Wikipedia:Requests for deletion

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

WP:BEFORE

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

A. Read and understand these policies and guidelines

The Wikipedia deletion policy, which explains valid grounds for deletion.
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)
Subject-specific notability guidelines, which can be found at Category:Wikipedia notability guidelines

B. Carry out these checks

Confirm that the article does not meet the criteria for quick deletion.
If there are verifiability, notability or other sourcing concerns, take reasonable steps to search for reliable sources. (See step D.)
Review the article's history to check for potential vandalism or poor editing.
Read the article's talk page for previous nominations and/or that your objections haven't already been dealt with.
Check "What links here" in the article's sidebar, to see how the page is used and referenced within Wikipedia.
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

If the article can be fixed through normal editing, then it is not a candidate for RfD.
If the article was recently created, please consider allowing the contributors more time to develop the article.
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.
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

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.
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.
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.

Click "Change source" at the top of the page to be deleted.
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.
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.

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.
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.
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

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".
Go to the list of deletion requests, and click "change source" beside the words "Current deletion request discussions".
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)}}
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

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

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:

A nomination involves a topic that you do not know much about.
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. --Eptalon (talk) 19:51, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Robert E. Grant

Robert E. Grant (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Batrachoseps has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Rather promotional article. Does not seem to have enough coverage for WP:GNG. At least one of the sources is invalid, about another person with the same name. Batrachoseps (talk) 15:07, 20 September 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 As I can see from a quick Google search, Robert E. Grant is also a notable American YouTuber with over 118k+ subscribers^[1], which is a significant number. This level of following suggests he has made a notable impact in his field, and therefore meets the notability standards. While the article may have some promotional tone that needs cleaning up, I believe it has the potential to be improved rather than deleted. Cleaning up the content and verifying sources should address the concerns raised. Ultimately, I think it's worth giving editors and admins the chance to revise it. --Symonds Gerother (talk) 18:20, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

↑ https://www.youtube.com/@Robert_Edward_Grant

Delete Some of the sources are suspect. The reference for being knighted by Montenegro links to an amazon.ca entry; that entry lists a contributor named Robert Grant, but doesn't say anything about Montenegro or being knighted (plus amazon is not a reliable source). The reference for winning a best TV host award shows someone named Robert Grant, but doesn't say anything about an award. The obituary on legacy.com seems to be about a different person with the same name, but wouldn't be a reliable source anyway. I also tried to find the items listed in the filmography in IMDB; I found one or two with the titles indicated, but they didn't list anyone named Robert Grant. Maybe IMDB doesn't list things from Gaia. Also, based on what I did see on the Gaia website, listing Grant as "featured cast" makes his role sound more important than it probably is; the items in the filmography seem to be documentary-type things, so just "cast" would be enough. As for a number of YouTube subscribers, that doesn't make a person notable, and certainly doesn't say anything about making an impact on anything. --Auntof6 (talk) 10:55, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This request is due to close on 15:07, 27 September 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. clearly A4 fr33k man 22:38, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"Salt Bridge"

"Salt Bridge" (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Ternera has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Non-notable band. Ternera (talk) 14:36, 20 September 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, but it doesn't claim notability, so it can easily be tagged for quick deletion. Batrachoseps (talk) 14:47, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This request is due to close on 14:36, 27 September 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. This point made by Fehufanga is worth noting for those who may end up reviewing this page again. --Ferien (talk) 21:52, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Muhammad Hammad Ansari

Muhammad Hammad Ansari (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Ternera has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: None of the sources are from reliable places. Subject does not appear to be notable. Ternera (talk) 21:16, 19 September 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 - self-published sources, nothing to support notability and nothing useful in a goole search. Ravensfire (talk) 02:00, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete non notable person--Symonds Gerother (talk) 16:08, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This request is due to close on 21:16, 26 September 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. Soft delete --Auntof6 (talk) 00:52, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

VidLii

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

24.130.150.141 has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Non-notable website 24.130.150.141 (talk) 20:19, 18 September 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 20:19, 25 September 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) 00:51, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:TorontoElections

Template:TorontoElections (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

24.130.150.141 has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Should be deleted. This is unused and has only redlinks, and the creator even requested deletion. 24.130.150.141 (talk) 20:17, 18 September 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: FYI: I declined the author's QD request for two reasons. First, the reason given was "redlinks only", which is not a valid QD option. Second, I considered deleting it under WP:QD#G7 (author wants deletion), but part of the option requires that the page was created by mistake, which I don't think this was. --Auntof6 (talk) 06:02, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This request is due to close on 20:17, 25 September 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. Redirected to Galactic Republic because there are incoming links. Anyone wishing to merge can find the text in the page history --Auntof6 (talk) 00:48, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

New Republic (Star Wars)

New Republic (Star Wars) (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

RiggedMint has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: We already have an article on the New Republic, though it's a very small portion. (See Galactic Republic) I think it's just too soon for an article on the New Republic from Star Wars. I'd say merge or delete. RiggedMint 17:15, 18 September 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

Merge Per nomination and enwiki. Since there is only a small amount of information about the New Republic, I support merging information from New Republic (Star Wars) into Galactic Republic. – Ang erxi ety^! 17:19, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, I also support for it to be merged into the New Republic section of the Galactic Republic :) 82.5.214.243 (talk) 18:15, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge I too think merging into the Galactic Republic page seems best. fr33k man 19:07, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I would prefer it to be merged into the New Republic section of the Galactic Republic page. though im new to this im not entirely sure how but it would be nice to have it merged! :) 82.5.214.243 (talk) 18:13, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This request is due to close on 17:15, 25 September 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. closed as deleted fr33k man 20:05, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Natasha Kojic

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

Ferien has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Appears to fail WP:GNG, also see w:en:Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nataša Kojić --Ferien (talk) 15:55, 18 September 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 non-notable artist, article is written like a promotion, and creator is the subject's agent: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Grandprodukcija24#Conflict_of_Interest_Declaration. Ternera (talk) 18:11, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This request is due to close on 15:55, 25 September 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) 00:46, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Young Piero Omatseye

Young Piero Omatseye (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Ferien has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: fails WP:GNG --Ferien (talk) 15:49, 18 September 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

Comment: A4'd by Fr33kman.- FusionSub (Talk page) (Contributions) 10:36, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Fr33kman: I chose to send this to RfD because it is not eligible for A4. 100 most influential personality in Africa is a reasonable claim to notability, even if it does not show notability in terms of guidelines. I have restored the page, but I would like to ask you to avoid doing this in future as it causes unneeded conflict. --Ferien (talk) 22:04, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Fine by me fr33k man 22:06, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete All sources are either social media or are not notable or reliable sources themselves. I found the claim by a non-notable source that they are among the 100 most influential people in Africa to not be a valid claim of notability in and of itself. fr33k man 22:13, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - sources do not support the claims. Peterdownunder (talk) 23:43, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This request is due to close on 15:49, 25 September 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) 00:45, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Phil Gries

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

Ferien has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Limited coverage in reliable sources. A search online only brings up social media, IMDb, etc. --Ferien (talk) 15:49, 18 September 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 There are many people who are great at their jobs but don't make it into Wikipedia, this is such a case. I've searched for them but only find what the nom has already pointed out. fr33k man 19:02, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Per nominator Astera🪻 ^talk ^edits 23:12, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This request is due to close on 15:49, 25 September 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. A soft-delete. --Ferien (talk) 15:45, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Latin America and the Caribbean topic

Template:Latin America and the Caribbean topic (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Auntof6 has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Nominating a template that duplicates the function of two other templates. This is the configurable template for Latin American and the Caribbean. Its functions are covered by the templates Template:North America topic and Template:South America topic. I think we do better when we categorize by continent rather than by region.

The template is currently used only by National symbols of Mexico, which also has the North America template on it. See Wikipedia:Requests for deletion/Requests/2016/Template:Latin America topic for an RfD where a similar template was deleted. Auntof6 (talk) 09:12, 18 September 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 is what i am leaning toward.--Two templates sometimes overlap.--I find this template quite helpful, as i live in Europe (and i have often heard about South America and North America being 'one continent together').--Where things get difficult, are the countries in the Gulf of Mexico, and countries in the oceans.--User:AuntOfSix voices a concern - and it is not without reason.--I have noticed 'my own, similar concerns' about Templates about rocket flights into space; On the face of it, there seems to be too many.--My attitude until now, has been that, 'Okay, there will always be one or two areas, where an individual will perceive that there is an overkill in regard to, too many templates present.'--About the space-flight templates, I decided many months ago, that I was not going to raise the issue. (I am still not raising the issue - and i am guessing that some people will find a template that that individual, will prefer over another template.--Apples and oranges, so to speak.)--I can live with having to templates about the Americas, where the two templates might somewhat overlapping. 2001:2020:327:AC74:F124:2E3C:2632:CE96 (talk) 17:23, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This request is due to close on 09:12, 25 September 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) 03:25, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Arcadia Global School

Arcadia Global School (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Ferien has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Doesn't meet WP:GNG, also see w:Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Arcadia Global School --Ferien (talk) 20:15, 17 September 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 clearly fails all notability guidelines. fr33k man 22:34, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This request is due to close on 20:15, 24 September 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) 03:24, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dan DeFigio

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

Ferien has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: I don't think the sources show the subject passes WP:GNG, and I can't find any other sources online. --Ferien (talk) 20:08, 17 September 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 20:08, 24 September 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) 03:22, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Year films cat row

Template:Year films cat row (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 apparently intended to display something on Category:Movies by year. For what it's worth, enwiki removed their version of this template from en:Category:Films by year in 2022, but I don't see any sign that we ever had it on our category. Auntof6 (talk) 10:21, 17 September 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 per above. Batrachoseps (talk) 13:02, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This request is due to close on 10:21, 24 September 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) 06:38, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Mario Winans

Template:Mario Winans (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Auntof6 has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Nominating a group of unrelated, unused navboxes where the body of the template has either zero blue links or only one blue link. Without multiple blue links, navboxes can't do their job of navigation between pages.

No blue links in body:

only one blue link in body:

--Auntof6 (talk) 09:57, 17 September 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 There is no use of these navbox, they only have one blue link, unless someone plans to create the pages later. Cactus🌵 ^spiky ^ouch 10:01, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If the pages are recreated later, the templates can easily be recreated. -- Auntof6 (talk) 10:03, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all for now, per nominator. Batrachoseps (talk) 20:05, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This request is due to close on 09:57, 24 September 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 22:32, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nelvana Studios

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

William Graham has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Hoax. William Graham (talk) 22:38, 16 September 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

Comment: it does have a page (w:Nelvana) on enwiki, so I doubt it is a hoax. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ternera (talk • contribs) 19:35, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Ternera: The content is all completely wrong - compare the two versions and you'll see, so I think that's why William Graham said it was a hoax. Also, please sign your comments. Batrachoseps (talk) 19:39, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry for being brief when I requested the deletion. The article is a complete work of fiction imagining a business that will start sometime in the future. The people claimed to be associated with this business are unsourced and I can find no references from my own searches of the internet. The anonymous IP address editor or editors that created this page are also responsible for similar hoaxes (fictional animated movies and productions) in English Wikipedia draft space. William Graham (talk) 22:41, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Administrator note: There is a newly-created duplicate article at Nelvana Movies that should be treated the same as the nominated article. --Auntof6 (talk) 10:14, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete WP:CRYSTAL.- FusionSub (Talk page) (Contributions) 10:20, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Quick Delete QD A6; WP:CRYSTAL. RiggedMint 16:20, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This request is due to close on 22:38, 23 September 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. G3d by Ferien— *Fehufangą ♮ ✉ Talk page 22:34, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Frenzy Entertainment

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

William Graham has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Hoax. William Graham (talk) 22:37, 16 September 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 WP:CRYSTAL.- FusionSub (Talk page) (Contributions) 09:25, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This request is due to close on 22:37, 23 September 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) 08:44, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

New Era Party USA

New Era Party USA (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Batrachoseps has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: I can't find any good coverage in secondary sources for this political party. It seems to fail WP:GNG. Batrachoseps (talk) 21:02, 16 September 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 Not a notable political party. No significant coverage from independent sources.— *Fehufangą ♮ ✉ Talk page 22:29, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This request is due to close on 21:02, 23 September 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) 08:42, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bangladesh Madrasah Education Board

Bangladesh Madrasah Education Board (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

CosmLearner has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: The nominator's reason for doing this is: The Bangladesh Madrasah Education Board oversees all madrasahs in Bangladesh. But there is a description of Darunnajat Siddiquia Kamil Madrasa (possibly a madrasah in Bangladesh) which is inconsistent with the title of the article. 😬CsmLrner 20:10, 15 September 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 20:10, 22 September 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 22:30, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Brfxxccxxmnpcccclllmmnprxvclmnckssqlbb11116

Brfxxccxxmnpcccclllmmnprxvclmnckssqlbb11116 (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Fr33kman has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: I don't see this as notable. It doesn't seem to be widely cited anywhere and just seems to be a political protest without much coverage. Perhaps it could be part of an article on naming law but I think as a separate article it's not notablefr33k man 19:25, 16 September 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 This "article" is just the story.- FusionSub (Talk page) (Contributions) 09:31, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete The page title is non sense, because the name is gibberish. 2001:569:7C55:9000:95EF:28C2:D9B2:8816 (talk) 02:07, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete nonsense title Cactus🌵 ^spiky ^ouch 11:19, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Did you actually read the article? Batrachoseps (talk) 11:21, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes? Cactus🌵 ^spiky ^ouch 11:23, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You said it was nonsense but it's not. The name may be a random set of letters, but the article makes sense. Batrachoseps (talk) 11:25, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I meant the name Cactus🌵 ^spiky ^ouch 11:25, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That's not a reason for QD. The article has to be nonsense. The fact that it's about a made-up word doesn't matter for QD. Batrachoseps (talk) 11:33, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I chnaged to delete Cactus🌵 ^spiky ^ouch 11:33, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This request is due to close on 19:25, 23 September 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. Per WP:BEFORE point C, complex articles should not be sent to RfD. Looking in the article history, previous revisions are simpler so the issue of complexity can be easily fixed. --Ferien (talk) 16:40, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ambipolar electric field

Ambipolar electric field (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Fr33kman has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Complex wording. fr33k man 04:08, 16 September 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 It's not really more complex than a lot of the science articles here. I guess people disagree whether it's possible to explain science subjects well using just Basic English words, but as long as an average person can generally understand it, that meets part of this project's goal. That needs a little more work here, but it's closer than the enwiki version. Batrachoseps (talk) 04:15, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I wrote this article. If you really think the wording is to difficult, then that is reason to simplify it, not erase it.Kdammers (talk) 05:10, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Actually there were some people who wrote the article.--The following diff might be the most sifnificant work done to the article yet,

simple.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ambipolar_electric_field&diff=9764260&oldid=9757283
, but yeah, you wrote the first version of the article. 2001:2020:349:AAF6:38BE:150D:7B75:8731 (talk) 17:41, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If not ... , then Delete - is what i'm leaning toward.

The English-wiki article is 'drifting alone, on the seas'; All the new work (there), is being done on (their) "Polar wind" (wiki-article).

If our article were to say: " Ambipolar electric field is (an important idea or) key element of a theory about an electric field which surrounds the planet.

[End of lede:] This (thought-of or imagined) Ambipolar electric field would be like other ambipolar electric fields, in that they are a kind of electric field called polarization electric field.

Voltage measurements done from a rocket traveling thru Space:

Various voltage measurements were done, during a rocket-flight in 2022. What is thought to be a kind of polarization electric field, an ambipolar electric field, seems to have been measured. Later measurements, if even made, have not been published (as of 2024's third quarter).

The field was measured in 2022 by a sounding rocket launched from Svalbard. This NASA mission was called Endurance. "^[1]

Further comment: If the article says the above (, and little else), then that is about where one should be.--If our "Polar wind" article gets updated, then that is also fine.--Good luck (while i fix other articles). 2001:2020:32F:EA20:E848:467B:C80:4CCB (talk) 22:05, 16 September 2024 (UTC) /2001:2020:32F:EA20:E848:467B:C80:4CCB (talk) 22:08, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Simple language, article supported by third party publications. Deletion is not for cleanup, ideas on how to improve the article can be discussed on its talk page. Clear keep-Eptalon (talk) 05:45, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - The wiki-article is pretending that we have an article about "Polar wind".--As of mid-September, we do not have an article about Polar wind. (That is a flaw, of our wiki-article: it reminds me of 'sailing under false flag'.)--Another thing: If you look at the history of the English-wiki article about the Ambipolar electric field, the chemistry professor has added tags to the article, and c. nothing else. On the other hand, the chemistry professor has added a ton of stuff to the "Polar wind" article of En-wiki, largely according to specific questions on the talk page (of "Polar wind", at En-wiki).--'Everyone' is leaving alone, the 'smallish' (?) mistakes, of the En-wiki article about "Ambipolar electric field". 2001:2020:349:AAF6:38BE:150D:7B75:8731 (talk) 17:20, 17 September 2024 (UTC) /2001:2020:32F:EA20:E848:467B:C80:4CCB[reply]
Update: Regarding the 'fake blue link' in the article - i removed it, a half-day later.--Now it is a red-link. 2001:2020:323:D3CA:446A:FEEC:D94A:7361 (talk) 03:49, 18 September 2024 (UTC) /2001:2020:32F:EA20:E848:467B:C80:4CCB[reply]

Note: if the following gets left in the article - without clearly stating anything specific about the Ionosphere (or thereabouts), then i will later change my 'vote'/voice to 'leaning toward hard Delete '.--"The existence of the field was hypothesized (suggested) in 1955.--If what i said, was simply put, then fine. 2001:2020:301:B2A4:6170:F6C2:4789:40FA (talk) 18:21, 17 September 2024 (UTC) /2001:2020:32F:EA20:E848:467B:C80:4CCB[reply]

Comment - i have moved some stuff, around in the article. And i have added some stuff (without being part of lessons-of-basic-chemistry-falling-from-the-sky).--I would not be concerned if the article gets Delete, or Merge, or whatever.--If the En-wiki article does not have tall tales or extraordinary claims, then y'all should probably consider to be somewhat careful about that.--The article is (arguably) okay, as of version,
simple.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ambipolar_electric_field&oldid=9777607
. Good luck (while i fix other articles). 2001:2020:329:CFB8:A029:293B:A415:ACDB (talk) 04:41, 19 September 2024 (UTC) /2001:2020:349:AAF6:38BE:150D:7B75:8731 /2001:2020:32F:EA20:E848:467B:C80:4CCB[reply]

This request is due to close on 04:08, 23 September 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) 12:11, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Alysson Paradis

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

Chenzw has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: The actress doesn't appear to meet NACTOR, and a cursory search for news articles doesn't reveal significant coverage. Sending this to RfD after QD declined because NOTINHERITED cannot be used with QD. Chenzw Talk 12:05, 15 September 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 12:05, 22 September 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) 07:11, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Cairo CPT

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

Batrachoseps has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: There are some sources and awards, but they look fairly spammy and I'm not whether they are good enough to qualify for WP:GNG / WP:NMUSIC. Batrachoseps (talk) 06:27, 15 September 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 clearly not notable fr33k man 22:47, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This request is due to close on 06:27, 22 September 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) 07:10, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

B Major SA

B Major SA (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Batrachoseps has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: There are some sources and awards, but they look fairly spammy and I'm not whether they are good enough to qualify for WP:GNG / WP:NMUSIC. Batrachoseps (talk) 06:26, 15 September 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 06:26, 22 September 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. --Ferien (talk) 16:37, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Luke Hessler

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

MathXplore has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Luke_Hessler#Awards_and_recognitions includes a great list of awards, but almost all of them are unreferenced. Can this be true? MathXplore (talk) 05:16, 15 September 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 I believe the subject may indeed meet notability guidelines based on some findings in Google search results that suggest Luke Hessler has a level of public recognition. However, the issue raised about unsourced awards is valid. The current list of awards and recognitions lacks proper references, which undermines the credibility of this section.

Rather than deleting the page outright, I propose cleaning it up. This includes:

Removing any unsourced claims, particularly in the Awards and Recognitions section.

Ensuring the page adheres to a neutral point of view.
Adding reliable references to support the remaining content.
By improving the quality of sourcing and maintaining a neutral tone, this page can meet Wikipedia's content guidelines. --Symonds Gerother (talk) 16:22, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete The sources are all advertising, including the websites I found on Google search. He doesn't meet WP:GNG. And the Forbes 30 Under 30 seems to be a hoax. Batrachoseps (talk) 04:41, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This request is due to close on 05:16, 22 September 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. was quick deleted fr33k man 18:22, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Greek Pakistan

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

Chenzw has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Anachronistic term that, as far as I can tell, is not conventionally used within academic sources. Chenzw Talk 02:49, 15 September 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

same as the other article recently discussed. 'Pakistan' first mentioned in 1933. There may have been traces of Ancient Greek culture on the territory, but as is: ill-named. Delete?-Eptalon (talk) 13:19, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Fr33kman: Can you close this as speedy, because non-admin closures aren't allowed anymore. 2603:3005:902:5E00:C0B:E77A:260A:EAB3 (talk) 18:20, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This request is due to close on 02:49, 22 September 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) 06:59, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Muhammad Usman Malik

Muhammad Usman Malik (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Davey2010 has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Non notable actor and singer, Fails NSINGER, NACTOR and GNG, Thanks –Davey2010^Talk 22:56, 14 September 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.

The creator Muhammadusmanofficial is the articles subject and has been globally locked which I was unaware of at the time of nominating, Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 22:58, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

This request is due to close on 22:56, 21 September 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) 07:06, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of programs distributed by Sprout

List of programs distributed by Sprout (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Davey2010 has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Non notable list, References are poor, nothing better found online. EN doesn't have an article either, I suspect each and every entry in this list is vandalism as these IPs seem to thrive on adding fake content to these articles here, Thanks –Davey2010^Talk 21:46, 14 September 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 21:46, 21 September 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. --Ferien (talk) 16:35, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

DG Hamblin

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

Trishneet Kalra has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Non Notable Fails GNG and ANYBIO Jha-Authorised⁴⁷⁷²🧿^Talk 17:16, 31 August 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 - Fails WP:Notability; contains spam links and uses social media as a source, which are generally considered unreliable sources (See: WP:RS). – Cyber.Eyes.2005^Talk 19:12, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Administrator note: CU requested (Special:Diff/9748295). MathXplore (talk) 00:39, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I am curious as to why you chose this particular article for deletion, especially since you are new to editing. When I first started editing articles I had no idea that the deletion of articles could be requested. Did you create your account for the specific purpose of having this article deleted? Are you in any way affiliated with Poulan Police Department or anyone who works there and would not want the negative attention created by this article? Do you know David Larkins personally and have some issue with him? Have you tried adding citations or information to the article in order to improve it? Workingboots (talk) 02:45, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello @Workingboots,

It’s quite suspicious that you've made only about 10 edits and created your account today, just to comment on this specific RFD. This suggests potential undisclosed paid editing (UPE) or a conflict of interest, especially since you're questioning my motives as a new editor while your account shows a similar lack of history. My request for deletion is based purely on Wikipedia's notability and reliable sourcing guidelines—this article does not meet those standards.

I would advise against making unfounded assumptions about my intentions. Instead, we should be focusing on the content itself and whether it adheres to Wikipedia’s policies, rather than diverting the discussion toward personal speculations.

If you have valid, policy-based reasons for keeping the article, please provide them. Otherwise, I would suggest that this line of questioning is unproductive and potentially disruptive. Jha-Authorised⁴⁷⁷²🧿^Talk 16:58, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That was a lot of big words, you might have to simplify what you are saying for me. I freely admit that I am a new editor and learning as I go along. I am certainly not trying to start any fights or do something disruptive. I also do not hold myself up as an expert on Wiki editing. I don't think that any new editor should. I'm inclined to think that perhaps new editors also should not be allowed to make requests for deletion. I am definitely not paid or compensated in any way for my work here. And I have no conflict of interest. It does seem weird that a new account is created and then very quickly asks for a page to be deleted without trying to improve the page to bring it up to standard. It just feels like somebody has an ax to grind. And the way you responded to me feels like an attempt to bully me into silence. I don't know a lot about editing, but I am learning. As I continue to edit other pages, I will also work to improve this one as well. From what I have seen, there appears to be plenty of publicly available information from third party sources which can be used to improve the page. I have also had pages suggested to me for edits which are about people who seem less notable than Larkins/Hamblin. Workingboots (talk) 00:00, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

— This user has made few or no contributions outside of this page.
DG Hamblin is well known to many people in the NE GA area. He was a law enforcement executive and in addition to running for sheriff in the area, he is known for his compassion and equity in dealing with members of the community. His YouTube channel is popular in the area, and I would imagine is gaining more popularity with his most recent guest. While I am not a member of his church, I have been led to understand that in addition to being in a high-ranking leadership role, he has contributed to the teaching and presentation of that church's doctrine. His content is popular in the area, and is extending out of the area, I would reason that is because of his latest content upload. I do not know him, and I have never met him. His content is fair and equitable, and this article does show notability via multiple independent sources. I do not know about the Poulan Police Department but based on the content that his channel is showcasing, I can understand why people are creating articles about the content and the individual who approached the guest that increased DG Hamblin's notability. He is notable for interviewing a police officer who chose to tell the truth, in a time when officers being transparent to the public is rare to non-existent. This article was properly created and within the source guidelines of Wikipedia. I will admit that I have seen DG Hamblin's content, and the most recent videos (including the interview with the former officer). It inspired me to begin editing Wikipedia articles and updating the history of these agencies and cities appropriately and within the context of transparency based on the independency of proper sources. This article complies with Wikipedia and it uses independent sources not associated with DG Hamblin. DG Hamblin advertises himself on social media and that is allowed to reference when the subject of the article is making public statements. The interview with the former officer, happened. The documents release that DG Hamblin uploaded with the interview to YouTube proves that the guest is a certified peace officer in Georgia, and that the things he spoke about were either documented or audio recorded. According to Wikipedia referencing guidelines, those statements and the video are also able to be used as references. Elbertgranite (talk) 23:47, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
— This user has made few or no contributions outside of this page.
Administrator note: User is blocked/locked. MathXplore (talk) 07:24, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There are multiple reliable sources in this article. The sources are independent of the article's subject. There may be an argument for presumption in one of the sources, but it is still significant coverage from a source that is independent of the subject of the article. The social media reference should be removed, but the YouTube video section is, I thought, allowed under Wikipedia's policy as they are cited and not linked (Wikipedia:Video_links). The content of the most recent video is controversial, and it is apparently causing a notable stir publicly. I would say the content creator DG Hamblin is notable,and the references cited show that. Cachevalley1820 (talk) 00:11, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
— This user has made few or no contributions outside of this page.
Administrator note: User is blocked/locked. MathXplore (talk) 07:21, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Quick Delete A4 or G11 (might even be G5, this type of behaviour isn't new to me at all). ✩ Dream Indigo ✩ 22:19, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Administrator note: The discussion was not listed on WP:RFD. Therefore, I have listed the discussion over there and extended the discussion term. MathXplore (talk) 07:24, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This request is due to close on ~~17:16, 7 September 2024 (UTC)~~ 07:24, 21 September 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. Notability not established Peterdownunder (talk) 07:03, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sangeetpedia

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

Batrachoseps has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Unclear notability; seems to fail WP:GNG, and the sources don't link the pages they say they are. I am open to keeping this if anyone can find external sources, because the English Wikipedia version (which I also sent to AFD) says it was released in the 2000s, while this version says it was released in 2020. Batrachoseps (talk) 20:39, 13 September 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. --Astera🪻 ^talk ^edits 17:31, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This has already been nominated for RfD, so we may as well let the RfD run its 7 days. --Ferien (talk) 20:10, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This request is due to close on 20:39, 20 September 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) 07:03, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tamirul Millat Kamil Madrasah

Tamirul Millat Kamil Madrasah (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Eku Roy has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: WP:N Doesnt pass Eku Roy (talk) 09:35, 9 September 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

Comment: I changed the date because this was not transcluded on WP:RFD. Batrachoseps (talk) 16:05, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This request is due to close on ~~09:35, 16 September 2024~~ 16:05, 20 September 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. Peterdownunder (talk) 22:16, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Averill, Vermont

Averill, Vermont (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

2603:8001:6940:2100:8A58:E42:3ACF:9A69 has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: too short to aquadately explain what it is about 2603:8001:6940:2100:8A58:E42:3ACF:9A69 (talk) 23:43, 7 September 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 settlement along with the page is too small— Preceding unsigned comment added by 2603:8001:6940:2100:ACA1:B9B1:C170:EF34 (talk • contribs)
Keep I believe the subject is notable enough for Wikipedia. Averill, Vermont is a geographic location, and the existence of the page in multiple languages (beyond just the English Wikipedia) further suggests that it meets notability standards for geographic and historical importance. While the article may be brief, it still provides essential information about the place. Rather than deleting the page, I suggest expanding it with additional verifiable information regarding its history, geography, demographics, or local significance. A short article can still be valuable and expanded over time. --Symonds Gerother (talk) 16:26, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
no, Delete it is so short it gives the impression that it is not notable.2603:8001:6940:2100:E8AA:3934:D3D6:82D1 (talk) 17:17, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Please Deleteit is so short it gives the impression that it is not notable. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2603:8001:6940:2100:e8aa:3934:d3d6:82d1 (talk • contribs) 17:25, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Administrator note: Above stricken out because the user already commented above --Auntof6 (talk) 13:08, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Settlements are considered to be notable. We have many articles about settlements that are this short. It's not ideal, but just the place's existence makes it notable. --Auntof6 (talk) 13:11, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment:saying its not ideal means this page should be deleted btw i don't speak simple english 2603:8001:6940:2100:ACA1:B9B1:C170:EF34 (talk) 00:24, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep While the article could use some work here, EN's article shows notability for the settlement. I'll try and expand the article tomorrow but can't guarantee I will get time (or remember) to do so.- FusionSub (Talk page) (Contributions) 13:15, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I would like to propose keeping this article as it meets the notability criteria and already exists on the English Wikipedia. The subject has demonstrated significant achievements in their field, which satisfies the general notability guidelines. The article is well-referenced with reliable sources, ensuring verifiability. Deleting this article would result in the loss of valuable information that is relevant to readers interested in this topic.--QwErTyUiOpaSDg20 (talk) 07:18, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I changed the date because this was not transcluded on WP:RFD. Batrachoseps (talk) 15:59, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This request is due to close on ~~23:43, 14 September 2024~~ 15:59, 20 September 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) 07:01, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Code Red (computer worm)

Code Red (computer worm) (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Ternera has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Random facts, not encyclopedic. Ternera (talk) 15:48, 13 September 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 15:48, 20 September 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. The consensus was to delete all these categories apart from "LGBT". The "LGBT" category could be renamed in the future to represent the fact that "LGBTQ" is often used to describe the community. I should note the main priority in these deletions is of course to allow preservation of the original category's history and attribution, and I do think renaming the category is a discussion worth having, as intersex people are very much welcome and often included in the LGBTQ+ community. --Ferien (talk) 14:50, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:LGBTIQ

Category:LGBTIQ (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) ·

Category:LGBTI (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) ·

Category:LGBTQ (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) ·

Category:LGBT (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Batrachoseps has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: It's unnecessary to have separate categories based on how many letters there are in the acronym. I think we should only have one category for LGBT(QIANP etc.) Batrachoseps (talk) 15:41, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know what the category should be, but the letters stand for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer, Intersex, Asexual, Non-binary, Pansexual, and I have seen others used too. Batrachoseps (talk) 15:44, 13 September 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

They include different specific groups. The pages about intersex don't belong under LGBT. LagoonGoose (talk) 03:08, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Category:LGBT because it's the oldest (to preserve the page history and attribution). Redirect everything else, because Category:LGBTI, Category:LGBTIQ and Category:LGBTQ were started yesterday 13 September 2024. I feel like the letters can be discussed in the category's talk page in a second moment. ✩ Dream Indigo ✩ 02:13, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If there's too many, that's actuality the first I would get rid of. The intersex pages belong with it, but not within it. LagoonGoose (talk) 03:09, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

~~Prefer Keep all 4. …~~ . LagoonGoose (talk) 03:30, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

giving up on first choice. LagoonGoose (talk) 00:52, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

At a minimum we need one with i and one without (for intersex)

So,

Keep Category:LGBTIQ and

Keep Category:LGBTQ (so

Redirect Category:LGBTI to Category:LGBTIQ and

Redirect Category:LGBTI to Category:LGBTIQ).

OR

Keep Category:LGBTIQ and

Keep Category:LGBT (so

Redirect Category:LGBTI and Category:LGBTQ both to Category:LGBTIQ).

LagoonGoose (talk) 00:52, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Category:LGBT but Delete the other 3. The LGBT cat is the oldest and a category on LGBT-related topics is ensential for any encyclopedia without a conservative agenda.- FusionSub (Talk page) (Contributions) 07:03, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, we certainly need a category for these topics. I think pansexual, nonbinary, queer etc. can be included even within the LGBT label. We still need to decide what to do with the intersex category. Batrachoseps (talk) 08:04, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Batrachoseps but intersex definitely doesn't fit in LGBT without an i, and "non binary" doesn't quite fit within T but does fit within Q. e.g. An intersex person who identifies as non binary is not L, G, or T (a not a woman attracted to women, not a man attracted to men, and not transgender) and may or may not be B (attracted to both women and men), but they are intersex and Queer. LagoonGoose (talk) 00:52, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

LGBT doesn't include i - Q is a bit fuzzy but intersex is a very specific different concept. At a minimum we need one with i and one without. I would prefer Q on both because it's more modern. LagoonGoose (talk) 00:24, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Administrator note: The user is blocked/locked. MathXplore (talk) 00:04, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I now believe that LGBTQ is a better title than LGBT. @Dream Indigo and FusionSub:, what do you think we should do with the intersex category? Batrachoseps (talk) 05:05, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The think is: we must preserve page history and attribution. We should keep Category:LGBT, because it's the oldest one, not because of it's name. The other three were created just 2 days ago. We can talk about the name later on the category's talk page, not here. ✩ Dream Indigo ✩ 10:52, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello all, yes I see that these are ill-named. This is Simple-English Wikipedia, we shouldn't add categorgiest when they aren-t necessary. Category:LGBT is well populated, and should likely be kept. Also, if you talk to people on the street, they may have heard of 'LGBT', they ikely won't have heard of the other acronyms. Provided we have areticles (no idea, the respective category can be re-created but should likely be a subcategory of Category:LGBT. So: Keep Cat: LGBT, delete the others, and re-create when there's a need for them (Out category guidleine says that we need 3 entries for a category). If recreated, the delete category should be a subcategory of Cat:LGBT...--Eptalon (talk) 05:34, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep --QwErTyUiOpaSDg20 (talk) 07:16, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This request is due to close on 15:41, 20 September 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. Renamed. --Auntof6 (talk) 10:03, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:20th-century Ghanaian male actors

Category:20th-century Ghanaian male actors (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Category:21st-century Ghanaian male actors (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete)

MathXplore has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: WP:CATGENDER MathXplore (talk) 04:56, 12 September 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

Move – Since there are enough entries for both categories, I suggest moving them to Category:20th-century Ghanaian actors and Category:21st-century Ghanaian actors respectively. – Cyber.Eyes.2005^Talk 09:23, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Move per Cyber.Eyes.2005 ✩ Dream Indigo ✩ 02:15, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This request is due to close on 04:56, 19 September 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) 09:54, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Article for deletion/dated

Template:Article for deletion/dated (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Batrachoseps has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: This process is not used here. Batrachoseps (talk) 00:40, 12 September 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 00:40, 19 September 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. Unused template Peterdownunder (talk) 23:45, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Édith Piaf

Template:Édith Piaf (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Batrachoseps has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: This navbox is currently useless, because it only has redlinks except for the article on the person. Batrachoseps (talk) 22:12, 11 September 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 per nom. ✩ Dream Indigo ✩ 22:15, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Remove from use and delete. --Auntof6 (talk) 22:17, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hard Keep is what i am leaning toward.--Then one can revisit the issue, when the article about the artist, has most of the red-links.--The information in the article is (arguably) also much better formatted than the wiki-article (and some might feel that could be another reason to keep the template, for now).--Good luck (while i fix other articles). 2001:2020:355:B15E:3C8B:D77:6B12:F727 (talk) 03:23, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, IP user, but please note:
- This RfD is for the template about Piaf, not the article about her. The article doesn't have to have any of the links in the template. In fact, what is or is not in the article has nothing to do with the template. Neither does the condition of the article.
- This is a navigational box template. Its purpose is to allow people to easily move between related articles. To do that, you need at least two of the linked items in the template to exist (which would show as blue links). Since this navbox has only one blue link anywhere in it, it can't do its job and therefore serves no purpose. If more of the things linked in the template are created, the template can be recreated. In the meantime, it's not helpful to have this template around.
-- Auntof6 (talk) 09:53, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This request is due to close on 22:12, 18 September 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. Unused template Peterdownunder (talk) 22:30, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Daniel Dennett

Template:Daniel Dennett (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Batrachoseps has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: This navbox is currently useless, because it only has redlinks except for the article on the person. Batrachoseps (talk) 20:46, 11 September 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

Remove from use and delete. --Auntof6 (talk) 22:17, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete agree with Auntof6 fr33k man 19:57, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This request is due to close on 20:46, 18 September 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. Unused template Peterdownunder (talk) 22:12, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Neodymium compounds

Template:Neodymium compounds (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Batrachoseps has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: This navbox is useless because it only has redlinks. Batrachoseps (talk) 17:54, 11 September 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

Remove from use and delete. --Auntof6 (talk) 22:18, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep is what I am leaning toward.--The wiki article does not mention a single compound, it seems (and therefore c. no red links of the most important compounds.) Some might feel that might be a partial reason to keep the template.--Good luck (while people try to figure out how to write a 'H2O style red-link' in the article). 2001:2020:355:B15E:3C8B:D77:6B12:F727 (talk) 03:34, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete agree with Auntof6 fr33k man 19:55, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This request is due to close on 17:54, 18 September 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. Not notable Peterdownunder (talk) 21:57, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hossein Kamalabadi

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

Vermont has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Doesn't seem to be notable. Might merit mention in articles about productions he's worked on (if there's sufficient sourcing about his work), but no indication of significant coverage about him personally. Deleted and salted on enwiki for similar reasons. Vermont (🐿️—🏳️‍🌈) 01:51, 12 September 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 Article Please pay attention to the references in Google

For example https://namnamak.com/%D9%81%D8%B1%D9%87%D9%86%DA%AF-%D9%88-%D9%87%D9%86%D8%B1/%D8%A8%DB%8C%D9%88%DA%AF%D8%B1%D8%A7%D9%81%DB%8C-%D9%87%D9%86%D8%B1%D9%85%D9%86%D8%AF%D8%A7%D9%86/%D8%A8%DB%8C%D9%88%DA%AF%D8%B1%D8%A7%D9%81%DB%8C-%D8%AD%D8%B3%DB%8C%D9%86-%DA%A9%D9%85%D8%A7%D9%84-%D8%A2%D8%A8%D8%A7%D8%AF%DB%8C

Ariya9100 (talk) 15:38, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete The source linked above doesn't qualify for GNG: It's just a short biography according to Google translate. That alone shows no notability. I found no other basis for notability.— *Fehufangą ♮ ✉ Talk page 13:06, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Fehufanga fr33k man`

This request is due to close on 01:51, 19 September 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. Unused template Peterdownunder (talk) 21:54, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Muscles of the lower limb

Template:Muscles of the lower limb (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Batrachoseps has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Useless at the moment. None of the articles about muscles exist, leaving dozens of red links and blue links only to buttocks, thigh, and foot (which are not muscles). Batrachoseps (talk) 17:34, 11 September 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

Remove from use and delete. --Auntof6 (talk) 22:19, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete unused fr33k man 19:52, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This request is due to close on 17:34, 18 September 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. Peterdownunder (talk) 21:46, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Editnotices/Page/Deaths in 2023

Template:Editnotices/Page/Deaths in 2023 (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Auntof6 has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Nominating the edit notice for the page Deaths in 2023. The page may have been useful when it was created in 2023, but I don't believe it is now because it's unlikely that Deaths in 2023 will get many more edits. No other deaths-by-year pages have edit notices. Auntof6 (talk) 10:16, 11 September 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 10:16, 18 September 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. Peterdownunder (talk) 21:43, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hellenic Pakistan

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

Chenzw has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: WP:OR and WP:SYNTH where the article primarily discusses Greek history, but cited sources do not explicitly support the association of the discussed Greek subject matter to "Hellenic Pakistan". Chenzw Talk 05:39, 9 September 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-Important references. Eku Roy (talk) 07:15, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- That doesn't address my concerns about OR and SYNTH. Chenzw Talk 08:57, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Administrator note: User is locked. MathXplore (talk) 22:14, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep but rename it to "Hellenic Period in Pakistan"; this is to address concerns about anachronism. The article covers the Greek/Hellenic history within the region of modern-day Pakistan, including Alexander's conquest and the successor states that followed. This is a very significant part of the history of Pakistan. The references cited discuss Greek history in the area, but indeed do not specifically refer to it as "Hellenic Pakistan." – Cyber.Eyes.2005^Talk 09:21, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Are you saying that Pakistan existed during the Hellenic period? Please also address the concern that the article is a misrepresentation of Indo-Greek Kingdom. [1] Chenzw Talk 10:24, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  I’m not claiming that modern Pakistan existed during the Hellenic period. The focus is on the land itself? The article discusses Alexander’s conquest and the following Seleucid, Greco-Bactrian, and Indo-Greek periods. There’s no misrepresentation here. The confusion likely came from the map, which shows the Indo-Greek kingdom, but it is clearly labeled as such. – Cyber.Eyes.2005^Talk 10:39, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I was going to nominate this myself. Concerns raised at enwiki (as linked above) are valid and I quote User:AirshipJungleman29: "...as someone who has contributed extensively in the area of the so-called "Hellenic Pakistan", a formulation which I don't believe has ever been used in scholarship..."; this is further supported by the fact that this simplewiki article is the only one which comes up if you search for "Hellenic Pakistan". This is also patent OR not a case simply solved by a rename, no RS on South Asian history consider a distinct period as such beyond a mention of the Indo-Greek Kingdom. To expand that to a coherent period of history and further anachronistically limit it to modern territorial entities is also clearly SYNTH. Gotitbro (talk) 04:19, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The term Pakistan was not used until 1933 Rathfelder (talk) 10:20, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep but move/rename --Cactus🌵 ^spiky ^ouch 10:31, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Cactusisme: Move/rename to what? -- Auntof6 (talk) 13:24, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
tp Hellenic Period in Pakistan Cactus🌵 ^spiky ^ouch 12:26, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@FusionSub @Cactusisme I would be opposed to this. This title would make sense to describe how the period was in Pakistan but back then the region was vastly different from what it currently is. Pakistan didn't exist back then. I would suggest going through en:Wars of Alexander the Great to see how historical events are usually written. Modern day places are usually only used to educate people on where the place is now. This will do nothing but confuse readers. BRP^ever 13:38, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Move to Hellenic Period in Pakistan per Cyber.Eyes comment. Looking into the page isn't flaring any OR concerns for me.- FusionSub (Talk page) (Contributions) 14:01, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Searching for 'Hellenic Pakisttan' or Hellenistic Pakistan', I find the SEWP artice. So, the title of the article might be chosen badly. This here, is a discussion of whether to delelete the article, though. Looking at the content though, I see that there seem to be traces of Hellenic/Ancient Greek culture in theregion that is called 'Pakistan' today, so this might be just ill-named. The page of ther Greek Embbassy suggests there may have been an influence. There lso seem to be atifacts/ruins that suggest that. So, likely, the article needs looking at from the perspective of fixing terminology; I am not a hisotrian, so I am likely the wrong person to do that. In short, I think the article needs cross-checking, and perhaps a ename, but not deletion.--Eptalon (talk) 14:55, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
~~USERFY~~ is what i am leaning toward.--No mention of "Hellenic Pakistan" at En-wiki, if anyone were to ask; And that says a lot!--The onus is on the article creator, to have a title that makes sense.--If this article is mostly about Greek artefacts in Pakistani archaeology, then that could be a title (if the article is deemed otherwise unproblematic). 2001:2020:317:ACB3:B1AC:69D6:5BD0:8FB1 (talk) 17:19, 15 September 2024 (UTC) /2001:2020:317:ACB3:B1AC:69D6:5BD0:8FB1 (talk) 17:22, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Move/Rename to Archaeology of Pakistan. 2001:2020:317:ACB3:B1AC:69D6:5BD0:8FB1 (talk) 17:24, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If the new article, Archaeology of Pakistan, does not get deleted, then the vast majority of "Hellenic Pakistan" information, has not been lost.--Merge might now be an option. 2001:2020:317:ACB3:B1AC:69D6:5BD0:8FB1 (talk) 17:34, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The keep argument are unconvincing to me. Going through the page just got me confused. It says, 'In Pakistan' but then that didn't exist back then. A lot of sources don't even use the term or mention it. It feels like this page is a mess, mostly OR. Let's not make the history this confusing, we are supposed to be simplewiki.--BRP^ever 13:30, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete There was no Hellenic period in Pakistan as it didn't exist as a nation at that time. It's like saying the Roman period in the United Kingdom, nonsense. fr33k man 19:45, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This request is due to close on 05:39, 16 September 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. Not notable Peterdownunder (talk) 21:37, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Anita Malik

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

Batrachoseps has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Insufficient notability for a Wikipedia article. Fails WP:GNG and WP:PEOPLE. The sources are not independent of the subject. Batrachoseps (talk) 06:20, 11 September 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

Comment: On English Wikipedia, this title redirects to an article about an American candidate in an election, but the article we are discussing here is about an Indian doctor. Batrachoseps (talk) 06:23, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The subject of the article demonstrates a moderate level of notability, as evidenced by multiple interviews and features on reputable news channels that can be found through a simple Google search. However, the current version of the article appears to be written in a promotional tone, which does not align with Wikipedia's neutral point of view (NPOV) policy. It needs a cleanup to ensure neutrality and better adherence to Wikipedia's content guidelines. Additionally, the author did not include a sufficient number of these reliable news sources to establish the subject's full notability. I suggest keeping the page while improving it by adding more independent, reliable sources and rewriting it in a neutral, encyclopedic style to better meet Wikipedia's standards.--Symonds Gerother (talk) 06:33, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Notable person. Eku Roy (talk) 09:24, 11 September 2024 (UTC) blocked as sockpuppet. Ravensfire (talk) 22:12, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete purely promotional article for someone that's just not notable. The sources are passing mentions, interviews or paid/sponsored news. Where is a good source with significant coverage about Malik? Not one in the article. I've removed some of the unsourced / fluff, and some of the press-release / paid articles being used as sources. WP:GNG or WP:NBIO is not met here. Ravensfire (talk) 13:14, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Anita Malik meets the notability criteria, as a quick Google search reveals several independent sources that highlight her achievements. While some sources may be closely related, there are reliable, independent articles that confirm her significance. Instead of deletion, I suggest improving the article with better references or considering a merge if needed. --QwErTyUiOpaSDg20 (talk) 07:40, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Please provide examples of those sources, as the existing sources aren't reliable with significant coverage. Ravensfire (talk) 02:26, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Just noting here that the account was created after this RFD. BRP^ever 14:05, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Couldn't find many significant notable reliable source. Just saying them exist doesn't make it notable, we are here to verify those claims.--BRP^ever 14:02, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This request is due to close on 06:20, 18 September 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. -BRP^ever 14:16, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:European Handball Championship

Template:European Handball Championship (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Auntof6 has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Nominating an unused navigation box template created in 2016 that has no blue links in the body. The job of a navigation box is to allow navigation between related pages. With no blue links, the template can't do that job. Auntof6 (talk) 10:11, 11 September 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 for now. Pretty useless. Batrachoseps (talk) 16:07, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This request is due to close on 10:11, 18 September 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. -BRP^ever 14:11, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:IUCN Example

Template:IUCN Example (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Auntof6 has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Nominating some unused templates related to citing the IUCN Red List. They all seem to be documentation, not actually functional.

List of templates included in this RfD:

Template:IUCN Example
Template:IUCN Format
Template:IUCN Purpose
Template:IUCN/Purpose (a redirect to Template:IUCN Purpose)
Template:IUCN See also
Template:IUCN Usage notes

For what it's worth, enwiki deleted their versions of these and a lot of related ones in 2020 in favor of using Template:Cite IUCN (see their discussion here). We could convert our other IUCN citation templates as well (see list here) and delete them also, but this RfD covers only these that are currently unused. Auntof6 (talk) 10:07, 11 September 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 All were imported by one user and can now be deleted as unused and no longer useful. Batrachoseps (talk) 15:52, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This request is due to close on 10:07, 18 September 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. Quick deleted under WP:QD#A3 --Auntof6 (talk) 09:36, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Abbas Irshad

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

Xegma has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Copied from English Wikipedia. Xegma(talk) 09:22, 18 September 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

Comment: If it's directly copied from EN then it should be A3'd.- FusionSub (Talk page) (Contributions) 09:29, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This request is due to close on 09:22, 25 September 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. Quick deleted under WP:QD#A3 --Auntof6 (talk) 09:38, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Anissa Meksen

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

Asteradeae has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Page copied from the English Wikipedia. Astera🪻 ^talk ^edits 22:51, 17 September 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 22:51, 24 September 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. Redirected instead of deleted because there are incoming links --Auntof6 (talk) 09:41, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Alois Hitler, Jr.

Alois Hitler, Jr. (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

OIM20 has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: This page and Alois Hitler Jr. have the exact same content and were created by the same IP (77.65.160.33) on the same day. OIM20 (talk) 22:42, 17 September 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 Just directly copied. We don't need a duplicate. --Astera🪻 ^talk ^edits 22:44, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This request is due to close on 22:42, 24 September 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.

Related pages

All archives before July 2008 - implementation of new system made archives redundant
Category:Requests for deletion that did not succeed
Category:Requests for deletion that succeeded
Wikipedia:Deletion policy
Wikipedia:Quick deletion
Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion
Category:Deletion requests
Category:Quick deletion requests

↑ Cite error: The named reference NASA was used but no text was provided for refs named (see the help page).

[1] ttps://www.youtube.com/@Robert_Edward_Grant

[NASA-2] Cite error: The named reference NASA was used but no text was provided for refs named (see the help page).

[1]

[1]