Jump to content

Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Women

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Shortcut

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion and merging of articles related to Women. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.

Adding a new AfD discussion
Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:
  1. Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
  2. You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Women|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.
There are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.
Removing a closed AfD discussion
Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.
Other types of discussions
You can also add and remove other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Women. For the other XfD's, the process is the same as AfD (except {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName}} is used for MFD and {{transclude xfd}} for the rest). For PRODs, adding a link with {{prodded}} will suffice.
Further information
For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.

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

Purge page cache watch


Women

[edit]

Melva Blancett

[edit]
Melva Blancett (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NACTOR with four minor credits on IMDb. Clarityfiend (talk) 22:38, 28 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Zara Majid

[edit]
Zara Majid (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:GNG and WP:BIO. The available sources consist largely of routine coverage of tournament participation- awards- scholarships youth activities and brief mentions. While the subject has received local media attention the sources do not appear to provide the significant independent in-depth coverage required for a standalone biography. Participation in the Chess Olympiad and holding the Woman Candidate Master title do not automatically establish notability. Per WP:BEFORE a search for additional reliable sources did not identify sufficient coverage to clearly satisfy notability guidelines. Therefore deletion is recommended. Hirematviru (talk) 18:45, 28 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - While the article may require some cleanup and better sourcing, its deletion is not the right outcome. Both WP:GNG and WP:BASIC indicate that the determining factor is whether there is significant coverage of the individual in reliable, independent sources. While the nomination appears to only consider tournament and scholarship coverage of the individual, there are several reliable sources that make passing (or more) references to the Caymanian chess player.
The following publications contain independent references to player Zara Majid:
Each of these independent sources can be used to write a concise article on the individual and her accomplishments.
I agree that the article could be improved. However, that is not indicative of content that should be deleted. Instead, the article should be kept and later improved around the best of the independent news sources.
Additionally, while not the main point of discussion of this article, Wikipedia does have concise articles regarding other young female chess players with titles such as Hannah Wilson (chess player) and Isabelle Yixuan Ning. While not determining this particular debate, those articles help to indicate that concise articles on young chess players can be appropriate for those with reliable sources. In this case, the young Cayman Islands chess player has FIDE verification as well as independent news stories that cover her from sources such as Cayman Compass, Cayman Independent, Caymanian Times, Trinidad Express, BBC, ChessBase India, and The Indian Express.
Therefore, I vote Keep, albeit with some cleanup of the article. Tree867 (talk) 23:11, 28 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Yorgelis Delgado

[edit]
AfDs for this article:
Yorgelis Delgado (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Doesn't meet notability standards, known primarily for the circumstances of her death (WP:ONEEVENT, WP:MEMORIAL). She is no more notable now than she was when the article was deleted the first time; the sex video "scandal" is trivial. Renerpho (talk) 19:13, 28 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I think the references clearly show nobility.Thief-River-Faller (talk) 20:50, 28 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I’ve also just found a reference to her presenting the children’s show Atomic on the national broadcaster, I’ve added it to the article.Thief-River-Faller (talk) 22:48, 28 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
@Thief-River-Faller: A single reference for being the presenter of one non-notable show isn't enough to meet general notability standards. WP:NACTOR asks for either
1. significant roles in multiple notable films, notable television shows, stage performances, or other notable productions; or
2. unique, prolific or innovative contributions to a field of entertainment.
Delgado has had neither of those. Renerpho (talk) 23:04, 28 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
She was also a presenter on El Club de Los Tigritos [1][2] Thief-River-Faller (talk) 23:35, 28 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Club de los Tigritos is what made her a household name in Venezuela. It's no different than (actually, probably a bit better than) a random Anglophone soap opera actor having a Wikipedia article with no article content showing notability, just that they did one daytime show, but it's never challenged to delete because most editors have heard of them. Kingsif (talk) 23:40, 28 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
That's one notable tv show. If you show me a second one (because NACTOR specifically says multiple), I may reconsider. Renerpho (talk) 23:47, 28 June 2026 (UTC) Actually, I strike that, because I see no evidence that she had a significant role in that show. The El Club de Los Tigritos article has a single reference (IMDB, which runs afoul of Wikipedia:Citing IMDb), and that reference does not even list Yorgelis Delgado among the show's "top cast". Renerpho (talk) 23:51, 28 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Honestly, you're allowed required to do some BEFORE and google yourself? She became a household name from Club de los Tigritos, I don't expect Venezuelan in-house shows to keep IMDb particularly well updated but have some refs for that,[1][2][3][4] and then moved onto Entre tú y yo.[5]
And I will say, that sex video scandal was a significant scandal that lasted years, in part because she was known as a child star, in part because it was the first high profile case of such videos stolen and then episodically published by the thief[6][7][8] - and the man in it was still talking about in interviews this month.[9] Just because you see it as 'oh, minor celebrity sex tape', doesn't mean the atmosphere around it wasn't culturally significant - though the article doesn't mention anything about all that at present. Kingsif (talk) 00:55, 29 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I did google her before this nomination. I found loads of social media posts, but nothing that gave the impression of a notable celebrity. Renerpho (talk) 02:12, 29 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Found another reference here, I did notice most references refer to her as Yorgelys [10] Thief-River-Faller (talk) 03:04, 29 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I’ve also found an El Farandi article focusing on her, which refers to her a former host of another show, Rugemanía.Thief-River-Faller (talk) 03:19, 29 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Zoey Williams

[edit]
Zoey Williams (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

lack of reliable sources, not notable, promotional content Joey354458 (talk) 11:49, 28 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete She flies, but the article does not. No GNG. Yesterday, all my dreams... (talk) 13:45, 28 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: Article has plenty of WP:SIGCOV across multiple WP:RS. In addition, this is the third attempt to delete this article over the last two days for varying reasons:
    • Attempt 1: "The subject of this article does not meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines and lacks reliable, independent sources", made by a WP:TA, template was also malformed
    • Attempt 2: "Self promotion", made by a different temporary account
    • Attempt 3: This AfD, made under a new account that's only contribution is this AfD
    • Note: I originally created this article on July 15, 2025, and I am not Zoey Williams. The claim of "self promotion" does not apply here, and again, this article has plenty of WP:SIGCOV across multiple WP:RS.
    • CaptainAngus (talk) 13:50, 28 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Could you call out the three best sources, please? M kuhner (talk) 19:46, 28 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    I would push back on the concept of 'best' sources--I would call every source in the article WP:SECONDARY and WP:RELIABLE, which is the standard. I would not call any of them promotional, and certainly not "self promotional" as has been alleged. There is one reference to Embry–Riddle Aeronautical University where Zoey Williams earned both her Bachelors and Masters from, but I would say it's use is in-line with the parameters set forth in WP:PRIMARY (particularly items #1 and #3).
    Could I ask anyone in this discussion to identify which sources they consider non-reliable and why? If there is consensus against a particular source, the article has 13 citations, so there is a lot of depth here. CaptainAngus (talk) 20:46, 28 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Shubhavi Arya

[edit]
Shubhavi Arya (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:SIGCOV, no in-depth coverage. Puff piece. Accesscrawl (talk) 02:11, 28 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

* Delete Yes, puff piece it is. No go. Yesterday, all my dreams... (talk) 13:52, 28 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Ting Huang

[edit]
Ting Huang (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Not notable enough for a biography article. Entire article was written in 2020, and only has 9 links to other articles. Very few pageviews, only six sources cited for a very extensive article. Odettetellsastory (talk) 01:42, 28 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources. The subject passes Wikipedia:Notability (people)#Basic criteria, which says:

    People are presumed notable if they have received significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject.

    • If the depth of coverage in any given source is not substantial, then multiple independent sources may be combined to demonstrate notability; trivial coverage of a subject by secondary sources is not usually sufficient to establish notability.

    Sources

    1. "《念念》作詞人遭張艾嘉改30次　黃婷曬衣竄《少年》靈感" [Sylvia Chang Had Murmur of the Hearts Lyricist Huang Ting Revise Lyrics 30 Times; Inspiration for "Youth" Struck While Hanging Laundry]. Apple Daily (in Chinese). 2021-03-13. Archived from the original on 2022-07-06. Retrieved 2026-06-28.

      The article notes: "知名作詞人黃婷曾為梁靜茹、劉若英等大牌寫歌，作品超過200首，日前她上toto主持廣播節目《幕前幕後偷偷看》分享歌詞背後故事。... 黃婷身兼作詞人、音樂製作企畫統籌、演唱會企劃、講師及作家等身分。台大外文學系畢業，在美國馬歇爾大學、愛荷華大學取得廣電新聞和電影理論碩士學位，可說是學霸。2004年加入李宗盛工作室，完成超過30位藝人音樂統籌，2005年黃婷開始創作歌詞，2007年加入相信音樂，陸續與梁靜茹、劉若英、品冠、嚴爵、丁噹、MP魔幻力量等藝人合作。"

      From Google Translate: "Renowned lyricist Huang Ting has penned songs for major stars such as Fish Leong and Rene Liu, boasting a portfolio of over 200 works. She recently appeared on the radio program *A Peek Behind the Scenes* (hosted by Toto) to share the stories behind her lyrics. Huang Ting wears many hats—lyricist, music production coordinator, concert planner, lecturer, and author. A graduate of the Department of Foreign Languages and Literatures at National Taiwan University, she holds master's degrees in Broadcast Journalism and Film Theory from Marshall University and the University of Iowa in the United States, marking her as a true academic high achiever. She joined Jonathan Lee’s studio in 2004, where she oversaw music production for more than 30 artists. She began writing lyrics in 2005 and joined B'in Music in 2007, subsequently collaborating with artists such as Fish Leong, Rene Liu, Victor Wong, Yen-j, Della Ding, and Magic Power."

    2. Wang, Yu-hui 王郁惠 (2021-03-13). "黃婷難忘小鬼黃鴻升主動認親 解密「60億分之一」滿是洋蔥" [Huang Ting Recalls How Alien Huang (Xiao Gui) Initiated Their Connection; The Story Behind "One in Six Billion" Is a Real Tear-Jerker]. United Daily News (in Chinese). Archived from the original on 2022-07-07. Retrieved 2026-06-28.

      The article notes: "音樂人黃婷是作詞人、音樂製作企畫統籌、演唱會企劃、講師及作家，至今累計歌詞創作超過200首，曾與孫燕姿、梁靜茹、周華健、羅大佑等大咖合作，而她職涯一首多達800多字的歌詞就是為已故歌手黃鴻升（小鬼）的「60億分之一」填詞。"

      From Google Translate: "Musician Huang Ting is a lyricist, music production coordinator, concert planner, lecturer, and author. With over 200 lyrics to her name, she has collaborated with major stars such as Stefanie Sun, Fish Leong, Wakin Chau, and Lo Ta-yu. Notably, one of the longest lyrics of her career—spanning over 800 words—was penned for the late singer Alien Huang (Xiao Gui) for the song "One in Six Billion" (60 Yi Fen Zhi Yi)."

    3. Mei, Yen-nung 梅衍儂 (2023-04-15). "「一直走就不怕孤獨了」作詞人黃婷專訪：一切都是從追星開始" ["Keep Walking and You Won't Fear Loneliness": An Interview with Lyricist Huang Ting. It All Started with Being a Fan]. United Daily News (in Chinese). Archived from the original on 2026-06-28. Retrieved 2026-06-28.

      The article notes: "身為當代華語流行音樂作詞人、音樂製作企劃（A&R;）和作家等多重角色，黃婷一開口便滔滔不絕。她最近出了新書《一直走就不怕孤獨了》，聊聖母峰、聊育空河，去了南極，還去了西伯利亞鐵路。她的好聊，從在美國念電影理論碩士的女性主義課程，到偶像陳昇，話題之廣泛、尺度之宏偉，讓人很難想像，原來在唱片圈大名鼎鼎的黃婷，其實一切的開端都是從她追星少女的身份開始，有誰能像她追星追得如此有成就？天后劉若英是她的傳信小妹，在美國攻讀博士時被李宗盛一通電話說服回來，從此一腳踏入娛樂圈。"

      From Google Translate: "Huang Ting—who wears many hats as a contemporary Mandopop lyricist, A&R specialist, and author—is a spirited and engaging conversationalist. She recently released a new book, *Keep Walking and You Won't Fear Loneliness*, in which she discusses her journeys to Mount Everest, the Yukon River, Antarctica, and the Trans-Siberian Railway. Her conversation ranges widely—from the feminist film theory courses she took during her master's studies in the U.S. to her idol, Bobby Chen (Chen Sheng). It is hard to imagine that this renowned figure in the music industry began her journey simply as a teenage fan. Who else has turned fandom into such a remarkable career? Superstar Rene Liu once acted as a messenger for her; later, while Huang was pursuing a PhD in the U.S., a single phone call from legendary producer Jonathan Lee persuaded her to return, launching her career in show business."

    4. Pai, Tsui-ko 派脆克 (2024-05-15). "寫我的字｜華語流行音樂作詞人黃婷：「提醒自己誠實，知道為了什麼而寫，才能讓創作走得更長更遠。 」" [Writing My Words｜Mandopop Lyricist Huang Ting: "Reminding myself to be honest and knowing the purpose behind my writing is what allows my creative journey to go the distance."]. Marie Claire (in Chinese). Archived from the original on 2026-06-28. Retrieved 2026-06-28.

      The article notes: "2005年，黃婷透過梁靜茹的聲音，發表第一首流行音樂創作歌詞〈我還記得〉，寫的是青春年少的情懷。這一寫，就是將近20年時間，問問黃婷面對創作、面對人生，走過這段路，總有不盡相同的感受？... 至今約莫300首歌詞的創作量，黃婷定義自己是屬於慢工出細活的類型，除了常合作的梁靜茹，一字排開都是華語樂壇的中流砥柱，包含劉若英、孫燕姿、丁噹、李玟、周華健等，都曾詮釋過他的創作。... 台大外文系畢業後，去到美國攻讀碩士，原本打算繼續深造博士學位，因為李宗盛的一通電話返台，那時寫電影音樂評論，也接雜誌採訪工作。27歲寫了第一首歌，爾後十年時間，作品絕大多數與愛情有關，"

      From Google Translate: "In 2005, Huang Ting made her debut as a lyricist with the song "I Still Remember" (Wo Hai Ji De), performed by Fish Leong; the lyrics captured the sentiments of youth. That marked the beginning of a journey spanning nearly two decades. When asked about her creative process and her life's path, she reflects on the ever-evolving emotions she has experienced along the way. ... With a body of work comprising around 300 songs to date, Huang Ting describes herself as someone who takes her time to craft quality work. Beyond her frequent collaborator Fish Leong, her lyrics have been interpreted by pillars of the Mandopop scene—artists such as Rene Liu, Stefanie Sun, Della Ding, Coco Lee, and Wakin Chau. ... After graduating from the Department of Foreign Languages and Literatures at National Taiwan University, she went to the U.S. for a master's degree. Although she initially intended to pursue a doctorate, a phone call from Jonathan Lee brought her back to Taiwan; at the time, she was writing film music reviews and taking on magazine interview assignments. She wrote her first song at the age of 27, and for the decade that followed, the vast majority of her work centered on themes of love."

    5. Julian (2026-06-26). "【金曲幕後工匠】A&R暨作詞人黃婷：為歌手轉譯靈魂，華語流行音樂的關鍵樞紐" [【The Craftspeople Behind the Golden Melodies】A&R and Lyricist Huang Ting: Translating the Soul for Singers. A Pivotal Figure in Mandopop]. The News Lens (in Chinese). Archived from the original on 2026-06-28. Retrieved 2026-06-28.

      The article notes: "本次專訪邀請到縱橫華語樂壇逾20年的資深A&R暨作詞人黃婷。從卡帶、CD盛行的唱片時代，到如今串流與短影音主導的音樂市場，她不僅親歷產業變遷，也曾在滾石唱片、相信音樂等指標性唱片公司參與多張重要作品的企劃與製作。除了A&R身分之外，黃婷也曾為梁靜茹、丁噹、周華健等歌手填詞。在創作者與企劃工作者的雙重經驗下，她見證過無數作品從發想到完成的過程，更能理解創作理想與市場現實之間的拉扯。"

      From Google Translate: "For this interview, we spoke with Huang Ting, a veteran A&R professional and lyricist with over two decades of experience in the Mandopop scene. Having witnessed the industry’s evolution from the era of cassette tapes and CDs to today’s market dominated by streaming and short-form video, she has played a pivotal role in the planning and production of major works at iconic labels like Rock Records and B'in Music. Beyond her work in A&R, Huang Ting has penned lyrics for artists such as Fish Leong, Della Ding, and Wakin Chau. Drawing on her dual experience as both a creator and a project planner, she has overseen countless projects from conception to completion, gaining a deep understanding of the tension between creative ideals and market realities."

    There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow Ting Huang (Chinese: 黃婷) to pass Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline, which requires "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject".

    Cunard (talk) 05:55, 28 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Angelea Preston

[edit]
Angelea Preston (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I suggest redirecting/merging to America's Next Top Model season 17 as subject is only notable for one event. There seems to be a lack of reliable sources providing coverage to the subject outside of the disqualification and subsequent lawsuit. New sources include Entertainment Weekly which appears to be an interview with Preston surrounding another lawsuit and bustle which seems to provide extensive coverage and does include information about Preston outside of the lawsuit.

I still believe a discussion is warranted as Bustle might not be a reliable source and Bustle is the only source providing significant independent coverage of Preston outside of America's Next Top Model I can find after a BEFORE search.

Pinging Suzie554, Rosguill, and SamWinchester000 as active users that have restored / redirected the article in the past few years. Justiyaya 00:15, 28 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Clara Rosager

[edit]
Clara Rosager (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Potential non notable person. Added text: I think current sources and the ones out there don't meet the significant notability criteria. Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 19:51, 27 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Found a source:
https://elle.dk/agenda/identitet/skuespiller-clara-rosager-om-sildemadderne-pizzaen-og-pastaen-der-har-formet/
It isn’t primary though. Do with that what you will.
Also found this:
https://www.voguescandinavia.com/articles/clara-rosager-danish-actor-interview, which is both reliable and secondary. Keep. In solidarity Wikipedian12512 (Talking is fine | contribs) 20:08, 27 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
https://elle.dk/agenda/identitet/skuespiller-clara-rosager-om-sildemadderne-pizzaen-og-pastaen-der-har-formet/ looks to be an interview of the model. And the second is another interview. Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 21:58, 27 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
What does "potential non notable person" mean? You didn't check? No BEFORE, no AfD. Obvious WP:NACTRESS pass. Her role in Supergirl is significant. Her role in The Rain (TV series) too. Her role in the The Kiss (2022 film) too. In Those Who Kill (2019 TV series), too. In Before the Frost, too. See reviews of the productions (one example at random: https://loudandclearreviews.com/the-kiss-kysset-film-review/) and coverage such as https://www.voguescandinavia.com/articles/5-things-you-didnt-know-about-up-and-coming-danish-actor-clara-rosager https://tvovermind.com/clara-rosager/ Keep. ~2026-35976-24 (talk) 21:37, 27 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Why did you even initiate an AfD on her????@Tyw7 ~2026-35976-24 (talk) 21:38, 27 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
https://loudandclearreviews.com/the-kiss-kysset-film-review/ is a review about the film.
https://www.voguescandinavia.com/articles/5-things-you-didnt-know-about-up-and-coming-danish-actor-clara-rosager seem to be a first person article ie promo. Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 21:55, 27 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks but
1) "is a review about the film." Yes. It's explicitly indicated in my !vote : "see reviews of the productions " -> Read all the reviews of the films she has a role in and you will check that she has significant roles in multiple notable. Ergo WP:NACTRESS pass.
2) "a first person article" What does that mean? That the journalist says "I"? Hmmm? Okay. She does not (she says We, once) but what would the issue be? The article is bylined: Eleanor Kittle If you don't like it, don't use it. Not sure why it should be considered promo. Do you mean based on excerpts from interviews? Maybe. Still, it's a secondary source. If you don't like, again, don't use. It's not needed.
3) Please do a BEFORE next time and explain on what grounds precisely you think a subject is not notable. Rosager is clearly a notable actress. You changed your rationale since we !voted. You should have made that clear per WP:REDACT. Now my !vote seems unfair to you while at the time it was very justified. Please amend that by indicating what and when you added things.
4) as for your recently added " I think current sources don't meet the significant notability criteria", it's confusing, especially if you pipe the link to WP:SNG (which she meets!!!!) : significant coverage is one thing; notability is another thing. Do you mean "WP:GNG because of lack of significant coverage"? Familiarise yourself with the jargon and procedures, please. ~2026-35976-24 (talk) 22:27, 27 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Why are you editing from an IP address? You seem to have vast interest to keeping the article around.
And significant roles? The show maybe significant, but she doesn't. That said I looked at Google news and I found articles about the movie / series she stars in, but not about her on her own. That said I did find 2 focus pieces
Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 00:14, 28 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
"Why are you editing from an IP address?" Not from an IP address, with a temporary account. It's slightly different (technically anyone is editing online websites "from an IP address";D) Why not? Since when is that an issue? Why are you editing through a registered account? Since when is it mandatory? "You seem to have vast interest to keeping the article around." Sure, and for a good reason: I think she's notable. Thank you for the new source (the second one was the same one you had discarded earlier, but no worries). Of course her roles in the notable productions mentioned above are significant. Again, read the reviews or watch the films/series and you'll probably admit it. Have a look at the posters of two of her films. Before the Frost and Kiss. Can't you see her? Her name?
If you (have?) change(d) your mind, feel free to WITHDRAW this nomination.
Also, you have again changed your rationale since my last reply without making the timeline of your changes clear and my previous comment about the link to SNG that was (but is not anymore, now your link goes to SIGCOV) present in your statement is now confusing....In these conditions, I won't reply here anymore, it's too tedious. There's a good deal of coverage in Danish (some based on interviews), if you wish. Good luck. There's no way she cannot be considered notable and if the English Wikipedia does not consider her notable, then...well...too bad for the English Wikipedia. ~2026-35976-24 (talk) 01:18, 28 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Princess Marie Louise of Schaumburg-Lippe

[edit]
Princess Marie Louise of Schaumburg-Lippe (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The significance of the article is not shown. This article contains only genealogical information. Wikipedia is not a database of aristocrats. RobertVikman (talk) 07:58, 12 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Wedding of Taylor Swift and Travis Kelce

[edit]
Wedding of Taylor Swift and Travis Kelce (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

WP:TOOSOON + WP:CRYSTAL. Of all the sources in the article, a single one is about the event, and it is very speculative ("New York Prepares for an Event at M.S.G. Clues Point to You Know Who"). I do not see any reliable significant coverage about the subject that is not speculative or just spreading rumors. The lead says it all: "The wedding of Taylor Swift and Travis Kelce is rumored to take place on July 3, 2026". Even if it is true, we don't know if this will be a notable event that deserves its own independent page, instead of just being a section in the articles Taylor Swift and Travis Kelce. As it stands, most of the article's content (Background, Engagement and announcement) are not about the wedding at all, and "Venue" is entirely speculative. Skyshiftertalk 14:45, 26 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete Entirely based on speculation at this point. We won't know until it is confirmed to have happened. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 14:58, 26 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete on WP:CRYSTAL. M kuhner (talk) 15:21, 26 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - This AfD will become a mess before our eyes and could possibly be deferred until later. With July 3 being literally next week, a yes or no about that rumored date is bound to happen before this discussion closes. News broke broke yesterday (June 25) that Swift has rented Madison Square Garden for three whole days, July 2-3-4, and many celebrities have confirmed that they will be there for some reason. [12], [13]. Meanwhile, whenever the wedding truly happens, there will be so much media coverage about it that it will then be a notable event that qualifies for an (embarrassing) Wikipedia article. Good luck when WP's Swifty population learns of this discussion too. This topic will be back again and again regardless of what happens with this particular 7-day long AfD discussion. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 16:23, 26 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete of course there will be a lot of sources. Maybe, later, if there is a cultural or financial impact, we can return to this, but right now, it's not that important outside of gossip and rumor. Coltsfan (talk) 16:50, 26 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Draftify I think there's some content here worth saving. Given that it's possible that the wedding will happen before the end of our AfD, we'll just have to see what the sources say on wedding day. And probably sic the Swifties on it, they'll dive deeper than the Marianas on those details. A diehard editor (talk | edits) 18:17, 27 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Draftify per A diehard editor. While this is currently WP:CRYSTAL, we will know prior to the end of this AfD if the wedding does take place on July 3. If it happens, we can work on the draft and see if significant coverage arises before moving it back to mainspace. If not, it can be deleted. Although this is not ready for mainspace, I don't think a straight delete at this point would be warranted, given the unusual circumstances (the rumored wedding is to take place within a week, by which point we will know if it's delete-worthy or a promising draft). – Epicgenius (talk) 18:52, 27 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment It seems odd that there is no mention of a possible wedding in Taylor Swift although the engagement is noted! (I haven't checked page history to see if it's been added and removed!) PamD 20:17, 27 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Draftify as per previous comments. The wedding is already a notable event, covered by every reliable source. A deletion right now would be hasty. The only ambiguous aspect is the venue and exact date.
ℛonherry☘ 01:21, 28 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Sara Hesri

[edit]
Sara Hesri (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The subject fails WP:GNG and WP:ENT. The Newsweek article is about her cat, the other is a passing mention in an article about her brother. Searching has not revealed WP:SIGCOV in independent reliable sources. Se7enNationArmy2024 (talk) 19:47, 25 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Serene Hesri

[edit]
Serene Hesri (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The subject fails to meet WP:GNG and WP:ENT. The NYT article is about a camera, not her. Others name her in articles about her brother, Keemokazi, who's own notability is questionable. Se7enNationArmy2024 (talk) 19:32, 25 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

*Comment - Wrong. The NYT article does say about a camera but, it mentions Serene Hesri on the article about she can be using her brother's camera for photos for Instagram. JuiceTheNet56 (talk) 20:08, 25 June 2026 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE. ~SG5536B 05:13, 27 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Sophie Hesri

[edit]
Sophie Hesri (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The subject fails WP:ENT, WP:NMODEL and WP:GNG. Having a significant social media following does not guarantee notability if there has been limited WP:SIGCOV in reliable, independent sources. Se7enNationArmy2024 (talk) 19:17, 25 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Suzannah Clarke

[edit]
Suzannah Clarke (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Unclear that notability requirements are met. Whilst there are press articles, particularly from the early to mid 00s, these are largely focused on her visit to North Korea. I don't think this necessarily meets requirements of WP:MUSIC re international tours or demonstrates sufficiently ongoing notability. Similarly, although she is an elected politician, being a backbench councillor on a London borough typically wouldn't meet notability requirements Drerac (talk) 17:12, 25 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - local office and a minor music career. Not enough. Dcpoliticaljunkie (talk) 19:59, 25 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: this discussion has been included in the list of England-related AfD discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 22:41, 25 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per WP:BASIC, and also per WP:HEY. There is sufficient coverage in multiple reliable secondary sources to sustain an article. ResonantDistortion 12:32, 28 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per WP:GNG and WP:HEY. There is sufficient coverage in multiple reliable secondary sources over a WP:SUSTAINED period of time. Yes, Suzannah Clarke has had an unconventional career path and life, but what matters is the coverage. One of the strongest pieces is the 2003 BBC feature article about her visit to Pyongyang ("Opera star's North Korean date"), but we can discount it since the BBC was also filming a documentary about her visit. Nevertheless, there is plenty of coverage in other outlets about her annual visits to Pyongyang and their aftermath, including two in-depth articles in 2007 in The Times – a national newspaper in the United Kingdom and clearly independent – specifically, "Diplomatic diva at the dictator's proms" (which contextualises the ethical dilemmas of such visits) and "British singer charms North Koreans into a tour". (Links should work if you log in to The Wikipedia Library and access The Times Digital Archive via GALE.) One other thing to note is that she was even interviewed on CNN (in London) in 2014 about her past experience in North Korea and her views on controversy stirred up by American basketball star Dennis Rodman, which demonstrates sustained interest in, and relevance of, her story internationally. (Log in to ProQuest via TWL.) Another topic which has generated national media coverage is her creation of the Tutu Peace Garden in Lewisham, London, which was opened in 2009 by Desmond Tutu himself – the most in-depth of these is the 2009 article in The Guardian ("Chelsea flowers will bloom again for Desmond Tutu") which focuses on how Suzannah Clarke came up with the idea and advanced the project, but she is also discussed in several paragraphs in the BBC News' "Desmond Tutu opens peace garden". Finally, the third bucket of media coverage I would highlight is the sustained media coverage that Suzannah Clarke has received in local and regional newspapers in North East England. There are obviously too many articles to list spanning decades, but a couple I would highlight include The Sunday Sun "100 North Heroes" (in which she was recognised on the occasion of the regional newspaper's 100th anniversary in 2019), and The Sunday Sun article from 2011 which discusses her epilepsy diagnosis and her work for the National Society for Epilepsy ("The Secrets of Our Real Life Soprano Star"). Finally, for those who ask how "serious" of an opera singer she was back in the day, I have added a Reception section with opera reviews in The Times, as well as an in-depth review of her 2004 National Concert Hall performance in Dublin in The Irish Times. (As a bonus, check out all the stories about the Heavy Metal Opera Choir she started.) The problem here is that there is still a lot more media coverage to sift through (ProQuest finds 400+ articles most of which seem to be the correct person); this is already considerably more than a lot of BLPs, and I wouldn't be surprised if she's a serious candidate for a future OBE or better. Cielquiparle (talk) 19:03, 28 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Sarah Adebisi Sosan

[edit]
AfDs for this article:
Sarah Adebisi Sosan (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Appointed deputy governor (not elected) so this is not an automatic WP:NPOL pass. Three sources: an official bio on a government website, a self-published book, and an interview. Completed a WP:BEFORE and only found routine news mentions and WP:NEWSORGNIGERIA. 🄻🄰 16:47, 25 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians, Women, and Nigeria. 🄻🄰 16:47, 25 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: Your nominations of Nigerian contents is beginning to scream disruption and very disappointing. What part of WP:NPOL says that appointed cabinet members are failing the criterion? Let me quote for you Politicians and judges who have held international, national, or (for countries with federal or similar systems of government) state/province–wide office, or have been members of legislative bodies at those levels. (emphasis added and needed). Oh, and let's take a look at WP:POLOUTCOMES for cf... "elected or appointed". And just an FYI, I hope you're aware that ALL members of a Nigerian State's Executive Council (i.e. cabinet members (aka. commissioners) also fall into this category? Just informing you before hand to be guided for future nominations. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 17:39, 25 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - the governor and members of a state legislature are automatic passes not the chief of staff, attorney general, deputy governor, or other cabinet members who are appointed rather than elected. Dcpoliticaljunkie (talk) 19:58, 25 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
@Dcpoliticaljunkie Sorry, where did you get that guideline from? Vanderwaalforces (talk) 20:26, 25 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Standard practice. Review the U.S. states where we have articles listing state-level cabinets, most of those who were appointed (current and former) do not have articles. Dcpoliticaljunkie (talk) 20:34, 25 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I’m sorry, but I cannot use a gap in the encyclopaedia as an argument to validate other gaps. They’re in fact covered in NPOL and your argument doesn’t carry weight guidelines-wise. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 21:14, 25 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Babatunde Fashola#Governor of Lagos state could be an alternative since since he appointed her. Dcpoliticaljunkie (talk) 20:38, 25 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Devi Krishnapriya

[edit]
Devi Krishnapriya (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails GNG and NMUSIC. Sources gives routine coverage and mostly promotional brand affiliates. Thilsebatti (talk) 15:00, 25 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Sanchita Basu

[edit]
Sanchita Basu (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Failed in NACTOR also GNG Hirematviru (talk) 13:29, 25 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

*Keep. The nomination statement is inaccurate, she verifiably passes WP:NACTRESS, the subject-specific notability guideline for actors, with two significant (in her case, lead roles) roles in notable productions; namely Thukra Ke Mera Pyaar and First Day First Show, all the reviews of those notable productions cover her performance, making expansion of the article possible without original research, so that the page meets the WP:Notability core requirements: "A topic is presumed to merit an article if: It meets either the general notability guideline (GNG) below, or the criteria outlined in a subject-specific notability guideline (SNG); and It is not excluded under the What Wikipedia is not policy."--~2026-35976-24 (talk) 16:03, 25 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

WP:AFDSOCK admin please note... Also you answer me which sources is claim shes is notable?? Hirematviru (talk) 17:16, 25 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
What are you talking about? I added 4 or 5 sources to the page. "which sources is claim shes is notable": read my !vote. ~2026-35976-24 (talk) 17:31, 25 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Times of India is questionable reliability and the article isn't being done any favors by including that source. ~Anachronist (who / me) (talk) 04:33, 26 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
A long-time established consensus agrees that the TOI is accepted for bylined reviews of film/series and uncontroversial topics. You might want to check that as, for films, their reviews are clearly accepted even in notability discussions. See Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources and innumerous Indian film AfDs. ~2026-35976-24 (talk) 08:33, 26 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Taya Bonicos

[edit]
Taya Bonicos (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fairly promotional, not finding any WP:SIGCOV, just passing mentions of the subject. Mariamnei ✦ reach out 🕊️ 11:25, 25 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Kartiyaini Jeyapalan

[edit]
Kartiyaini Jeyapalan (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non notable politician. All the sources used are from facebook or some other unreliable ones. Fails GNG and NPOL. Thilsebatti (talk) 05:13, 25 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - it's too local and the sources aren't up to snuff. Dcpoliticaljunkie (talk) 19:50, 25 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hikari Tachibana

[edit]
Hikari Tachibana (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Not my area of expertise by any means, but does not appear to be notable. A brief search did not return any coverage worthy of meeting WP:NACTOR. Cheerio, Mattdaviesfsic. Talk to me. 20:52, 24 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I always find it very hard to establish the notability of voice actors. The article in Japanese includes many other credits but since it is her best-known work, I would like to suggest a redirect to Princess_Zelda#Portrayal, where she is mentioned. Wikipedia:ATD-R is the relevant policy to explain my suggestion. ~2026-35976-24 (talk) 21:36, 24 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Libby Weaver

[edit]
Libby Weaver (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Does not meet WP:NOTE. Sources cited are either promotional in nature, or relate to one specific brief scandal around the use of an offensive term in one of her books, which was recalled. After additional research (Google, Google Scholar, Google News) I am unable to find more non-promotional, independent coverage other than relating to this one incident. I also can't find evidence that Weaver is regarded as an important figure in her field, and the company she founded, Bio Blends, is not mentioned in any non-promotional media coverage I can find. The article describes her as an "authoritative figure in the health and wellness industry" but cites only her own website for this claim, which I cannot back up elsewhere. Lastly and least importantly, article has been marked an orphan since August 2024, and as relying on sources close to the subject since September 2021. Taken all together, this seems to point to the subject not meeting notability standards. Goyston talk, contribs 20:28, 24 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Women and Australia. Shellwood (talk) 20:35, 24 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Delete. If this person is a biochemist then I am a kangaroo. However, I am not a kangaroo and I am a biochemist. You would find it difficult or impossible to find a real biochemist who had heard of her and knew what contributions to biochemistry she was supposed to have made. Searching at Google Scholar is made difficult by the existence of M. Libby Weaver, a researcher in a biology-related field who has a modest profile. Her book Accidentally Overweight reads as if written by a journalist or quack nutritionist, not by a scientist. Consider the following passage: "The optimal pH of stomach acid is 1.9, which is so acidic it would burn you if it touched your skin." (The whole section is very bad, but I won't bother with the other nonsense.) No one who had ever worked with what chemists call dilute hydrochloric acid (2-molar), which has a pH of about -0.3, would write such a thing. It wouldn't be wise to drink it, but spilling a little on your hand doesn't burn you and doesn't need emergency treatment -- just common-sense rinsing with tap water. She was accused of being derogatory for referring to trisomy-21 as mongolism. Whether or not it is derogatory, it shows an ignorance that no one educated in biology in the last 40 years would have. She claimed that "she learnt to use the term while at university in the 90's and was not aware that it was considered offensive until she was contacted by a reader." I find that very hard to believe unless she had teachers at university who had never advanced their knowledge from 1950. Athel cb (talk) 15:24, 25 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. No notability through NPROF, didn't see any book reviews in RS. I don't understand how someone could earn a PhD in biochem without any publications?? Nothing matches on Scopus for either "Libby" or "Elizabeth Weaver". Also not impressed with her promotion of TCM and adrenal fatigue (and endorsement of TCM for adrenal fatigue). JoelleJay (talk) 17:38, 25 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    I also don't "understand how someone could earn a PhD in biochem without any publications", but I thought that the fact that I didn't find any didn't mean that there weren't any. Athel cb (talk) 18:07, 25 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    I need to amplify that a bit. It's true that you need some publications from your doctoral work, but not necessarily immediately. Looking at my own case, my own DPhil was approved in 1967 at a time when I had no publications based on my thesis, which didn't in fact appear until 1969. My examiners were satisfied with an assurance from my supervisor that some publications would appear in good time; he wasn't the sort of supervisor who rushed into print the moment he had something to say. If there had been nothing by, say, 1977, that would have been a cause for worry, and closer to what seems to be the case with Libby Weaver.
    Athel cb (talk) 10:29, 26 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    @Athel cb, I am more surprised that she defended without any papers, first-author or otherwise. I still had 3 or 4 middle-author papers by the time I graduated...
    I searched University of Newcastle's dissertations database for people with either "Weaver" or "Libby" in their name and couldn't find anything, although those search results seem to be mixed up with Ohio theses somehow... I also searched Trove for pre-2015 theses from authors with "Weaver" or "Libby" with no luck. JoelleJay (talk) 10:50, 27 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. The subject's qualifications and certifications are not particularly germaine to this discussion. Whether or not she's a competent or qualified biochemist isn't relevant to notability. Editors should be assessing her notability, as demonstrated by significan coverage in reliable sources. pburka (talk) 22:39, 26 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    OK, so it's up to you. What reliable sources exist to demonstrate her notability? There are none in the article itself, but maybe you can add some. Athel cb (talk) 13:45, 27 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    There certainly are reliable sources in the article (BBC, Stuff, etc). Once again, I encourage participants to focus on notability guidelines rather than challenging the subject's academic qualifications. pburka (talk) 14:40, 27 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    The BBC is certainly a reliable source. Maybe Stuff as well, but how widely known is it outside New Zealand? Both of your sources are about Libby Weaver's use of an obsolete term that many people regard as offensive. Is that her only claim to notability? Is there anything else? Is Kenneth Tynan notable because he was the first person to deliberately say "fuck" on British television, or was he notable for other things? Would he have an article if he had done nothing else but say "fuck" on television? That is, of course, just one possible example. Athel cb (talk) 15:26, 27 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Not once have I argued that the page should be kept. For a third and final time, I encourage all editors involved to focus on policy-based arguments. The subject's credentials are irrelevant to her notability. Whether a source is "widely known ... outside New Zealand" is also irrelevant, of course. pburka (talk) 16:02, 27 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Esther Obasike

[edit]
Esther Obasike (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Promotional page for non-notable clergyperson that was already created and deleted under a different spelling of her surname (see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Esther Obasi-ike, less than a month ago), with no additional evidence she passes WP:GNG. The sources here are different from the tabloids and trivial mentions used in the prior version; prior to the removal of a massive block of copyright-infringing text, the sources did not mention her at all ([17], [18], [19], [20], [21]) and thus added in an apparent effort at WP:SYNTH, or they were primary source official bios ([22], [23], [24]). Still no evidence of significant coverage in independent, reliable, secondary sources. Dclemens1971 (talk) 19:55, 24 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Courtesy ping to all participants in the prior AfD: @PARAKANYAA, @लॉस एंजिल्स लेखक, @AlMarijad, @AriuCH. Dclemens1971 (talk) 19:57, 24 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – No evidence of notability per WP:GNG; subject has not progressed since prior AfD. AriuCH (talk) 20:19, 24 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Linda Cyril

[edit]
Linda Cyril (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:GNG, WP:SIGCOV, WP:NBIO and WP:NOTPROMO. The article does not demonstrate notability through significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources. Much of the sourcing appears weak, consisting of routine coverage and sources with questionable reliability. Several references were published on the same date and lack identifiable bylines or clear editorial oversight. Taken together, the available sources do not provide the depth of independent coverage required to establish encyclopedic notability. --BusyEditor (talk) 22:22, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: Special consideration should be given to WP:NEWSORGNIGERIA. The timing and nature of the cited sources raise questions regarding independence and editorial oversight.
--BusyEditor (talk) 22:25, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Sheryl Zohn

[edit]
Sheryl Zohn (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

She has many credits and several emmy nominations but couldn't dig up any coverage except new york times article to build a good page. Searched GNews and ProQuest. —LastJabberwocky (Rrarr) 21:01, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Update: Still leaning toward deletion; as i noted in my previous comment, this person should be notable for their work and nominations but there aren't any independent and significant coverage (except NYT article) to expand the page. There is a Wall Street Journal article about her time during covid pandemic but I don't think it can be useful. —LastJabberwocky (Rrarr) 11:56, 27 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
"many credits and several emmy nominations" sounds like a Wikipedia:CREATIVE ("the person has created or played a major role in co-creating a significant or well-known work or collective body of work" ) AND a Wikipedia:ANYBIO ("The person has received a well-known and significant award or honor, or has been nominated for such an award several times") pass. If you add an article in the NYT, it's a Keep (per nom's rationale!). ~2026-35976-24 (talk) 23:01, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Jordan Rice (actress)

[edit]
Jordan Rice (actress) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This actor does not yet meet notability requirements for WP:NACTOR. Sources are almost all primary and she hasn't had many significant roles as the criteria requires. This very well may be a case of WP:TOOSOON. Se7enNationArmy2024 (talk) 17:08, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Gayathri Ashok

[edit]
Gayathri Ashok (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Only significant role is in the movie Member Rameshan 9aam Ward while other roles being minor. Fails NACTOR. Sources are of WP:NEWSORGINDIA in nature. Fails GNG. Thilsebatti (talk) 12:05, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

"Only significant role is in the movie Member Rameshan 9aam Ward while other roles being minor." is inaccurate, She has at least two significant roles in notable productions, the one that the nominator acknowledges and "The Young Girl" (despite the generic name for the role it is one of the lead roles) in Footage. See reviews mentioning her performance in that film, for example: https://www.timesnownews.com/entertainment-news/reviews/malayalam/footage-film-review-an-experimental-film-that-offers-a-thrilling-experience-review-112738184/amp, https://thesouthfirst.com/entertainment/malayalam/footage-malayalam-movie-review/ etc. Therefore a WP:NACTRESS pass, not a fail. So Keep. ~2026-35976-24 (talk) 21:22, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Anna Makula

[edit]
Anna Makula (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The article has limited independent sourcing and may not demonstrate sufficient notability under Wikipedia guidelines. Nakulukia 16:25, 22 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Vasuki Sunkavalli

[edit]
Vasuki Sunkavalli (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Not Required Mchalasani (talk) 07:49, 22 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Please delete It. Prashantbansal23 (talk) 07:52, 22 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I would be interested to hear further explanation from the nominator as to why this article is "Not Required". Until then, I will lean Keep.
Redvelvetvanilaaaaaaaaa (talk) 13:58, 22 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. No WP:DEL-REASON presented and subject passes WP:NBEAUTY. मल्ल (talk) 17:47, 22 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Yaroslavna of Halych

[edit]
Yaroslavna of Halych (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Unreferenced since day one in 2012. Dubious speculation about, as the article alleges, a wife of king Stephen III of Hungary. The sources about Stephen III I've seen say that he was married "to an unnamed daughter of Yaroslav Osmomysl". --Altenmann >talk 02:38, 22 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. Oh even worse: sources cited in "Stephen III of Hungary" say he was betrothed, not married.--Altenmann >talk 02:58, 22 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Sandhya Arakere

[edit]
Sandhya Arakere (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails NACTOR and GNG. No significant roles in multiple films. Sources also consists of that from NEWSORGINDIA. Thilsebatti (talk) 08:20, 21 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Svartner (talk) 08:40, 28 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Yun Bai

[edit]
AfDs for this article:
Yun Bai (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Most information obtained from artist's website. Brooklyn Museum claim fails verification. First nomination from 2016 Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Yun Bai. WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 00:58, 21 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Source assessment table prepared by User:WomenArtistUpdates
Source Independent? Reliable? Significant coverage? Count source toward GNG?
No interview ✘ No
Yes Yes No link to "Feminist Art" page of Brooklyn Museum No mention of Yun Bai ✘ No
No No No dead link to artist's website ✘ No
web.archive.org times out ? Unknown
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{source assess table}}.
  • Comment - I checked all the museum collections and private collections that were claimed as having works; they all came up cold. It seems she is not in these collections. The only one that even mention her was Self-Help Graphics, where it showed she was selling a print, but not that she was in the collection. She is also not in the Brooklyn Museum's Center for Feminist Art as claimed. I'll continue to check the article before !voting. Netherzone (talk) 01:52, 21 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Per WomenArtistUpdates's source table above. Jay-GH 06:41, 21 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources. The subject passes Wikipedia:Notability (people)#Basic criteria, which says:

    People are presumed notable if they have received significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject.

    • If the depth of coverage in any given source is not substantial, then multiple independent sources may be combined to demonstrate notability; trivial coverage of a subject by secondary sources is not usually sufficient to establish notability.

    Sources

    1. "Yun Bai. Los Angeles, USA". Brooklyn Museum. Archived from the original on 2015-07-22. Retrieved 2026-06-22.

      The article notes: "Yun Bai was born in Beijing, China and migrated with her parents to the United States at age five. Although she grew up in a traditional Chinese setting—complete with extracurricular activities, strict discipline, and high expectations, she was also heavily influenced by Southern American culture, due to her Southern upbringing. Consistent themes found in Yun’s work include explorations in identity, social stimulus/ experiments, a fascination with science, a feminine comment, sarcasm/mockery, and sometimes, influence from urban culture. Yun also creates artwork under her alter ego, “Yunny Bunny.” ... She graduated from Agnes Scott College, a private women’s college in Atlanta, Georgia in 2001. She has shown both nationally and internationally, and has been reviewed by the Atlanta Journal Constitution, ART PAPERS Magazine, Pittsburgh Pulp, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, Pittsburgh City Paper, Creative Loafing Atlanta, Art Asia Pacific, LA Weekly (Top 10 Emerging Artists, 2006), and was recently included in New American Paintings, Pacific Edition, No. 67."

    2. Fox, Catherine (2006-03-30). "VIZARTS: Sex Symbols in Exhibits, Painting Is One Way to Flesh Out Kinky Thoughts". The Atlanta Journal-Constitution. Factiva ATJC000020060330e23u0000f. NewsBank 110AE715DB907908.

      The article notes: "Yun Bai's work is more of a tease. From a distance, the soft colors and floral designs of her paintings at Wertz Contemporary beckon with expectations of something sweet and innocent. Not! When you get close up, it becomes apparent that the flowers are collaged with fragments of photos of sexual organs and sexual acts, which the artist has cut out of porn magazines. Suddenly you're caught in public looking at images that most people likely look at in the privacy of their rooms. Call it pornography with a purpose, though the purpose depends on your point of view. Most feminist artists would make something like this to call attention to the dehumanizing effects of pornography. In her artist statement, Yun says she sees it as a celebration of woman power. I don't buy it, but maybe you will."

    3. Venkatasubban, Sharmila (2003-12-17). "Losing Its Luster; A Show About Lust Leaves You Cold". Pittsburgh City Paper. p. 37. ProQuest 368802936.

      The article notes: "Images certainly aren't what they seem to be in Yun Bai's acrylic-on-Masonite works. At first, she seems to have painted dainty flowers onto the black, shiny surface -- like the floral decorations of a Japanese print you might find at Target, perfect for the wall space above a living-room couch. But take a closer look: The plants are collages culled from pornographic magazines, close-ups that actually do look more like stamens than genitalia until you read the fine print that seems to have been copied from those same magazines."

    4. Iris (2008-06-24). "'Enclosed, Encased & Enrobed' = Enthralling". Orange County Register. NewsBank 12977466F12F9938.

      The article notes: "Yun Bai’s work also addresses stereotypes. She explains that her "Porn Flowers" works came out of "researching and participating" in the adult entertainment industry during college. Bai says she, like other women in the industry, was driven into it "out of desperation" - a series of emotional family and relationship tragedies left her in need of money "fast" to continue her college studies. So she uses flowers to symbolize the "essence" of these women, who others see as dirty, "women of ill repute." She creates lovely flesh-colored blossoms that on closer inspection reveal that the leaves and petals are made of cropped images of female body parts (lips, skin, breasts …). Yun Bai, "Porn Flowers" It’s interesting how she collected these images. She put an ad on Craiglist, in the personals’ "Women Seeking Men" section, asking people to donate their porn magazines for her art work. When she went to pick them up (accompanied by "a big male friend"), she thanked the donors for indirectly supporting feminism by supporting her art - which seemed to pleasantly surprise some of the men: "So that makes me a feminist?""

    5. Fox, Catherine (2006-03-29). "Sex in many guises, and more". The Atlanta Journal-Constitution. Factiva ATJC000020030629dz6t0000c. Retrieved 2026-06-22.

      The article notes: "It showcases Atlantans David Isenhour and Yun Bai and New Yorker Jeff Sonhouse, all emerging artists worth tracking. And in the pairing of Bai and Ohm in "Secrets and Lies," it offers the kind of provocation that stimulates discussion. ... The good-natured sexuality of Barsness and Isenhour turns dark and dirty in "Secrets and Lies." Bai, a recent graduate of Agnes Scott College, comes on strong with collages that could be subtitled "les fleurs du mal." What appear to be elegant, stylized, Asian-inspired blossoms on black or cream lacquered backgrounds turn out to be collages of female private parts taken from pornographic magazines. Around their edges, Bai inscribes porno-promises that infest e-mail in-boxes."

    6. Feaster, Felicia (2006-03-15). "Broken Blossoms: Yun Bai's Fresh Flora at Wertz Contemporary gallery". Creative Loafing Atlanta. Archived from the original on 2007-02-13. Retrieved 2026-06-22.

      The article notes: "It was amusing to watch gallery-goers contemplate Yun Bai's exhibition Fresh Flora on a recent Saturday afternoon. Men and women would mosey into Castleberry Hill's Wertz Contemporary gallery, chatting merrily. Then they would promptly about-face when they realized what was going on in Bai's abstract botanicals. ... To really see Bai's work, you need to practically bury your nose in it. A closer inspection reveals that Bai has added sentences to her canvases, which curl like grape tendrils around the naked body parts. ... In her previous work, Bai used porn at the service of feminist commentary. But Bai's latest exhibition shows her ability to inject new content and complexity."

    7. McLaren, Leah (2008-02-16). "The latest picture show". The Globe and Mail. Factiva GLOB000020080216e42g0003w. ProQuest 383374908. Archived from the original on 2026-06-22. Retrieved 2026-06-22.

      The article notes: "Inside, though, visitors can see art like Yun Bai's Elegant, Nasty New Porn Flowers – a series of decorative Asian-inspired floral collages on cheerful lacquer backgrounds, which, on closer inspection, are made up of photographs of orgies. Just the sort of edgy work, in other words, that culture vultures seek out in Chelsea or SoHo."

    8. "Yes, these flowers are made of boobs". Thrillist. 2012-01-26. Archived from the original on 2026-06-22. Retrieved 2026-06-22.

      The article notes: "In the hands of Yun Bai, however, they’re made of naked chicks, and they’re the best flowers you’ve ever seen. Also going by the name YunnyBunny™, Beijing-born/Agnes Scott-trained Bai creates flower paintings you’ll actually want to put in your solarium, by combining oils, watercolors, and...yawn!...nudie magazine clippings. There's an unmistakably Asian flair to the designs, which ..."

    9. Thomas, Mary (2003-12-06). "At Fe gallery, lust makes attractive exhibit". Pittsburgh Post-Gazette. Factiva PPGZ000020031206dzc600035. NewsBank 0FF470FB22ECDE81. Retrieved 2026-06-22.

      The article notes: "There's nothing subtle about the strong and evocative works by Catya Plate, Yun Bai and Neil Bender, although it takes a moment to see past their formal prettiness. ... What appear to be refined, floral patterned lacquer works are actually part of Bai's "Porn Flowers" series comprising images cut from sex magazines, purportedly to challenge sexism but perhaps giving it presence instead."

    10. Primary sources that don't establish notability but that I'm including as reference material for expanding the article or for finding more sources:
      1. Bai, Yun (Spring 2004). "Yun Bai". ArtAsiaPacific. No. 1. p. 96. ProQuest 1415618241.

        The article notes: "Projects in the Making... The Asian and Southern series is about my upbringing in a Southern culture, other Asian people who are also influenced by Southern culture, and other Asians living in Atlanta. It explores Southern symbolisms, such as the Rebel flag, pork ribs, the music of Outkast and Goodie Mob, with Asian subjects. In the process of research, I have discovered that there were Asians who fought for the Confederacy in the American Civil War. So I thought, "Why can't I claim this Rebel flag? Must it be a hate symbol because hate groups took it over?" Hopefully, my work creates a new face of what "Southern" really looks like. I got my subjects to pose around their Southern culture because that's what they're proud of. It's supposed to be sarcastic and funny, but it's real. Born in Beijing, in 1979, Yun Bai has lived and worked in Atlanta, Georgia since 1985. More about the artist can be found at www.yun-bai.com."

      2. Becker, Noah (January 2007). "April, WM issue #2: Noah Becker in Conversation with Yun Bai AKA Yunny Bunny". Whitehot Magazine of Contemporary Art. Archived from the original on 2026-06-22. Retrieved 2026-06-22.

        The interview notes: "YB: I was born in Beijing, and moved to the when I was five. We moved to Tallahassee, Florida and I lived there for twelve years. I loved that city because it was a collegetown, and the people you went to school with all knew everybody. I especially missed the lush trees...in nearby Wakulla County. We'd have keg parties by the sinkholes, swinging off vines, riding horses, running around cowfields....it was fun. Then as soon as I turned 18, I left and went to college in Atlanta, the nearest major city and lived there for seven years. Yup, I'm a Southern girl."

      3. The subject's website has a press coverage page that has additional reviews and news coverage.
    There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow Yun Bai to pass Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline, which requires "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject".

    Cunard (talk) 07:58, 22 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment I do not agree that there is significant coverage in multiple independent sources, rather there are some gallery listings. The majority of biographical information is either unsourced, interviews, or supported by the subject's own (dead) website. Please see WP:BURDEN WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 16:07, 22 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
The majority of biographical information is either unsourced, interviews, or supported by the subject's own (dead) website
How is this relevant? Katzrockso (talk) 22:59, 27 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep If the subject is notable, which the reviews of her work seem to demonstrate, that much of the biographical information can't be verified (by an internet search) really doesn't matter at all for Afd. Tag it or cut it. Johnbod (talk) 03:46, 28 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Svartner (talk) 08:42, 28 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Sandra Williams (Sark politician)

[edit]
Sandra Williams (Sark politician) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

proposed for deletion following outcome of AfD/Paul Armorgie. Sark politicians fail WP:NPOL as Bailiwick of Guernsey is the crown dependency rather than Sark. Person not otherwise notable and no other members of the first elected legislature of Sark have articles. BleachPuffin (talk) 10:30, 19 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 01:36, 27 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Erica Spatz

[edit]
Erica Spatz (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Does not meet WP:N including WP:PROF including WP:NACADEMIC. Is an associate professor - not even recognized by employer to be a full professor - does not have significant coverage separate from her employer that is promotional and fails to cite sufficient sources to demonstrate the notability. Is clearly not notable. Quaerens-veritatem (talk) 02:58, 19 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Svartner (talk) 05:44, 26 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Agnes, wife of Ramiro I of Aragon

[edit]
Agnes, wife of Ramiro I of Aragon (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I could only find genealogies and mentions, nothing substantial. Article content reflects the lack of information. This could be redirected to Ramiro I of Aragon#Marriage and children where she is mentioned. Themeparks (talk) 02:48, 19 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 14:48, 26 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Helina Daimary

[edit]
AfDs for this article:
Helina Daimary (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

All I can find is sources about the film Gorai Phakhri where she played a lead role. No significant coverage exists beyond routine coverage in these sources. Fails GNG and NACTOR. Thilsebatti (talk) 06:00, 17 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: this discussion has been included in the list of Assam-related AfD discussions. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 06:19, 17 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: The sources cited provide passing (or no) mentions, and therefore don't come even close to meeting GNG, and there is nothing in this to suggest NACTOR would be satisfied either. Note: given that this is the 2nd AfD, and this version of the article has been draftified already which the author objected to, I am specifically !voting 'delete' rather than 'draftify'. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:23, 17 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    with the recent update of the page with the subject's works and filmographies, I hope the page is meeting all the criteria to be a standalone and independent Wikipedia page as per the WP:NACTOR.
    I strongly feel and hope that all the issues regarding the subject's work and filmographies has been solved successfully now and if it is so then the Notice should be removed at the earliest. Thank You. Laogaa45 (talk) 02:51, 18 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: as a regional artist the subject has limited published sources that's the reason why her other works have been ommitted initially. However, now I have updated with her works and filmographies (music videos excluded) and I feel that now the page is meeting the Wikipedia criteria and the notice should be removed at the earliest. Laogaa45 (talk) 03:26, 18 June 2026 (UTC) Sock strike --DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:29, 28 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • KEEP: Helina Daimary's contributions to the Bodo-language cinema and the regional music and film industries are what make her worthy of a standalone independent Wikipedia page rather than a redirect or deletion. She is highly celebrated in the region and has a solid fan following. Her work in the film Gorai Phakhri (Wild Swans), where she was praised internationally for her performance in the film, is another reason why the page should be kept. She starred in a music label produced by and sung by the national playback singing icons Papon and Shreya Ghoshal, respectively, again, proving why she needs such credibility.
Her decade-long career in the entertainment industry with international acclaim must be an inspiration rather than an ignorance or a deletion just because of the limited published sources, this might be a case of WP:BIAS/WP:SBEXT. I am literally voting for a KEEP of the page. The notice looks like nothing less than bullying and an attempt to neglect the regional talent. Girii101 (talk) 04:14, 18 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • With respect, WP:NACTOR does not say "any actor who has played a lead role in a notable film", but rather "has had significant roles in multiple notable films, notable television shows, stage performances, or other notable productions"; note esp. the word "multiple", which is germane here. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:33, 17 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Please do not use LLM or other AI-based tools to generate your comments (or anything else for Wikipedia, for that matter). We are interested to hear your views, not what some algorithm thinks we should hear.
    You only get to !vote once. Please strike or delete your second 'keep' !vote.
    As for notability, the onus is on you as the author clearly to demonstrate that, and by and large it would be better to do so before publishing rather than after. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 10:04, 17 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    I sincerely apologize for the repeated errors I previously committed. I have now updated her filmographies (excluding her music videos), as her appearances in various regional commercial films support her eligibility for an independent Wikipedia page. The fact that initial omission of her filmographies was due to the limited reliability of sources available for those regional films and movies. Thank you for your understanding. Laogaa45 (talk) 11:18, 17 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I would like to inform you that the text has been updated to include her filmographies (excluding music videos) previously omitted due to concerns regarding the reliability of sources for those regional films. I apologize for any inconvenience and confusion this may have caused.
With the recent additions to her filmographies, I believe the page now meets all the necessary criteria for a Wikipedia entry. I kindly request that the deletion message be reconsidered and removed. Thank you for your attention to this matter.Laogaa45 (talk) 11:48, 17 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 08:09, 25 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Helina Daimary is a northeastern Indian regional artist from the state of Assam. The creator of the subject's page earlier had omitted her works and filmographies, which, however, had been added later. Upon communication with the creator, he stated the reason for the omission is that the regional artist has limited published sources.
One of the "reviewers" cited the page as the "violation" of the Wikipedia norms as per the WP:NACTOR as initially it was mentioned only the major internationally acclaimed film Gorai Phakhri. This was indeed the gap of communication regarding the necessity of such sources leading to calls for the page to be deleted or redirected. However suggesting that the page of a regional artist should be removed due to the limited published sources is a clear case of WP:BIAS/WP:SBEXT.
Daimary's decade long career, which includes multiple projects, demonstrates why the page should be maintained rather than deleted or redirected. Such talent must be recognized and celebrated rather than neglected. Girii101 (talk) 18:20, 25 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
KEEP: Thus, I am voting for KEEP of the page. Girii101 (talk) 18:31, 25 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
@Girii101: you're only allowed one !vote per given discussion, so please strike this one, since you already !voted once. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 18:43, 25 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
got it, thanks! Girii101 (talk) 01:54, 26 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Death of Maria Eduarda Rodrigues

[edit]
Death of Maria Eduarda Rodrigues (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

See WP:NOTNEWS. Nothing to suggest that this incident has "enduring notability". AndyTheGrump (talk) 00:00, 17 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Events, and Brazil. Kodning 🌸 (talk) 00:26, 17 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: Per nom, while Maria Eduarda Rodrigues' death was tragic and unfortunate, there's nothing indicating her death will receive much non-WP:ROUTINE coverage. Gommeh (talk! sign!) 01:28, 17 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: per my PROD. This is a really sad death, but I would need to see evidence that it inspired some sort of cultural or legal shift to believe that there is anything that suggests it doesn't run afoul of NOTNEWS. If RSs are still following this six months from now or if legislation called "Maria's Law" passes to ban bungee jumping somewhere, we can revisit. In the meantime, it's a clear candidate for deletion without any suitable AtDs. Best, ~ Pbritti (talk) 01:49, 17 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep the article in Portuguese is much more substantiated, with a multitude of sources and clearly meeting notability criteria. The English version just needs an expansion. Skyshiftertalk 02:42, 17 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    I don't see anything in the Portuguese article that suggests meeting EnWiki's notability criteria. There is a description of the tragedy, an examination of who could face legal repercussions, and some listing of various reactions to the event. That does not confer notability. Best, ~ Pbritti (talk) 03:03, 17 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep – Fullness of sources [28], [29], [30]. The case also gained worldwide attention [31]. Svartner (talk) 20:34, 17 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Failure of WP:NOTNEWS Wikipedia considers the enduring notability of persons and events. While news coverage can be useful source material for encyclopedic topics, most newsworthy events do not qualify for inclusion... Hemiauchenia (talk) 20:52, 17 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    But since the incident occurred, every day there's some kind of repercussion, including a discussion about imploding the bridge where the jumps are practiced [32]. Svartner (talk) 03:03, 20 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, including per WP:NOTNEWS, and also WP:BLPCRIME, because people accused of crime are a focus of ongoing coverage. June 15, 2026 coverage from NBC News suggests potential enduring notability, e.g. Citing repeated attempts to secure the area surrounding Skeleton Bridge, city officials said in a statement that they intend to sue the federal government over Eduarda’s death. Limeira Mayor Murilo Félix said the city council has attempted to adopt local ordinances for more than a year “demanding action from the federal bodies responsible for the area.”, see also June 14, 2026 coverage from People, e.g. The Limeira City Council is filing a complaint against the Brazilian federal government following the incident, but this type of anticipatory reporting seems contrary to how Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. For now, it seems WP:TOOSOON to develop an article according to guidelines and policy. Beccaynr (talk) 21:04, 22 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 20:27, 24 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. While yes her death was indeed tragic, this article does not meet WP:SIGCOV. Wikiman (Talk) 03:50, 27 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Delete WP:NOTNEWS. OhNoitsJamie talk 14:17, 27 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Salish Matter

[edit]
Salish Matter (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Delete. Fails WP:GNG and WP:ANYBIO. The references are just passing mentions and routine coverage. The Variety and THR links are a prime example of routine casting announcements, and Tubefilter is just a single-event report. Lacks the independent WP:SIGCOV required for a BLP.

Note on WP:ANYBIO and new sources: While WP:ANYBIO criterion 1 includes "significant awards," the guideline notes that meeting one or more does not guarantee that a subject should be included. The award sources (e.g. [33]) are passing mentions. Furthermore, the newer Variety and Deadline links brought up by another user (not the ones I was talking about earlier about the upcoming Angry Birds movie) are routine trade announcements regarding a joint deal with her father, not the independent biographical coverage required by WP:GNG and WP:BASIC. Otherwise, a redirect to Jordan Matter remains the most appropriate outcome.ConeKota (talk) 13:17, 24 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. Nothing like the coverage to meet relevant notability criteria. And I'd advise article contributors to read Wikipedia:Reliable sources. As an example, there are no circumstances where Wikipedia should be citing beacons.ai, a website for "creators... to grow their online presence and monetize their content". AndyTheGrump (talk) 01:44, 17 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Jordan Matter per Waypoint Wikiman (Talk) 21:20, 19 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep She is notable per WP:GNG because news outlets like Variety and Deadline have covered her film work and business. Staticspector (talk) 04:37, 22 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    I find your vote to be blatantly wrong as WP:GNG states and I quote A topic is presumed to be suitable for a stand-alone article or list when it has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. Variety and Deadline are reliable sources, sure, but these are not independent of Salish or her career, as she is simply a passing mention in both sources. Again, I fear this fails WP:GNG. ConeKota (talk) 14:08, 22 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per award and notability. --NYC Guru (talk) 08:18, 22 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    I fear this vote shouldn't count, and I recommend reading WP:ITSNOTABLE, Simply stating that the subject of an article is not notable does not provide reasoning as to why the subject may not be notable. ConeKota (talk) 14:11, 22 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    But that's not what the !vote of NYC Guru is (they DO mention a reason: an award, which is indeed a good reason) and I fear this vote is perfectly valid and should count, although short, and also would like to invite you to comment with open questions (Could you refer me to the relevant guideline, for instance? (Spoiler: That's WP:ANYBIO)) rather than by dismissing all K votes, which might look like "bludgeoning the process". ~2026-35976-24 (talk) 23:09, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: The nominator might reconsider arguing with others enough to dominate discussion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 06:46, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
weak keep - I think the Variety and deadline source posted by the IP user above me push this just above the GNG, with the addition of multiple Kid's Choice Awards supporting WP:ANYBIO Yojo98 (talk) 01:48, 27 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Annisa Suci Ramadhani

[edit]
Annisa Suci Ramadhani (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Initially I speedy deleted this article, which to my mind meets both the A7 and the G11 criteria. Following a deletion review, where other users did not agree, I've restored it. The subject is a local politician, who would not meet the notability criteria for the English Wikipedia, where we don't include local mayors, council leaders, etc. The criteria may be different at the Indonesian Wikipedia, whence the article was initially translated. Following this, the article was substantially edited by another user with an undeclared COI, which didn't help. The article is laid out in the form of a CV and most earlier versions used the subject's forename, often an indication that they are known to the author, though in this case that is not so. I do not believe that the references provided (one of which is from LinkedIn!) are enough to demonstrate individual notability, so for me it's just a question of whether a "Regent", described in the Regent article as "the English translation of bupati, the head of a kabupaten (second level local government)", is automatically notable. Deb (talk) 16:05, 15 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Elected leader of the Dharmasraya Regency, which has a population over 240,000. This is not a local mayor or council leader. The position is Regency (Indonesia).
More coverage of Indonesia is needed, not less. The well referenced id:Pemilihan umum Bupati Dharmasraya 2024 needs translations as well, to “2024 Dharmasraya Regental Election. SmokeyJoe (talk) 22:41, 15 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete, but could be persuaded the other way. Here on en.wiki, the relevant guideline on automatic politicial notability is WP:NPOL, which says major local political figures (which I think applies to an Indonesian regent) are presumed notable if they have have received significant press coverage; and just being an elected local official...does not guarantee notability, although such people can still be notable if they meet the general notability guideline. So this boils down to the quality and depth of available sourcing. The article does have several sources which appear to be plausibly independent press outlets (in addition to that LinkedIn page). However, to someone like me not from Indonesia, they feel like biographical material, press release-type material, noncritically repeated when a candidate for important local elected office appears. I don't (yet) see the type of editorially independent analysis I think we need for GNG. I try to be sensitive to geographical bias in situations like these, and have looked up 3 random cities with comparable population size (~250k) in Canada; we do have articles on all 3 mayors, but in one case it is a stub that is marginal, and in the other 2, there is a significantly richer and longer press trace and political career on which to ground an article. So I end up, for now, on the delete side. But weakly so, and would switch if anyone could pinpoint 1 or more of the sources here (or provide additional ones) which exhibit genuine editorial independence and independent insight, from which an article could be written that is more than just a CV. Martinp (talk) 22:49, 15 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
She is weak on NPOL, low press coverage, because it was an election with a single candidate. A better solution than deletion is to write 2024 Dharmasraya Regental Election, for which the Indonesian article is well sourced, and to consider merging Annisa Suci Ramadhani into that, if even post-election coverage is not there. SmokeyJoe (talk) 23:08, 15 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Dharmasraya Regency is only one of the 19 subdivisions of West Sumatra Province, making the regent a local elected official. As a regent, some coverage is expected, mostly from local news outlets, which I do not think is sufficient to establish notability.
Most of the references in the article also focus on the election itself, especially since she ran unopposed against the empty ballot. Ckfasdf (talk) 02:22, 16 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
It is worth remembering that NPOL is not an exclusive criteria. Not passing NPOL means you refer to GNG, not a disqualification. Juxlos (talk) 02:46, 16 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
IMO, GNG and NPOL are the qualifying criteria to have article in WP. Ckfasdf (talk) 03:51, 16 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Please give NPOL another read.
People are likely to be notable if they meet any of the following standards. Failure to meet these criteria is not conclusive proof that a subject should not be included; conversely, meeting one or more does not guarantee that a subject should be included.
There is no requirement for NPOL to be passed for GNG to work. That is in NPOL itself. Juxlos (talk) 06:45, 16 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep while not explicitly in WP:NPOL, regents/mayors in Indonesia have a surprising amount of political authority; they are often elected with comparable numbers of votes to a British MP (in this person's case, ~65 thousand) in the small-to-medium sized districts. I have added some coverage of her ~16 month so far term; there are unsurprisingly many press releases if you look up online, but there are adequate amounts of sufficiently independent WP:RS (e.g. Antara, the Sawit website) to pass WP:GNG. Juxlos (talk) 02:46, 16 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
As I mentioned above, a regent will naturally receive some local coverage. This is reflected in the references cited in the article, many of which come from local outlets, such as Antara Sumbar (the West Sumatra branch of Antara), Langgam.id, Regional Kompas, and Minangsatu.com. However, I do not think this level of local coverage is sufficient to establish notability. Ckfasdf (talk) 03:51, 16 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
And what is the issue with local (provincial branch of a national newspaper (Kompas), news agency (Antara), and regional news website for a province of 6 million people) coverage? There are no policies against local newspapers, only WP:ROUTINE; and consider if these are routine:
Juxlos (talk) 07:44, 16 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
First, thanks for adding and expanding. I agree with you that "weak on NPOL" means nothing if GNG is met (the logical flow is the other way - strong on NPOL would but sufficient but is not necessary). That said, I also don't think GNG is met yet. Your adds, while indeed independent coverage mentioning Annisa, are not really substantial coverage of Annisa as an individual. They appear to be routine coverage of declarations and decisions that you would expect arise in any such local unit, not any degree of reflection about this individual and what is specific about them or their activities in their role. So far, we have "X is the acclaimed candiate for [role] in [location]; her resume is Y" sources. And we have "X as [role] declared/decided Y about a local issue in [location]". What we need is "What is characteristic about X in [role] is Y" or "X's background of ... has influenced her actions by ..." or "X is notable for being the first / only ... in [role]" type coverage. Martinp (talk) 09:47, 16 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Tempo is a national magazine. Between the profile there and the depth of more regional sources, I feel like GNG is met. As for the coverage focusing on the election... that's par for the course for Indonesian media. The "celebration of democracy" aspect of elections still hasn't died out in almost 30 years, even with a general autocratic backslide in the past decade, and the depth of coverage is significantly greater than one would expect at a comparable level in some countries (in Canada, for example, a county leader race would receive little coverage at the provincial level, let alone at the national level). — Chris Woodrich (talk) 20:25, 16 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep For many of the reasons listed above, mainly that such a person is similar in representation to an elected MP here in Canada, and in this case has received enough news coverage IMO. Dan Carkner (talk) 03:53, 17 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, strong sources mean even putting aside WP:Politics this passes just under GNG Jishara (talk) 18:04, 18 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 07:36, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Women's Health and Equal Rights Initiative

[edit]
Women's Health and Equal Rights Initiative (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Sometimes organisations are difficult to determine their notability, however you see a clearly non notable one when there are no secondary or at least reliable sources to back up the contents herein. Bearing this in mind, such resonates with this article as if fails WP:ORGCRIT which, for me, should there be WP:ATD at all, should never be considered. Nevertheless that doesn't mean it cannot be notable someday but it's obviously not for this time. SafariScribeEdits! Talk! 15:04, 15 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Health and fitness, and LGBTQ+ studies. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 16:59, 15 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Lean keep or possibly merge with Akudo Oguaghamba per Dreamyshade's statement. The article has decent sourcing although it could be improved, and this nomination has already inspired some improvements. The fairly recent Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/African Pride Accelerated decision to merge content into this article should be considered and given some weight here, as well. That discussion had low participation and was not explicitly evaluating the notability of this article, but editors there clearly did not find fault with this article and saw it as an appropriate place to cover content that should be covered somewhere on en-wiki. —Myceteae‍🌈 (talk) 21:48, 15 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Because the editors of that deletion discussion might have been in the quandary of saving an article, and so, they found this. Moreso when the so-called ATD now becomes non notable (of course as this one), we have an option of deletion. When you argue merg again to the parent article i.e. the foundere, I see a good point there but what actually made Akudo Oguaghamba notable is this organisation, and her article should have covered muc of this one.. SafariScribeEdits! Talk! 23:01, 15 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    This orgnization made its founder notable, but the organization itself is not notable? Interesting. —Myceteae‍🌈 (talk) 15:46, 16 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    @Myceteae, yes, an organisation can actually be the influence of its founder and still may meet not WP:STANDALONE. It may have been you're lean on AFD. Maybe. Because so many articles have actually been merged to its founder. SafariScribeEdits! Talk! 02:08, 27 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    @Myceteae, you said for this AFD, ...That discussion had low participation and was not explicitly evaluating the notability of this article, but editors there clearly did not find fault with this article and saw it as an appropriate place to cover content that should be covered somewhere on en-wiki. Really? Let me tell you: they didn't find fault with this article because 1. They are not interested here 2. They probably didn't care to check here but presupposes that there must be an ATD to whatsoever non AfD-ed article, in this sense, this one 3. Or that they are blind (but this is out of bound b/c I consider all editor intelligible). SafariScribeEdits! Talk! 02:35, 27 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Lean keep. Would support merge as suggested by Dreamyshade and seconded by Myceteae. Also, per WP:BEFORE, nominating a very new article for deletion instead of allowing time for growth seems premature; a clean-up tag and/or article talk page discussion first would have been better. Pikkupapupata 💌 🌷 01:28, 16 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    @Pikkupapupata since clean-up tag and/or article talk page discussion are not possible because a BEFORE shows nothing notable about this organisation, what claims then are you holding to argue against the nominator, or importantly, for the keep of this article? Sources? That is what is an AFD discussion and not causality case. SafariScribeEdits! Talk! 15:42, 16 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    WP:BEFORE is clear about what to consider and steps to take before nominating an article for deletion. I don't see evidence that such steps and considerations were taken before this nomination, and I fail to understand how those steps were 'impossible'.
    And my initial reply to this discussion was clear enough. Pikkupapupata 💌 🌷 15:50, 16 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    That is nevertheless a reason to argue for keep. Unless you know not the value of AFD, show sources therefore to prove that no BEFORE (of sources), irrespective of time, was done. SafariScribeEdits! Talk! 18:16, 16 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    A clean-up tag is always possible. While WP:DILIGENCE can find sources to show that notability is achieved, any failure to find such is not proof that such sources do not exist, as not all reliable sources are online, nor are all online sources indexed appropriately by the key online tools. -- Nat Gertler (talk) 18:43, 16 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: Does not meet WP:NORG. No independent sources seem to cover it significantly in-depth. It can be merged with Akudo Oguaghamba. I'm not sure whether the merge target is notable. But for now, the organization is at least not notable for a standalone article. — Raihanur (talk) 16:36, 21 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • At this point, I am supporting merging into Akudo Oguaghamba.SafariScribeEdits! Talk! 19:19, 21 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 06:47, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Yuan Ping (scientist)

[edit]
Yuan Ping (scientist) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Appears to fail WP:NPROF, none of the awards are prominent enough for criteria 2 and the other citations are to Ping's own articles. Mariamnei ✦ reach out 🕊️ 10:07, 15 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

  • Weak delete. She has done a significant amount of collaborative work where it appears that her group has done the theory part. Hence her area should be classified as fairly high citation, comparable to experimental sold-state chemistry/physics or materials science. On that basis her h-factor & total citations are a bit low, and there are no (as yet) "high-impact" papers which would be those with > 1K cites. The awards are important for her career, but are all starter grants. I dont see other SIGCOV. The accelleration of her cites/year is very encouraging, but it seems to still be a little early WP:TOOSOON by 2-3 years. It is a close call, and I would change my vote if someone finds additional indicators.Ldm1954 (talk) 11:39, 15 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak keep. While she indeed doesn't have any work with citation counts in the thousands, I will add that having a dozen papers with > 100 citations in about as many years is a sign of her being a leader in her field. She also doesn't just have starter grants - she earned the NSF Career Award and the Alfred P. Sloan Fellowship, both notable enough to have their own pages. Speaking as a researcher in a related field, I can say that while these fall short of the prestige conferred by more obvious indicators like an APS fellowship, it's definitely nothing to sneeze at either. I think it's borderline per above, but I'm inclined to keep at the moment. RaisedArizona (talk) 14:42, 15 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Sloan and CAREER are both early-career awards, which we exclude from contributing to NPROF C2.1,2,3,4 JoelleJay (talk) 16:16, 15 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm not sure if I agree with disallowing early career awards as a qualifying factor, but I will strike that point from the above per prior consensus regardless. RaisedArizona (talk) 16:40, 15 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. Note that this is a high-citation, high-publication field where someone in the 3rd year of their PhD can already have 15 papers and an h-index of 9, and where someone whose first publication was in 2020 can have 1200+ citations, an h-index of 14, and multiple Nature papers. I might do a full Scopus analysis of coauthors, but an initial pass over her relative citation record indicates a very strong start while still not quite at the level expected for NPROF. JoelleJay (talk) 17:07, 15 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak delete. Joelle's "strong start while still not quite at the level expected for NPROF" appears accurate to me. —David Eppstein (talk) 21:24, 15 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 07:23, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Marianna Laba

[edit]
Marianna Laba (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

She is a Merited Artist of Ukraine, but cannot find enough substantial coverage about her. Searched Gnews, Gbooks, and Ukrainian library in with both Ukrainian and russian spellings. Found [34] and [35]. The german and Ukrainian wikis don't have much. —LastJabberwocky (Rrarr) 12:00, 14 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BhikhariInformer‬ 📮 (Ping me or else I won't see it) 14:59, 21 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Karishma Mehta

[edit]
AfDs for this article:
Karishma Mehta (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The sources talk about Humans of Bombay rather than this particular person. There is a lack of significant coverage specifically about the person in reliable sources. Zalaraz (talk) 04:17, 13 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Wikilawyering will not make the subject notable. Sources will. Tarann06 (talk) 06:29, 14 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
There are currently 16 sources in the article, including, e.g. coverage focused on Mehta that has helped develop a biographical article; some were added after the previous AfD started by a now-banned sock:
Sources were also listed and discussed in the previous AfD discussion, along with the notability guidelines. From my view, there is sourced biographical information on Mehta that would not fit well in the Humans of Bombay article, and a separate biography article is supported, not only because notability is WP:NOTTEMPORARY, and according to the WP:BASIC and WP:CREATIVE guidelines, but also because there has been and is WP:SUSTAINED coverage focused on Mehta. Beccaynr (talk) 14:36, 14 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • First source fails WP:NEWSORGINDIA. It is about "Two years, a thousand stories, and nearly 6lakh followers later, some of the most powerful stories from Humans of Bombay, the Facebook page, is now a book. We go behind the scenes"[36]
  • Second is an interview specifically about "Humans of Bombay". It cannot be used for establishing GNG.[37]
  • Third source fails WP:NEWSORGINDIA and is about Karishma Mehta talking only about Humans of Bombay.[38]
  • Fourth source fails WP:NEWSORGINDIA and is about "As Humans of Bombay launches its own talk show on YouTube, its founder discusses the past, present and future of the storytelling platform"[39]
  • Fifth source fails WP:NEWSORGINDIA and is about "what led to the Humans Of Bombay dragging another platform to the court."[40]
  • Sixth source concerns a copyright claim involving a story of Humans of Bombay.[41]
  • Seventh source fails WP: NEWSORGINDIA and covers only about an interview for Humans of Bombay.[42]
All of this simply proves that the subject does fail WP:GNG, and lacks coverage that does not significantly concern Humans of Bombay. THEZDRX (User) | (Contact) 01:16, 15 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
The sources listed above are offered only as examples, and from my view, the WP:BASIC and WP:CREATIVE notability guidelines are supported based on all of the sources about Mehta, which include reports about successes and challenges she has encountered in her work as the founder and CEO of Humans of Bombay. I have avoided what seems more like tabloid content focused on her personal life that has also received substantial coverage, because from my view, our guidelines suggest she is notable as a successful creator of a website and related social media channels, based on sustained coverage of her as the founder and CEO, similar to other business executives.
Overall, I think it is to be expected that coverage of Mehta will include discussion of her work at HoB, because she is the founder and CEO. From my view, this type of Mehta-focused coverage is in addition to coverage and commentary on the HoB website, so having two articles seems to reflect the available coverage, in accordance with the WP:BASIC and WP:CREATIVE guidelines (noted in my initial !vote above). From my view of our guidelines, it does not seem disqualifying for coverage of Mehta to focus on her role developing and working on her major accomplishment - it instead seems to enhance her notability independent from the website and its related social media. Beccaynr (talk) 17:09, 15 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]


Keep. Seems to have sufficient sources to establish individual notability. 19:51, 18 June 2026 (UTC) Jishara (talk) 19:51, 18 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete This is essentially a notability-by-association biography. The case for a standalone article rests largely on the existence and prominence of Humans of Bombay, which already has its own article. Once coverage primarily about the project is separated from coverage about Mehta herself, there is little evidence of the significant independent coverage required by WP:GNG.
Much of the sourcing consists of founder-profile interviews in outlets such as Hindustan Times, The Hindu, The Indian Express, Verve, Khaleej Times, NDTV, and The Tribune. These are largely "meet the founder behind Humans of Bombay" pieces based substantially on Mehta's own statements. Such sources help verify facts about her career and the project but contribute limited independent analysis of her as a subject. The concerns identified at WP:NEWSORGINDIA regarding interview-driven and promotional-style coverage are relevant here.
Other sources are similarly weak. The Vogue India pieces are promotional or tied to the release of her book. The BuzzFeed article is a list-style piece based on a TEDx talk. The Better India coverage is largely inspirational-profile content. None provide the sort of sustained, independent treatment expected for establishing standalone notability.
The strongest independent coverage comes from 2023 reporting by BBC News, The Economic Times, Moneycontrol, The Indian Express, The Independent, and NDTV regarding the Humans of Bombay v. People of India copyright dispute. However, this coverage is fundamentally about the controversy and the company, with Mehta appearing in her role as founder and CEO. That material is already appropriately covered in the Humans of Bombay article and does not, by itself, justify a separate biography.
Additional sources concerning her pregnancy announcement are derived from her own social-media posts and subsequently recycled across entertainment and lifestyle desks. These are routine news updates rather than significant biographical coverage.
The academic sources do not materially strengthen the case. The Current Sociology paper uses Mehta as an example within a broader discussion and is not a study of her. The Rao and Sinha work is primarily a case study of Humans of Bombay, not an in-depth treatment of Mehta as an individual.
The remaining material—awards, TEDx appearances, podcasts, YouTube content, and routine career milestones—does not establish notability under WP:BIO. Likewise, there is no indication that her books satisfy the requirements of WP:AUTHOR.
Ultimately, a WP:THREE challenge cannot be met. After excluding interview-based coverage, project-centric coverage, routine announcements, and other weak sources, there do not appear to be three independent, reliable sources providing substantial coverage of Mehta herself. What is notable here is Humans of Bombay, and that topic is already covered in its own article. Redirecting this title to Humans of Bombay would be a reasonable outcome per WP:ATD-R. CommanderF1 (talk) 13:19, 20 June 2026 (UTC) Strike sock comment In solidarity, Blue-Sonnet (I'm listening) 03:45, 21 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
The WP:THREE essay links to User:RoySmith/Three best sources/notes, which states This was never intended to set a standard that three good sources is either a necessary or sufficient condition for a topic to be considered notable. Various !votes in this discussion that begin with delete yet seem to advocate for merge or redirect also do not seem to address, WP:PERGUIDELINE, the WP:BASIC guideline for biographies, nor the WP:CREATIVE guideline as applied to Mehta's creation of a significant or well-known work. Beccaynr (talk) 15:25, 20 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
As to the recently-added material related to Mehta's announcement of undergoing an egg-freezing procedure; she was noted by a peer-reviewed academic source [44] as an example, i.e. the ‘choice’ to seek to freeze their eggs and delay conception is marketed as an empowering ‘choice’ exercised by successful women, namely entrepreneurs and celebrities. CEOs, highly skilled female professionals, and celebrities dot the coverage on egg freezing reportage, like the one below; another source in the article [45] contextualizes her announcement as sparking a conversation about the procedure, after the initial coverage of her social media announcement, e.g. [46], and reactions on social media [47]. The scholarly notice is why I reassessed the depth of this coverage for inclusion in the article and its contribution to notability per the WP:BASIC guideline. Beccaynr (talk) 15:39, 20 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - Just being a founder of a notable organization does not make the person notable. I havent seen a single source that has provided coverage without mainly discussing the organization. Abhishek0831996 (talk) 15:21, 21 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: This AfD is already a bit of a mess. The delete comments make a strong case, but there is not a clear consensus. Relisting to get more perspectives from experienced Wikipedians would be helpful.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 01:01, 22 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: Seems to be enough sourcing about the individual to support keeping an aritcle. This [50] is in a non-Indian medial platform, showing international attention. I'd say we have enough to show notability. Oaktree b (talk) 01:28, 22 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    It only concerns a copyright claim involving a story of Humans of Bombay. Nothing significant about Karishma Mehta there. THEZDRX (User) | (Contact) 10:24, 22 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. Everyone who's cited WP:NOPAGE is essentially making a merge or redirect argument, rather than delete. Editors citing this rationale ought to consider whether it would be better to merge Mehta into Humans of Bombay or to merge HoB into Mehta's page. pburka (talk) 02:10, 22 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: I went through the sources, and I don't think they establish notability as required by WP:GNG....as article coverage is either interviews, promotional profiles, or articles connected to Humans of Bombay itself. There isn't enough substantial, independent coverage that discusses Karishma Mehta in depth. Being the founder of a notable platform does not automatically make the founder notable WP:NOTINHERITED. Chronos.Zx (talk) 03:27, 28 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Irina Zvereva

[edit]
Irina Zvereva (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Far below the notability standards of even WP:NTENNIS. Achieved nothing noteworthy during her career. Never quite reached WTA Tour level. Notability is also WP:NOTINHERITED from her son. Tvx1 06:43, 13 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Faulty reasoning by the nominator. She did reach WTA Tour level, so she does meet WP:NTENNIS. More importantly, she meets WP:GNG through [51] [52] [53] [54]. Sportsfan77777 (talk) 10:06, 13 June 2026 (UTC)— Note to closing admin: Sportsfan77777 (talk • contribs) is the creator of the page that is the subject of this XfD. [reply]

No there is nothing faulty with my reasoning. She played one WTA event in doubles. ONE. A domestic soviet event where she lost her only match in an unremarkable manner. This is a far below a notable achievement. We have stepped away from performance-based notability years ago, so NTENNIS doesn’t even ascert notability. As for the WP:GNG argument, of course there are going to be some background articles written on the parents of major sports stars, especially by specialist sources, but that doesn’t make these people notable in their own right. I already dealt with that by referring to WP:NOTINHERITED. To demonstrate notability per GNG you need to prove the existence of significant secondary and independent coverage in mainstream sources of Irina herself. Tvx1 16:47, 13 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not disagreeing with you that WP:GNG is more important. But you say she doesn't even meet WP:NTENNIS, and that's just not true. You only need to play one WTA Tour event to meet WP:NTENNIS, and she has. No need to make stuff up. Sportsfan77777 (talk) 18:11, 14 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BhikhariInformer‬ 📮 (Ping me or else I won't see it) 06:45, 20 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BhikhariInformer‬ 📮 (Ping me or else I won't see it) 05:58, 27 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

* Delete She is somewhat above the level of people who play Tennis in the parks, but Wimbledon quality is far off. Yesterday, all my dreams... (talk) 09:13, 27 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Susmitha Prabhakaran

[edit]
Susmitha Prabhakaran (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Does not meet WP:NACTOR or WP:GNG. Most of the references are just brief mentions and there is WP:NEWSORGINDIA concerns. Thilsebatti (talk) 04:57, 12 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Reads more like a promotional article. Madeleine (talk) 23:57, 12 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]


Delete - Definitely not notable, the article was also created by a user who has faced controversy due to their disruptive editing. Malgosha (talk) 05:30, 12 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per nom Dinitrify (talk) 11:02, 12 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Dinitrify You may consider rechecking this discussion as nomination is clearly for deletion not keeping, so I dont know why you have !voted for keep per nom. AristocrSirr22 (talk) 11:10, 12 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Clearly failing WP:SIGCOV, WP:GNG and WP:BLP. I am not able to find a single source providing in depth reliable coverage. AristocrSirr22 (talk) 11:07, 12 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Can't find evidence of notability outside of the PR-news ecosystem. CoffeeCrumbs (talk) 14:31, 12 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 20:27, 19 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 06:46, 27 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Clare Fallon

[edit]
Clare Fallon (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Declined prod. Fails WP:JOURNALIST. 2 of the 3 sources are primary. LibStar (talk) 23:16, 10 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

This seems like it should be classified as a stub and request more sources not automatically deleted. Juju (talk) 14:28, 11 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Are you aware of additional reliable independent sources? If so, please list them here. pburka (talk) 15:29, 11 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Channel 4 News correspondent. Notable enough. BilboBeggins (talk) 22:46, 15 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Simply working for Channel 4 does not confer notability. LibStar (talk) 21:56, 16 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 08:13, 18 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 01:23, 26 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Kavyashree Nayak Ajeru

[edit]
Kavyashree Nayak Ajeru (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

After a search, I found one Deccan Herald profile and a Prajavani feature/video, but the remaining coverage appears largely to be routine regional award-announcement coverage about the Kundeshwara Samman. I am not seeing clear multiple intellectually independent reliable secondary sources with significant biographical coverage sufficient for WP:BASIC/WP:GNG, nor clear evidence that the cited award satisfies WP:ANYBIO as a well-known and significant award. Tatupiplu’(she/her · talk · email) 11:03, 10 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Kavyashree Nayak Ajeru is a notable Yakshagana artist with significant coverage in reliable sources:

  • Featured in Deccan Herald's prestigious "DH 23 in 2023" annual changemakers list — an editorially selected list of notable Karnataka personalities
  • Covered by Daijiworld, a major regional news outlet, for receiving the Kundeshwara Samman award
  • Over 2,500 performances across India
  • 'B' grade artist of Akashvani (All India Radio) Mangaluru
  • Already has an established article on Kannada Wikipedia
  • One of very few female Bhagavathas in a historically male-dominated art form, making her culturally significant

The subject clearly meets WP:ANYBIO and WP:GNG criteria through independent reliable source coverage. Pkjaincpk (talk) 11:36, 10 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Additional reliable sources found:

Pkjaincpk (talk) 11:45, 10 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I do not think the additional points resolve the notability concern. The issue is not whether the subject is talented or locally respected, but whether there are multiple independent reliable secondary sources with WP:SIGCOV. The Deccan Herald profile appears to be the strongest source, but the remaining cited items appear largely to be announcement/ceremony coverage for the Kundeshwara Samman, with only brief biographical context. Under WP:BASIC, a person needs significant coverage in multiple reliable, intellectually independent secondary sources, and under WP:GNG routine announcements or minor news reports generally do not establish significant coverage.
The “DH 23 in 2023” listing may be useful coverage, but it has not been shown to be a WP:ANYBIO “well-known and significant award or honor”. Likewise, claims such as 2,500 performances, AIR “B” grade status, and being one of few female Bhagavathas may be article content if reliably sourced, but they are not themselves notability criteria unless supported by substantial independent coverage. An article on Kannada Wikipedia also does not establish English Wikipedia notability. I remain unconvinced that WP:BASIC, WP:GNG, or WP:ANYBIO is met. - Tatupiplu’(she/her · talk · email) 12:57, 10 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
@Tatupiplu: Thank you for the detailed feedback.
I have found additional independent sources:
  • Prajavani (major Karnataka newspaper, owned by The Printers
Mysore, same group as Deccan Herald) published a dedicated
video feature article specifically about Kavyashree Ajeru
on 2 June 2024: https://www.prajavani.net/district/dakshina-kannada/yakshagana-artist-kavyashree-ajeru-dakshina-kannada-2830296
  • Daijiworld covered her as a featured performer in
Dubai Yakshotsava 2025 international Yakshagana event
The Prajavani article is a dedicated biographical feature
about her specifically — not an announcement — which
demonstrates independent significant coverage beyond
the Kundeshwara Samman. Pkjaincpk (talk) 01:02, 11 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Requesting other editors to review and comment
on this article. Additional sources have been
added since nomination. Pkjaincpk (talk) 04:41, 11 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
@Tatupiplu: A full dedicated interview with Kavyashree
Ajeru was published in Kannada Prabha (major Karnataka
newspaper) on 5 October 2025, Page 3, Section: Sandharshana
(Interview). This is independent significant biographical
coverage, not an announcement. This along with the Deccan
Herald profile and Prajavani feature demonstrates multiple
independent reliable sources with significant coverage. Pkjaincpk (talk) 05:40, 11 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 13:19, 18 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: A change-maker award and recognition from the local temple are not enough for notability. I don't see much else for coverage and this does not appear to pass notability. Oaktree b (talk) 13:27, 18 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    @Oaktree b: The notability is not based only on
    awards. There is significant independent biographical
    coverage in multiple reliable sources:
    • Deccan Herald – Full dedicated profile feature
    (DH 23 in 2023 changemakers list)
    • Kannada Prabha – Full dedicated interview,
    Page 3, Section Sandharshana, 5 October 2025
    • Prajavani – Dedicated video feature article,
    June 2024
    • The Hindu – Coverage of Kundeshwara Samman
    • The Hans India – Independent coverage
    These are multiple independent reliable secondary
    sources with significant biographical coverage,
    meeting WP:GNG criteria. Pkjaincpk (talk) 08:32, 20 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    @Oaktree b: @Tatupiplu: Additional
    strong independent source found:
    • Vijaya Karnataka (largest circulated Kannada
    newspaper, owned by Times Group/Bennett Coleman)
    published a full dedicated feature article titled
    "Kantha Beragina Kalavide Kavyashree Ajeru" by
    staff reporter Chitra Santosh
    We now have 6 independent reliable sources:
    1. Deccan Herald – full profile
    2. Kannada Prabha – full interview
    3. Vijaya Karnataka – full feature (Times Group)
    4. Prajavani – video feature
    5. The Hindu – national coverage
    6. The Hans India – national coverage
    This clearly establishes notability under
    WP:GNG. Pkjaincpk (talk) 08:42, 20 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Additionally, a 2017 Deccan Herald Spectrum feature
    article titled "Making their way to centre stage"
    by reporter Chethana Dinesh (Page 51, 14 March 2017)
    prominently features Kavyashree Ajeru with photograph.
    This shows independent media coverage spanning
    nearly 9 years (2017-2026).
    Complete list of 7 independent reliable sources:
    1. Deccan Herald Spectrum 2017 – feature article
    2. Deccan Herald 2022 – full profile
    3. Vijaya Karnataka – full feature (Times Group)
    4. Kannada Prabha – full interview 2025
    5. Prajavani – video feature 2024
    6. The Hindu – national coverage
    7. The Hans India – national coverage
    Coverage spanning 9 years from multiple major
    publications clearly establishes notability
    under WP:GNG and WP:BASIC. Pkjaincpk (talk) 08:47, 20 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 14:43, 26 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Subject has significant independent coverage
in multiple major reliable sources spanning 9 years:
  1. Deccan Herald Spectrum – dedicated feature article,
14 March 2017, Page 51, by reporter Chethana Dinesh
  1. Deccan Herald – full biographical profile,
DH 23 in 2023 changemakers list
  1. Vijaya Karnataka (Times Group/Bennett Coleman) –
full dedicated feature article by Chitra Santosh
  1. Kannada Prabha – full interview, Page 3,
5 October 2025
  1. Prajavani – dedicated video feature, June 2024
  2. The Hindu – national newspaper coverage
  3. The Hans India – national newspaper coverage
These are 7 independent reliable secondary sources
with significant biographical coverage from major
publications spanning 9 years (2017–2026), clearly
establishing notability under WP:GNG and
WP:BASIC. ~2026-36992-14 (talk) 08:46, 27 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Iris Lammertsma

[edit]
Iris Lammertsma (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Current sources in article do not meet WP:GNG or WP:NCREATIVE. A search online and in a newspaper database did not find anything else that did. Article also appears to have been created by a user with COI, as all their edits relate to her company or related people.

Another version by the same editor was draftified here by me: Draft:Iris Lammertsma. InfernoHues (talk) 08:12, 10 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't use an LLM to respond, see WP:LLMTALK. InfernoHues (talk) 13:13, 10 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 22:38, 17 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Eddie891 Talk Work 14:33, 25 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Valerie Neim

[edit]
Valerie Neim (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails GNG. Sources are mostly paid or puff pieces. Thilsebatti (talk) 07:10, 10 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I am a new contributor in this space; I am not affiliated with her. Please, I would appreciate an opportunity to edit and fix this I am open to learn and take corrections Leila237 (talk) 09:40, 12 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Any further draftify supports?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BhikhariInformer‬ 📮 (Ping me or else I won't see it) 16:58, 17 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BhikhariInformer‬ 📮 (Ping me or else I won't see it) 04:57, 25 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Preeti Malhotra

[edit]
Preeti Malhotra (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non notable business person having a leadership role in a non notable corporation. Hardly any references which meet the WP:RS criteria with most of the references being self generated, passing mentions or press releases. Fails WP:GNG Jupitus Smart 04:21, 9 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BhikhariInformer‬ 📮 (Ping me or else I won't see it) 01:49, 17 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 20:43, 24 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Becky Want

[edit]
Becky Want (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No clear established notability; minimal secondary RS coverage. TurquoiseGoose (talk) 22:18, 8 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hesitant about AfD. The article may have a plausible claim to notability through the long broadcasting career, including BBC and regional broadcasting work, so a fuller WP:BLP search seems best before deletion.
However, to OPs point, the article clearly needs WP:RS cleanup. Poorly sourced personal details, especially date of birth and family information, should be removed unless supported by strong reliable sources (in addition to independent secondary sources). If those sources cannot be found after cleanup, then AfD or redirect/merge (BBC Radio Manchester) may be appropriate. ABehjat (talk) 01:39, 9 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
We cannot argue that "There must be sources somewhere!" -The Gnome (talk) 09:44, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: A regular national broadcaster seen as notable enough for an article on Wikipedia as she has presented an England-wide radio show for the past four years and presents items for a well-known and established UK-wide programme.Rillington (talk) 15:02, 9 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Circular argument: Subject merits an article in Wikipedia because she has an article in Wikipedia. Also, "I simply find her notable"! -The Gnome (talk) 09:44, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 00:55, 16 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 17:06, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
The citations are still interviews; just more interviews (cross-interviewing is not all atypical in the journalistic milieu). We cannot build something from adding up nothings. -The Gnome (talk) 06:04, 24 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Pavlina Osta

[edit]
AfDs for this article:
Pavlina Osta (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

fails WP:GNG; I did some searching and was not able to find much significant coverage in reliable sources.

Admittedly, this is not my area of expertise, so I would appreciate if other editors could find additional sources and improve the article if possible.

I would also like to note that the page appears to be edited by the subject herself (@OstaLaVista13:, @Pavlinaosta1:), and has been previously deleted Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pavlina Osta Joeykai (talk) 01:48, 7 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Cavarrone 08:07, 14 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Although it's a somewhat edge case, she does appear to have sufficient coverage for GNG Jishara (talk) 19:26, 18 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BhikhariInformer‬ 📮 (Ping me or else I won't see it) 14:39, 21 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.‎

The result was no consensus. Concerns have been raised about the added sources that have not been adequately engaged with. Vanamonde93 (talk) 18:08, 28 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Regina Doman

[edit]
AfDs for this article:
Regina Doman (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Little significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. Refs in the article are all dead links. Blackballnz (talk) 10:12, 28 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - couldn't find much WP:RS coverage of the subject that was independent. Best I could find was an interview and coverage on "Catholic Mom.com". Fails WP:GNG Yojo98 (talk) 13:49, 28 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Multiple reviews of one book would suffice or we wouldn't have an article on Margaret Mitchell for example, Atlantic306 (talk) 23:49, 2 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
But we don’t have multiple reviews of one book for Doman, and Margaret Mitchell qualifies under ANYBIO and GNG anyway. Dclemens1971 (talk) 03:05, 3 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, jocelyn's dance talk 08:20, 5 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 07:23, 13 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: One more week to consider comments about the reliability of the found sources.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, In solidarity, asilvering (talk) 03:59, 21 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per above. ~2026-34360-03 (talk) 08:51, 21 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Bridget: This is an author whose work includes a text about "the first person adventures of a Jewish woman convert to Catholicism as a first-year graduate student in philosophy" (Catholic Philosopher Chick Makes Her Debut) or a children's book with the blurb: "In its mother’s womb, a tiny baby grows, explores the waters, and talks with the angel who is there." (Angel in the Waters) or a young adult book: "When a school shooting causes Allie Weaver to join John Paul 2 High, a newly-established parent-run Catholic high school" (Catholic, Reluctantly). Sources whose editorial policy is the promotion of a particular religion cannot be considered independent and reliable to determine the notability of texts written by authors who are also promoting that religion. That said, this author's texts are specifically engaged in issues which are unambiguously contentious topics (abortion, gender and sexuality, politics of the USA). Regards, --Goldsztajn (talk) 12:16, 21 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I think you're stretching your point; politics of the USA is discussed right across the spectrum as are abortion and gender - they are not specific to catholicism, imv Atlantic306 (talk) 00:18, 22 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I was responding to a prompt above whether this was within contentious topics territory. Angel in the Waters is an anti-abortion children's book; Catholic, Reluctantly posits that the response to gun violence in US schools is parent-run, private religious schools; Catholic Philosopher Chic is about a Jewish Catholic convert grad student pursuing a higher degree. I know some rabbis, quite a lot of women (and men), and some unions full of teachers who would consider every single element of those texts controversial at minimum. FWIW, if Tablet, Ms. or American Educator had reviewed one these works, I would consider those reliable sources in this case. Regards, Goldsztajn (talk) 10:33, 22 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

Proposed deletions (WP:PROD)

[edit]

Deletion review

[edit]
  1. ^ Pereira, Danyelis. "Reaparece Yorgelis: ¿por qué no participó en la serie de entrevistas al elenco del Club de los Tigritos?". 2001online.com (in Spanish). Retrieved 2026-06-28.
  2. ^ "¿Cuánto sabes del Club de los Tigritos? Wanda y Jalymar te ponen a prueba". CORPORACIÓN VENEZOLANA DE TELEVISIÓN, C.A. (VENEVISION). Retrieved 2026-06-28.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Deletion_sorting/Women&oldid=1361592153"