 July 2024 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The outcome of this request for deletion was to  Delete.  --Auntof6 (talk) 02:47, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kristina Wildeveld

Kristina Wildeveld (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Cactusisme has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Bunch of links in between the article with no inline citations and notability issues. Cactus🌵 spiky ouch 03:25, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

Discussion

  • I just realized that and I am figuring out how to move the links to be citations. This is my first one. I am getting a professional to work on this as I am NOT a professional. Hopefully someone will be able to fix this for me quickly. I realized how this looked right after I did it. It is the first time. Thanks Kwconeh (talk) 03:28, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There is also a notability issue Cactus🌵 spiky ouch 03:29, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This request is due to close on 03:25, 18 July 2024 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The outcome of this request for deletion was to  Delete.  --Auntof6 (talk) 02:36, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Module:No globals

Module:No globals (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Uzume has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: this Scribunto module is deprecated and superseded. It can be replaced with require('strict'). In all remaining references these are in other modules imported from English Wikipedia and have been protected (and thus an administrator is needed to modify them), however also in every case the English Wikipedia source module has been updated to remove the reference so these only need to be imported again. — Uzume (talk) 01:37, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

Discussion

This request is due to close on 01:37, 18 July 2024 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


IceTre

IceTre (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Ternera has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Sources are not reliable or do not show how the subject is notable Ternera (talk) 19:08, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

Discussion

  • Hello there! I was still in the process of putting the subject's Wiki together when you nominated it for deletion! I was only 60% done so there was information still being provided/links being cited. As far as notability, information can be provided for criteria to meet under "Criteria for musicians and ensembles"
  1. 5 Has released two or more albums on a major record label or on one of the more important[according to whom?] indie labels (i.e., an independent label with a history of more than a few years, and with a roster of performers, many of whom are independently notable).
  2. 7 Has become one of the most prominent representatives of a notable style or the most prominent of the local scene of a city; note that the subject must still meet all ordinary Wikipedia standards, including verifiability.
and under "Criteria for composers and lyricists" the subject meets #1
"Composers, songwriters, librettists or lyricists, may be notable if they meet at least one of the following criteria:
Has credit for writing or co-writing either lyrics or music for a notable composition." Stephenbestk28 (talk) 16:51, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
For #5 I cite this section of the subject's Wiki "Interest in Tademy’s music reached record level highs in 2013. A 85/15 distribution deal was offered to Tademy after he caught the attention of an A&R from EMPIRE Distribution In 2014, Tademy formed his own record label, Blazington Music Group which then became integrated into EMPIRE, which is to handle all releases while Blazington Music Group was to handle promotion. Tademy received major label backing when EMPIRE signed a partnership in 2018 with major label Universal Music Group.
The partnership integrated Blazington Music Group into EMPIRE and Universal Music Group. In the partnership, Tademy was able to secure ties from not only Universal Music Group and EMPIRE but from Universal Music Publishing Group as well. This allowed Tademy and other artists registered and established under Blazington Music Group to receive support on select projects that would benefit from major label backing, unique approaches to distribution, digital sales, promotion and marketing."
The subject has released more than two albums on the more important indie label and Notable artists on their roster is Peezy, BabyTron, Babyface Ray, Money Man, Fireboy DML, and more. Notable artists who have released albums through the label are Snoop Dogg, Kendrick Lamar, Cardi B., Tyga, T-Pain, Young Dolph, and more.
the albums can be cited for the sources. Blazington Music Group operates as a subsidiary for EMPIRE just like how Dr. Dre's Aftermath Entertainment operates as a subsidiary of Universal Music Group. Stephenbestk28 (talk) 17:09, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
As for #7 and #1 the case for that I cited this section of the wiki
"During this time, Tademy was regarded as the King of Idaho due to his high rank and stature.
Tademy's journey and legacy became well known throughout Idaho as he was the first to create the Idaho Rap Scene and further became the highest contender. Tademy further expanded his reach with live performances with artists such as Kirko Bangz, T-Pain, and Kid Ink ranging from Boise, Idaho to Salt Lake City, Utah. Other artists include Bone Thugs N' Harmony, IAMSU, and more.
On September 24, 2015, Tademy became the first Idaho musician to collaborate with a major label artist, Grammy Nominated and platinum recording artist Mike Zombie with their single, "No Worries." The collaboration went viral, pushing it to #28 on the Top 100 Chart in Idaho, which gave Tademy's musical career a tremendous boost in popularity.
During the King of Idaho Era, Tademy released two albums, "Pisces Gold 2.0" and "28."
Tademy executively produced both albums and released "Pisces Gold 2.0" on March 11th, 2017 and "28" on October 11th, 2019. The album "28" featured the viral singles, "House Party" and "Trophy.' Both songs feature EMPIRE artist Miscellaneous and the latter features Sony Music musician, Vinny Chase."
By co-writing the song "No Worries", the composition became highly notable due to this being the first collaborative demonstration in history of a platinum recording artist working with a musician in Idaho.
In #7 it states "Has become one of the most prominent representatives of a notable style or the most prominent of the local scene of a city;"
the subject overnight became one of the most prominent representatives of a notable style (hip hop/rap) of the local scene of a city when their composition became the first collaborative demonstration in history of a platinum recording artist working with a musician in Idaho. With that being cited that places the subject as a prominent representative of a notable style (hip hop/rap) in not the city and state.
I am still in the process of placing sources and citing references but if that is to your satisfaction on notability then I vote for a stay of the wiki. Hope you see this all soon!
:) Stephenbestk28 (talk) 17:36, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 Comment: @Stephenbestk28: The article was 5 hours old when it was nominated here. If it is taking that long to get it in good shape, it's probably better to work on it in a user sandbox until it's ready. -- Auntof6 (talk) 15:49, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
An important note to take into consideration: When it was first nominated it was still being edited from the Mobile version of Simple.Wikipedia.Org so the sources had not been added because the article was still being edited from Mobile). From Computer, i was able to cite in the notable sources as promised.
There are 51 cited sources in the subject's wiki as of yesterday. That many sources would be rather difficult to do in Mobile therefore the switch to Computer was necessary in fulfilling the task. Time was a necessity to do so properly.
With that being said, reliable sources have been provided for evidentiary proof of notability. You are free to take a look!
Notability (music)
Has released two or more albums on a major record label or on one of the more important indie labels (i.e., an independent label with a history of more than a few years, and with a roster of performers, many of whom are independently notable). Stephenbestk28 (talk) 17:10, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Your point is fair though and I do see where you are coming from! I have made the necessary changes though and the wiki is ready. Sorry for the issue! Stephenbestk28 (talk) 17:19, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Delete, not notable; sources used in the article are blogs and user generated. No other good sources on the internet. ToadetteEdit (talk) 18:46, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Under "Generally reliable sources:" it says:
    These sources are generally considered reliable for use in music-related articles on Wikipedia. Check the far right column for past discussions on the source and any limitations or warnings on a source's particular use."
    Both AllMusic and The Source are both included on the list of sources are considered reliable in music-related articles on Wikipedia. The subject's cited sources will be provided to the wiki and The Source is already mentioned in the wiki.
    On AllMusic the subjects music shows Blazington Music Group and Blazington Music Group operates as a subsidary of EMPIRE, (i.e., an independent label with a history of more than a few years, and with a roster of performers, many of whom are independently notable). Stephenbestk28 (talk) 01:02, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    More sources have been provided to assist with Notability.
    - the subject has released two or more albums on a major record label / independent record label with notable history.
    Evidence has been provided to show that the subject has released two or more albums through a major record label / independent record label with notable history. The subject's material are released through EMPIRE and its subsidiary Blazington Music Group. Stephenbestk28 (talk) 04:25, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Delete per above - no evidence of any notability, fails GNG, –Davey2010Talk 00:37, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Notability: released two or more albums on a major record label or indie label
    Proof: Walking On Water description on YouTube - it states:
    "Provided to YouTube by EMPIRE Distribution
    Midas (Intro) • Icetre • Doom Bap
    Walking On Water
    • 2024 Blazington Music Group
    Released on: 2024-03-29
    Auto-generated by YouTube."
    the subject's other albums cited in their wiki say the same thing. This is proof of the notability guideline being met. Stephenbestk28 (talk) 04:38, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    That's irrelevant, Please read en:WP:NMUSIC and en:WP:GNG, Also there are no independent, reliable sources on the subject (the one news piece there is your average blogsite pretty much so doesn't count), Thanks, –Davey2010Talk 09:57, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    What's the point of linking to en's GNG when we have our local WP:GNG?- FusionSub (Talk page) (Contributions) 13:18, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @FusionSub, Why not ? Are there any guidelines that say linking to EN guidelines is forbidden ?, Respectfully it's rather sad you felt the need to come here just to ask that.....
    But to answer your question I get fed up of linking to guidelines here and then finding out they don't exist WP:NCOLLEGE, WP:BLPVIO (the latter didn't exist until I recently created it) so it's easier just to link to EN. –Davey2010Talk 14:21, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Fair enough.- FusionSub (Talk page) (Contributions) 14:23, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I have a question, so it's been proven already that the subject has released two or more albums on the record label for notability but is the issue that there is no "reliable sources" that say that the subject's albums were released on the record label?
    Otherwise I am confused because you linked both of those to me and the subject still meets the criteria under #5 and the rest.
    Are you saying that there has to be reliable sources that actively say "the subject released this, this, and this on this and this" and that AllMusic and meta data connecting the albums to the subject does not count?
    I just want to be on the same page. Stephenbestk28 (talk) 22:09, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    If a tree falls in a forest and no one is around to hear it, does it make a sound? the answer is yes
    If the subject releases two or more albums on the record label but doesn't have coverage over those albums, does it still count as releases on the record label? The answer is yes
    If an event takes place, say at the White House, and there was no coverage of said event, did the event still take place? the answer is yes
    If your weather app told you it was 98 degrees outside would you say that's not a reliable source because you didn't see it on The New York Times? the answer is no
    If there was no coverage of you going to a movie (even if you have your ticket as proof with the time date and other info on it) does that mean you didn't go to the movie? the answer is no
    If the subject releases two or more albums on a notable major record label / notable independent record label but doesn't have coverage about those releases, does that void the albums being released on the record label? the answer is NO
    The reliable sources support the metadata of the releases being on the label. There's 60 sources.
    and for the record if it says for example:
    AllMusic: Walking On Water by IceTre released on Blazington Music Group, a subsidiary of Empire Distribution
    then that works fine for proof. it does not need to suddenly go the extra mile with:
    The Washington Post: IceTre from Empire Distribution and Blazington Music releases Walking On Water"
    Announcements do not dictate whether something exists or not so let's not be petty and biased. Evidence has been provided, everything else is moving the goal post and this needs to be a fair game otherwise that shows clear bias and favoritism amongst Wiki editors.
    In court, you cannot simply "deny" evidence just because you find it irrelevant to the case. All evidence provided has to be taken into consideration, it can't just be ignored like you are trying to do. Stephenbestk28 (talk) 15:55, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    They fail NMUSIC #5 because Blazington isn't a major record label, They're only backed by UMG[2] which means nothing. The subject still fails NMUSIC and GNG.
    I can assure you there's no favouritism here - If the subject is notable and meets BASIC, GNG and or the relevant policies to that article then I'm happy with notable subjects staying. Thanks, –Davey2010Talk 16:18, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Blazington releases music under EMPIRE and EMPIRE is a major record label/independent record label with notable past clients. All of Blazington's releases fall under EMPIRE.
    I cite this key piece of information: "Doggystyle is the debut studio album by American rapper Snoop Doggy Dogg. It was released on November 23, 1993, by Death Row and Interscope Records."
    At the time Death Row had only released one album and that was by Dr. Dre. Death Row was not considered a major record label at the time but Doggystyle being released under Interscope made it to where the album was released on a major record label.
    i cite this also "Earlier in 1992, Interscope negotiated a $10-million deal with Dr. Dre and Marion "Suge" Knight to finance and distribute their label, Death Row Records." And in the same article you cited it says "In 2014, Blazington Music Group became integrated into EMPIRE under a distribution deal. Blazington Music Group is a subsidiary of EMPIRE. By the conditions of the deal, EMPIRE is to handle all releases while Blazington Music Group is to handle all promotional values."
    the situation is the spot on, the only difference is $10-million and the language is slightly different. Stephenbestk28 (talk) 15:29, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    For clarification, the terms on, under, and through operate with the same basic intention that a product is considered property and thereby owned by the entity in question (the major record label)
    Using the example from above, Snoop Dogg’s album was released through Death Row and Interscope. Death Row simply acts as the pipeline between Snoop and the major record label. Interscope would own the rights and maintain it’s their property since it was released underneath Death Row and Death Row is underneath Interscope. This makes Snoop Dogg’s debut album an official release on/under/through a major record label which in that case would ultimately fall under Interscope.
    in the case of the subject, for example, they released the referenced album “Walking On Water” through Blazington Music Group and EMPIRE. Using the same language and terminology, Blazington simply acts as the pipeline between the subject and the major record label. EMPIRE would own the rights and maintain it’s their property since it was released underneath Blazington Music Group and Blazington Music Group is underneath EMPIRE. This makes the subjects album “Walking On Water” an official release on/under/through a major record label which would ultimately fall under EMPIRE due to the release being a product of their services to Blazington Music Group. EMPIRE owns the product and it is considered their property. Stephenbestk28 (talk) 22:55, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    To admin: sufficient evidence has been provided for notability. Requesting the subject's wiki stay in the community and not be deleted.
    proven notability: "subject has released two or more albums on a major record label or on one of the more important indie labels (i.e., an independent label with a history of more than a few years, and with a roster of performers, many of whom are independently notable).
    the major record label/one of the more important indie labels: EMPIRE
    the albums released on the record label: Pisces Gold 2.0, 28, Walking On Water, and Paradise. ' Stephenbestk28 (talk) 04:33, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Davey2010 @ToadetteEdit@FusionSub @Ternera Pingign you guys because you participated. Thanks Cactus🌵 spiky ouch 04:37, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Notability Argument: Has released two or more albums on a major record label or on one of the more important indie labels (i.e., an independent label with a history of more than a few years, and with a roster of performers, many of whom are independently notable).
    Proof (plus concept for reference):
    Snoop Dogg released his debut album on Death Row Records and Interscope. Death Row acts as the pipeline between Snoop and the major record label, Interscope. Interscope owns Death Row thus making his debut album an official release by Interscope.
    The subject "IceTre" released 5 albums on Blazington Music Group and EMPIRE. Blazington Music Groups acts as the pipeline between the subject "IceTre" and the major record label, EMPIRE. EMPIRE owns Blazington Music Group thus making the 5 albums all official releases by EMPIRE.
    I proved that the subject has released two or more albums on a major record label or on one of the most important indie labels. The subject in fact has released 5. I vote that it stays. In court, ignoring evidence is grounds for a mistrial. I presented the evidence when it was requested, do not ignore it.
    'Can anyone prove that the subject didn't release their 5 albums on Blazington Music Group and EMPIRE? If not then i double up on my vote for it to stay and if no one can prove that then that should be the nail in the coffin for it to stay.
    and don't just skim over my comments, actually read them in full length. Even a couple of times if necessary. In court, a short case is a sloppy case. do not be mad at me for making a solid case...thats what i am supposed to do. Stephenbestk28 (talk) 05:37, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Pisces Gold 2.0
    28
    STT5
    Walking On Water
    Paradise
    Pisces Gold 2.0 is the oldest release on that list with it being from 2017 and Paradise is the most recent with it being from 2024. From Pisces Gold 2.0 to Paradise every song in those links from 2017 to 2024 begin their description with this:
    "Provided to YouTube by EMPIRE Distribution"
    1. This further maintains that the subject's releases are property of EMPIRE (EMPIRE DISTRIBUTION), therefore making them official releases on a major record label / or one of the most important indie labels.
    2. YouTube compiles musical data from record labels and generates descriptions for the release on YouTube.
    3. The data is supportive as the newest album "Paradise" includes the following descriptions with the subjects first and last government name:
    "Provided to YouTube by EMPIRE Distribution Paradise · Icetre · Dracula Gang Paradise ℗ 2024 Blazington Music Group Released on: 2024-04-05 Producer: Tre Tademy Composer: Tre Tademy Lyricist: Tre Tademy Auto-generated by YouTube."''''' Stephenbestk28 (talk) 17:15, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Still no response from anyone. I wish I knew what was going on or why they won't respond back. I fear that the evidence will be ignored and it will become deleted, how unfortunate. Stephenbestk28 (talk) 15:26, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I answered every question and proved every bit of evidence and everyone goes quiet. It's clear that the only reason it's not being accepted is because I proved the subject's notability and you all do not like that. The subject is notable. A decision to keep it needs to be made by a moderator but if it gets deleted then at least I know it's due to Wikipedia bias and Moderator imbalance so I'll be able to let the proper channels know about that. Moving goal posts and demanding more and more and more is part of the bias and imbalance so let's not go into that situation. It's all under Guideline #5 and nothing else. You all can't be mad that I gave you what you wanted when you asked for it. Davey2010 @ToadetteEdit@FusionSub @Ternera Stephenbestk28 (talk) 15:38, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    There's been no response from anyone because nothing has changed, you've still not provided evidence showing how or why this subject is notable nor have you provided any references proving this fact, The subject as it stands still fails WP:NMUSIC and WP:GNG,
Regarding the closure - Unlike the English Wikipedia where anyone and everyone closes AFDs - Here it's generally left to admins whom all have lives and cannot be here 24/7, It will be closed when an admin has time to close it, This will be my last reply on the matter. Thanks –Davey2010Talk 15:51, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Stephenbestk28  Comment: I don't think adding on any more is going to help as it may just be repeated. Cactus🌵 spiky ouch 07:22, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This request is due to close on 19:08, 17 July 2024 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The outcome of this request for deletion was to  Delete.  --Auntof6 (talk) 02:34, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Badarkhali Degree College

Badarkhali Degree College (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Ternera has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Not notable. Ternera (talk) 13:49, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

Discussion

This request is due to close on 13:49, 17 July 2024 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The outcome of this request for deletion was to  Keep. --Auntof6 (talk) 02:32, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Schizophrenia in society and culture

Schizophrenia in society and culture (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

MrMeAndMrMe has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Schizophrenia in society and culture takes two irrelevant things and puts them together. Half of the "in society" section is medical analysis. I believe that this article should probably just be merged with Schizophrenia. MrMeAndMrMeTalk 19:18, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

Discussion


This request is due to close on 19:18, 16 July 2024 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The outcome of this request for deletion was to  Delete.  --Auntof6 (talk) 04:18, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bernedoodle

Bernedoodle (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Ravensfire has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Multiple tools show the source article as AI generated. The site itself it new and given the use of AI generated articles beyond this one, the reliability is questionable at best. There's also a sense of COI here, the creator used a single poor source and their only other edit besides here is to Wikitionary to add a link to the same source. Ravensfire (talk) 14:05, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

Discussion

Relying on a "tool" to detect whether a piece of content is AI-generated, or even to judge its credibility, is laughable—this is a consensus within the AI industry and shared by many writers. Nowadays, even when people write their own content, they often use AI to polish their wording because many people's writing skills are not as good as AI's. However, the focus of content should be on ideas and expression, not just on the wording. Therefore, using AI detection tools to dismiss content is a ridiculous and lazy approach. 38.32.68.195 (talk) 03:56, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed, I now really hate that someone only deny articles through AI detectors, just like every American student hates GPTZero for accidentally damaging our normal papers. 38.32.68.195 (talk) 05:48, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Administrator note: Comments moved. MathXplore (talk) 06:38, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I dont think we should delete articles just because they may have been assisted by AI - even if that can be proved. The question is whether the topic is notable and the article acceptable.
I dont see how any human or AI can be related to a dog. Rathfelder (talk) 09:27, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The problem is that the source itself is of poor quality, the site looks like it one using AI to build up articles, not actual editors creating good material and the short history of the creator suggests there some promotional effort here. The source article was published on July 8th and this article appeared shortly afterwards.
Enwiki doesn't have an equivalent article on this, instead it's a redirect to w:Designer dog. This may be something that's useful to have an article on, but this needs to be based on actual reliable sources, not a junk AI driven source like what we've got here. What shows that petsmoji.com is a reliable source? DNS Lookup shows the site was registered a few months ago. There's some warning signs about the site as well ("Knowledges"?).
And to the IP's point about using or not using automated tools, it's a tool that gives part of the information. A manual review of the source is what started my concerns about AI generation. The phrasing of the intro, the over-the-top tone, the organization of the article - all are hallmarks of AI generated articles, not human generated and edited articles. So from a reliability, is an AI generated article reliable? I have huge questions about that because it's pulling content from some place - where? We trust human created articles from good sources that have editorial control and standards in part because the editors can vet the sources used for the article. That's not present on AI generated articles because those sources aren't known.
So overall, we've got a bit of a promotional fluff article here, based on a single source from a brand-new site that has questionable editorial oversite and pretty fluff content. All of that says delete the article here. Ravensfire (talk) 14:00, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This request is due to close on 14:05, 16 July 2024 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The outcome of this request for deletion was to  Delete.  --Auntof6 (talk) 02:25, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Street King Immortal

Street King Immortal (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Rathfelder has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Futurology of the past Rathfelder (talk) 20:30, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

Discussion

This request is due to close on 20:30, 15 July 2024 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The outcome of this request for deletion was to  Keep. This is about two weeks overdue, and I will close it as a keep. Yes, like any other article, this article may have issues, but RfD is ont for fixing these.--Eptalon (talk) 15:09, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Project 2025

Project 2025 (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Rathfelder has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Tendentious and unreferenced. Rathfelder (talk) 17:53, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

Discussion

This request is due to close on 17:53, 15 July 2024 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The outcome of this request for deletion was to  Keep. Will be moved to the correct location, and stubs of the other two will be created.--Eptalon (talk) 19:07, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Basaa language

Basaa language (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Rathfelder has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Seems inconsistent with [3]. No working references Rathfelder (talk) 15:39, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

Discussion

This request is due to close on 15:39, 15 July 2024 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.

Recently closed deletion discussions

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The outcome of this request for deletion was to  Delete. After asking the Wikimedia Discord server, I found somebody with access to the copyrighted source and I found that a significant section of the article is identical to a paragraph from the source.— *Fehufangą ♮ ✉ Talk page 13:45, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bandkari

Bandkari (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

MathXplore has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Copyright violation is suspected but I cannot confirm due to paywall restrictions. The author is already blocked here (Special:Contributions/Thakor_Sumant_Sinhji_Jhala, w:Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Thakor Sumant Sinhji Jhala, blocked after article creation so not fit for QD G5), so there will be no updates from the author's side. MathXplore (talk) 01:52, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

Discussion

 Delete Many content is copyrighted.--Cactus🌵 spiky ouch 10:41, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This request is due to close on 01:52, 21 July 2024 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The outcome of this request for deletion was to  Delete. --Eptalon (talk) 14:47, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kami Name

Kami Name (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Rathfelder has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: unreferenced and rambling. Rathfelder (talk) 17:32, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

Discussion

This request is due to close on 17:32, 15 July 2024 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The outcome of this request for deletion was to  Delete. --Eptalon (talk) 14:46, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Olatise Olalekan

Olatise Olalekan (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Operator873 has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Unremarkable physician. Fails notability Operator873 connect 23:24, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

Discussion

  1. The Guardian News Nigeria source(1) is a dead link.
  2. I am pretty sure the article from the New Telegraph(13) is also a dead link.
  3. Daily Post Nigeria is listed as "sponsored" at the very top(3), which is a COI and does not indicate notability. Olatise Olalekan is on the board of Venite University, and any notability gained from the article written by that university(4) is also a COI.
  4. In Emporium Reporters,(5) Punch newspaper,(6), The Independent Newspaper(7), National Accord(8), Next Edition(9), the News Agency of Nigeria(11), The Authority(14), Leadership(15), Vanguard(16), the article does not indicate notability of Olalekan, and only quotes him. Since Olalekan is in a high position in Zenith clinic, it would make sense that journalists that make articles about Zenith clinic would interview someone like him. However, this does not indicate notability, and adding every instance in which he appears online does not make him notable.
  5. Everything from Olatise Olalekan#Early life and education is sourced by an article(12) that is about a person with a similar name.
  6. The article states that Olalekan got several awards in his career. The sources that are given(17)(18) are 2 websites that say he won the "Physician of the Year (private sector)" award in 2021. This is not "several awards", and this award does not indicate notability.
  7. The only actual reliable sources that indicate notability are This Day Live(2) and The Nation(10), which both talk about one thing that he said in Oman during a nephrologist conference. And besides the typos and dubious grammar in the latter article, and the fact that the former article is listed as "home and design", these indicate only one thing that he is notable for, qualifying him for WP:BLP1E. In any case, I would not consider two sources to be "significant coverage". MrMeAndMrMeTalk 19:56, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Dead links of ref 1 and 2 are fixed now. No.3 should be removed, so removed. Ref 4 is signed by "Directorate of Corporate Communications and Public Relations". I think man on high position are notable like CEO of banks, I.T. companies etc are notable. Ref 12 should be removed so removed. I have tried to fix other issues. Very nice to see you checked things deeply. Lazomia (talk) 00:24, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Passing mentions of his name online does not make him notable. This issue is still true with almost every reference. He is a high ranking individual in a clinic and not much else. If anything, there should be an article about the clinic that he works for.
    An article written by Venite University about a board member does not make that member notable. The majority of university board members get into their position by paying lots of money — meaning that there is a conflict of interest and the citation is not reliable. The New Telegraph article is iust regirgitating the Venite University article, which we have already established as not reliable.
    Thank you for continuing to edit on simple wikipedia. MrMeAndMrMeTalk 12:43, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This request is due to close on 23:24, 14 July 2024 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The outcome of this request for deletion was to  Delete. I am closing this, as uninvolved admin, as a delete. The reason for deletion are that when searching on Google for the term 'Disabled, Not Half a Human Being', I get a facebook page, before getting an article on Alex Fridman. Notability is not inherited though, so not all the things Fridman did become notable, and worthy to include in a Wikipedia. Notr, that this is not against rganisations that fight for the rights of disabled people. Fridman may be notable (no idea), this organization isn't.--Eptalon (talk) 14:33, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Disabled, Not Half a Human Being

Disabled, Not Half a Human Being (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

זור987 has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: I think that User:Dorian Gray Wild trying to promote this organization outside Israel. And this organization have no encyclopedic importance outside Israel, in contrast to its founder, Alex Fridman, and this isn't acceptable. The equivalent English Wikipedia article has been deleted with a purposed deletion because of my same reasons. זור987 (talk) 13:05, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

Discussion

  • Dear Wikipedians, the discussion is about the page, not about me.
In the English Wikipedia there is a page about Alex Fridman.
I did not discuss the request for deletion of Disabled, Not Half a Human Being. Therefore, it was deleted.
A request for a quick deletion has been submitted, and Fehufanga wrote: "There is no policy that prohibits users from writing articles about Israeli organizations".
In the Simple Wikipedia, there is no page about Alex Fridman. It was also suggested to delete "Alex Fridman" in the English wikipedia, but it was declined.
I am not a member of this association.
The organization has raised the disability allowances of the disabled people in Israel, no matter which religion they had. It is written in the page: "Lobbying and legislation in the Israeli Knesset".
Therefore it is recommended to keep the page. Dgw (talk) 14:30, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Although true that "There is no policy that prohibits users from writing articles about Israeli organizations" that is irrelevant. The question is whether the page is notable. As it is restricted to Israelis, I say it is not notable. All round the world there are people who are disabled. War may be one of the leading causes. As far as I know, all countries support injured people. What is strange or unusual about that? Macdonald-ross (talk) 18:54, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
We have plenty of articles about organisations bound to one country. Most activists and politicians confine their activities to their home country. That is not relevant to the question of whether they are notable. There seem to be 3 reasonably independent sources here. Fridman and the organisation he created seem to be notable. Rathfelder (talk) 19:17, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - it seems like no such article has been up for Deletion, at En-wiki. See en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:WhatLinksHere/Disabled,_Not_Half_a_Human_Being .--However, i can not see a clear case of the organisation being wiki-notable on simple-wiki. 2001:2020:341:D118:7D25:4D50:8B80:E9DA (talk) 20:25, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    That just shows that nothing currently links to the page, which doesn't indicate whether it existed. It actually did exist. It was deleted via enwiki's prod process on 29 July 2023 at 15:07 UTC. -- Auntof6 (talk) 01:14, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    The discussion was ended on July 2, 2024. This request for deletion has to be archived and closed.
    Dovno, a bureaucrat in the Hebrew Wikipedia wrote it to the user who created this discussion: "Do not edit Disabled, Not Half a Human Being any longer, except neutral edits of grammar or syntax."
    מי-נהר, a user in the Hebrew Wikipedia since July 2006, wrote today: "The user who put the template did it as part of a jihad which he is personally conducts against the association and against Alex Friedman. It is a reason for a permanent block due to an incompatibility. Enough is enough." Dgw (talk) 00:50, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The organization raised the pension from NIS 2,342 ($660) to NIS 4,500 ($1,270). I added it to the page, with the relevant sources. It is also written in the page: "The organization was established in April 2016 [...] as a protest to the wear of the disability pension in Israel for more than 15 years."
Whataboutism is not accepted in Wikipedia.Dgw (talk) 20:44, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
As someone said, There are lots of equivalent organizations in the world, that some of them don't have article, and this one isn't special compared to them. זור987 (talk) 10:40, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 Delete. None of the sources in the article appear to establish the subject's existence, let alone its notability. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 07:43, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This request is due to close on 13:05, 2 July 2024 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The outcome of this request for deletion was to  Delete. — *Fehufangą ♮ ✉ Talk page 11:32, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sumer Khattar

Sumer Khattar (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

73.170.137.168 has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: I can't determine what this person is the president of. The first Google result is this: [4] (All India Cow Protection Federation) but that's spelled differently, and I don't see this person mentioned there. So I don't see any sources about this person at all. 73.170.137.168 (talk) 21:33, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

Discussion

This request is due to close on 21:33, 15 July 2024 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.



Retrieved from "https://simple.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_deletion&oldid=9653291"