Wikipedia:XfD today

Speedy deletion candidates

Articles

Recent AfDs: Today Yesterday

Media Organisations Biography Society Web Games Science Arts Places Indiscernible Unsorted

< June 22	June 24 >

Guide to deletion

Purge server cache

Ladan Eshkevari

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

Fails WP:NACADEMIC and WP:GNG. Mid-career nurse anesthetist with routine credentials. Created by the same new editor as the Avesta article in October 2025. Clear UPE/COI pattern. WP:BEFORE turns up nothing better. LogosUnspoken (talk) 23:18, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: People, Academics and educators, and Medicine. LogosUnspoken (talk) 23:18, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Princess Pauline of Waldeck and Pyrmont

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

Article does not cite any sources. Search results yield no sources to establish notability either. Subject doesn't seem to have any except for her royal origins, so WP:NOTGENEOLOGY applies as well. OliviaRigby (talk) 20:41, 16 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Royalty and nobility, and Germany. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 21:19, 16 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:17, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Avesta Ketamine and Wellness

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

Fails WP:NCORP. Local DC-area chain of ketamine clinics. Coverage is press releases (PR Newswire, citybiz, Fox40 cision syndication), directory listings (Psychology Today), passing mentions (USA Today's general Matthew Perry-context article), and routine local business news. No independent in-depth coverage. Article appears to be coordinated UPE/COI editing alongside Ladan Eshkevari LogosUnspoken (talk) 23:16, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Health and fitness, Companies, and United States of America. LogosUnspoken (talk) 23:16, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Bahaa el-Din Ahmed Hussein el-Akkad

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

Stub bio of an apparently non notable individual. WP:BLP1E applies. Article appears to have been created with minimal sourcing in multiple languages to support an advocacy campaign. Mccapra (talk) 22:36, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Christianity, Islam, and Egypt. Mccapra (talk) 22:36, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Linda Cyril

(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]

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2026 June 23. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 22:32, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Women, and Nigeria. Shellwood (talk) 22:44, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Avraham Sinai

AfDs for this article:

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

Per WP:GNG and WP:BIO, this article fails to establish independent, encyclopedic notability. A review of the sourcing shows that coverage of the subject was incredibly brief, completely transient, and has been almost entirely non-existent for over a decade. The few sources provided, with the newest one being a decade old, consist of a first-person piece written directly by the subject himself and local interview profiles that simply repeat his own unverified personal claims. There is a total lack of lasting, verifiable coverage from independent secondary sources. Paprikaiser (talk) 22:07, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: People, Military, Israel, and Lebanon. Paprikaiser (talk) 22:07, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Paprikaiser, the first source is about 2,000 words long. In light of Wikipedia:One hundred words, do you think that two thousand words constitutes "incredibly brief"? WhatamIdoing (talk) 22:34, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hamastan

AfDs for this article:

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

I am proposing the deletion of this article per WP:NOTNEO, WP:NOTDICT and WP:POV. This is a non-neutral political neologism that has failed to achieve lasting adoption or widespread recognition. A review of the article's sources shows that coverage is entirely confined to a narrow window more than a decade old; there is zero contemporary usage in independent reliable sources to indicate the term ever transitioned into the mainstream lexicon. And the existing sources do not analyze the term as a distinct, encyclopedic concept. Instead, they consist of passing mentions tracking linguistic trends, localized Israeli military briefing terminology, and a collection of opinion pieces using the word as a transient, pejorative catchphrase alongside "Fatahland". Some of the sources are dead or don't even mention the term at all. Because long-term notability was never established, the article acts as a coatrack for an obsolete political insult and cannot be expanded past a basic dictionary definition. Paprikaiser (talk) 21:33, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Language, Politics, Middle East, Israel, and Palestine. Paprikaiser (talk) 21:33, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Sheryl Zohn

(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]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Television, and California. —LastJabberwocky (Rrarr) 21:01, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related AfD discussions. Shellwood (talk) 21:25, 23 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]

Massacres of Ukrainians by Polish forces in World War II

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

This article was probably created in response to the recent rise in Polish-Ukrainian tensions. In many ways, it appears to be a mirror image of Massacres of Poles in Volhynia and Eastern Galicia, perhaps intended as a counterbalance or a response to it.

The problem is that it effectively combines crimes committed against Ukrainian civilians by various Polish groups that had little or nothing to do with one another. These ranged from communist military forces to nationalist militias, organizations with different goals, operating independently and without coordination. By grouping all of these events together, the article creates the impression of a single, unified genocidal campaign against Ukrainians.

This is very different from the article on the Volhynia massacres, which deals with the so-called "anti-Polish action" carried out by the singular organisation OUN-B and it's armed force UPA in Volhynia and Eastern Galicia and which resulted in the deaths of roughly 100,000 Poles. In my opinion, presenting these unrelated events as a single phenomenon is misleading and amounts to original synthesis. I am not aware of any academic publication that treats the subject in this way.

Moreover, nearly every incident mentioned in the article already has its own dedicated Wikipedia entry, and there is also the article Polish–Ukrainian conflict (1939–1947) covering the broader context. As a result, this article does not seem to add any meaningful value. Also, although it's a minor thing, some of the events described happened after the WW2 ended, so they are outside of the article scope. Marcelus (talk) 20:30, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: History, Poland, and Ukraine. Marcelus (talk) 20:30, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Disgusting whitewashing and false balance whataboutism genocide denial. UPA and Ukrainian civilians committed huge scale planned genocide and few righteous Ukrainian where murdered by Ukrainians (!) and few other by Poles in self-defense, but the UPA planned systematic genocide and want "Ukraine clean as glass of water" without Poles, Jews, Czechs and others. So compressing of those two is just disgusting genocide denial. First I will like to see article Volhynia genocide denial because it's what neonazi and nationalist Ukrainian propaganda is doing. From Nazi Ukrainian nationalist collaboration OUN Uprising of 1939, through commiting Volhynia genocide, denying it, calling it a conflict, till now naming unit after Nazi collaborators who committed genocide it's full blown antipolonism, Nazism and just not a place for this nationalist propaganda and denialism on Wiki ~2026-36363-21 (talk) 20:44, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Authoritarian playbook

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

WP:SYNTH fork of Authoritarianism with sides of WP:NOTDICTIONARY and WP:TNT.

"Authoritarian playbook" is a common rhetorical phrase but does not seem to form an analytic structure used in scholarship, and if anyone ever lists the plays in the playbook, they vary in number and description. The article's creator wishes it to be "about typical authoritarian techniques",[1] but Authoritarian techniques (currently a redirect to this article) or List of Authoritarian techniques would have severe criteria and WP:OR challenges and risk being a fork of Authoritarianism. The creator modelled the article very closely on The Authoritarian Playbook: How reporters can contextualize and cover authoritarian threats as distinct from politics-as-usual[2] (not a WP:RS) from the advocacy organisation Protect Democracy, creating a list of techniques with many examples of "playbook" events from modern world history, which led to discussion at WP:NORN#Authoritarian playbook and to a large WP:COPYVIO revdel. That's left the current inadequate mess which doesn't look much like a sound foundation and has a mostly revdeled history; if there is ever to be an article with this title, this one is best cleared out of the way per WP:TNT. NebY (talk) 20:21, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the list of Politics-related AfD discussions. NebY (talk) 20:21, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Treating the article as about the concept in general is inconsistent with it having been conceived and developed as being about the PD article, and if it is about the PD article, it lacks notability. EducatedRedneck (talk) 22:26, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Humanist Society of New Zealand

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

I propose merging to New Zealand Association of Rationalists and Humanists because both articles are stubs and the Humanist Society of New Zealand is now the Wellington branch of NZARH. Duncnbiscuit (talk) 11:13, 16 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and New Zealand. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 12:51, 16 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per nominator's rationale. FaviFake (talk) 08:43, 17 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Gommeh ^{(talk! sign!)} 19:57, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Vladislav Radak

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

Appears to fail WP:NPROF and WP:NAUTHOR. Not finding any secondary sources about his work. Mariamnei ✦ ^{reach out 🕊️} 12:52, 16 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Authors, and Serbia. Shellwood (talk) 13:57, 16 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: The article is translated from Serbian Wikipedia, which cites several sources in Serbian. References that are mostly in English are selected here. Vladislav is multidisciplinary, has published several popular novels - books and gained popularity through them, is a doctor of science and a lecturer by profession, but is not only known for that. I think that the wealth of the English Wikipedia is that it also has articles about people who have biographies on smaller Wikipedias, especially if there are enough sources for them, which I think is the case here. --Djordjes (talk) 13:59, 16 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
What shows that the novels are popular? Geschichte (talk) 10:22, 17 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers and Mathematics. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 14:35, 16 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Gommeh ^{(talk! sign!)} 19:54, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Bound to the Dark World

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

I propose merging to Earthbound fandom#Fangames because the sources do not demonstrate the critical reception expected of a standalone article. Of the independent sources that actually discuss Bound to the Dark World, the GamesRadar source effectively only says that the project is impressive in scope, Time Extension mostly repeats an announcement, with about one sentence of added commentary: "As a result, it seems pretty fitting for fans of Earthbound to recreate one of Fox's games in this manner, with it being the perfect way to pay homage to the developer's ROM hacking past.", ResetEra is a forum thread, and GoNintendo is GUNREL. ~ A412 ^talk! 15:30, 16 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related AfD discussions. ~ A412 ^talk! 15:30, 16 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Oh wow, while i was trying to research more reliable sources for this article i found out this article has been nominated for merging! I will say though, there is indeed a lack of coverage, and i think a more appropiate merge would be if we just did a page for Undertale fangames. There is alot of them and some has gained enough coverage for a mention in a hypothetical "List of Undertale and Deltarune fangames" article Monathephantom (talk) 15:34, 16 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Deltarune rather, due to the subject matter of the game, though it can also be mentioned on the EarthBound page. Either way, coverage is slim and can't be called significant. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 23:45, 16 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Merge as above to both proposed article targets given the Gamesradar article appears to be the only source of WP:SIGCOV. Merging can have multiple targets, can't it? The redirect target should be to Deltarune though. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 08:08, 17 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Merging can have multiple targets, can't it?
Yes, it can! FaviFake (talk) 08:32, 17 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Now this article can properly be scattered across space and time.^[Humor] 🫀 Crash // Organhaver ( it / he | talk to me, maybe? ) 22:34, 17 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I still wish we did my suggestion though. There is enough Undertale and Deltarune fan projects that has news coverage, so I could still have split off into its one article Monathephantom (talk) 02:02, 18 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
It has to be notable via WP:NLIST. 🫀 Crash // Organhaver ( it / he | talk to me, maybe? ) 03:11, 18 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I'll see what i can do... Monathephantom (talk) 12:14, 18 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Gommeh ^{(talk! sign!)} 19:53, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Gerbla Syedan

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

Fails WP:V. No evidence that this village actually exists. A Wondrous Raven (talk) 16:03, 16 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related AfD discussions. A Wondrous Raven (talk) 16:03, 16 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related AfD discussions. Shellwood (talk) 16:06, 16 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting because no one has actually !voted on this AfD yet. No comment on whether or not the article should be deleted.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Gommeh ^{(talk! sign!)} 19:51, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Independent Gay Forum

AfDs for this article:

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

Renominating per WikiOriginal-9 (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Independent Gay Forum (2nd nomination)). Fails WP:NCORP; still missing WP:SIGCOV. This article has been here for over twenty years. A Wondrous Raven (talk) 19:04, 16 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Conservatism, LGBTQ+ studies, Organizations, and Websites. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:14, 16 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: this has been tagged as a potential NORG (which is the same as NCORP, but this is more of an organization than a corporation) failure since 2013–which is more than half of the 21–22 years the article has existed. This survived the first nomination in 2007 at a time of lower standards–but even that was as a "no consensus" defaulting to (but obviously not a consensus to) keep. (Its survival of the second nomination from 2013 was entirely procedural as the then-nominator started a high quantity of nominations within a day and was convinced to withdraw those, including that one, that did not gain any participation within the first ~12 hours or so.) No opinion. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:24, 16 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the list of Libertarianism-related AfD discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:25, 16 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
There's significant discussion by Lisa Duggan (2012), and a PhD Thesis (also 2012) with a chapter analyzing their work, not to mention quite a few paragraph or so mentions in other scholarly publications. I sort of come away feeling like there might be something here, but with just those two mentions it's really not enough to establish NORG. And the article is junky as of now. Maybe we redirect and add a brief mention to LGBTQ conservatism in the United States. But I'm not sure that's really merited. So right now I end up at Delete. But if anyone finds anything else, please do ping me. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 00:21, 18 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Did anyone comment of the WP:COATTRACK aspect? Dudzcar (talk) 00:56, 18 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Gommeh ^{(talk! sign!)} 19:46, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

RS Competições

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

Non-notable racing team. The only source, dated 2026, does not mention Competições or Seikel. See also Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mico's Racing CambridgeBayWeather (#1 deranged), Uqaqatigijaa (talk), Huliva 23:27, 9 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Motorsport, and Brazil. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:03, 10 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Per nom. Svartner (talk) 18:25, 10 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting since it has been 6 days with no other comments.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Gommeh ^{(talk! sign!)} 19:21, 16 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Gommeh ^{(talk! sign!)} 19:44, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Asian Workers Development Institute, Rourkela

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

Fails WP:GNG and WP:NSCHOOL Filmssssssssssss (talk) 21:07, 9 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Schools and India. Kodning 🌸 (talk) 21:37, 9 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the list of Odisha-related AfD discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:12, 10 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to List of colleges affiliated to the Sambalpur University: Didn't find anything in additional searches to warrant notability. BhikhariInformer‬ 📮 ^{(Ping me or else I won't see it)} 10:05, 10 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting since there has only been one comment.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Gommeh ^{(talk! sign!)} 19:27, 16 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect per BhikariInformer. Mccapra (talk) 07:25, 17 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Gommeh ^{(talk! sign!)} 19:44, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Kodak Photo Spot

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

Don't see any notability in this topic and couldn't find any more reliable sources to expand this article. Article is basically just about sponsored signage in Disney theme parks where taking photos is recommended. –Dream out loud (talk) 19:30, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Photography and Amusement parks. –Dream out loud (talk) 19:30, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Alex Bhathal (businessman)

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

Most of the sources are mostly about the business activities connected with him. The subject has no significant coverage from multiple reliable sources. Fails GNG. Thilsebatti (talk) 11:17, 16 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Finance, and United States of America. Thilsebatti (talk) 11:17, 16 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: As per nomination fails GNG. REVVAKKA (talk) 11:31, 16 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the list of California-related AfD discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 12:52, 16 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - A lot of the coverage is focused on the subject's businesses, but those businesses includes three major professional American sports teams including the Sacramento Kings. The main business, Raj Capital, might be a fork candidate. There's also an indepth profile of the subject and info about the subject's other non-sports businesses, including their investment platform and news of their takeover of their father's large swimwear business. TheDeafWikipedian (talk) 01:08, 18 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. There are clearly not enough sources that support our subject's independent notability. It all emotes the unpleasant aroma of vainglorious promotion, an attempt tellingly created by a kamikaze account. -The Gnome (talk) 08:49, 23 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 18:54, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Mouty Ousseni

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

Non-notable former player from 15 years ago. Fails WP:GNG, WP:BIO and WP:NSPORT. Geoff | ^{Who, me?} 18:47, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and France. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:09, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Real Friends (XO song)

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

The article is about a song by a relatively new artist which hasn't charted, nor nominated/won any awards, nor has it been covered/sampled by multiple notable artists. The vast majority of the sources are either about the release of the song or its accompanying EP, most read like industry press releases. The song has 52,767 listens on Spotify and 23,000 on YouTube with a live version on the latter with 523,000. All extra coverage I could find is about the song release. I suggest the article be merged in the artist page (XO (group). UaMaol (talk) 18:06, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I am also nominating the following related articles for the same reasons:

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Albums and songs and United Kingdom. Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 18:22, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - the articles meet GNG as they have several sources talking about the songs. Even if they are about the release of the song they still count for GNG. The sources also feature discussion of the song - e.g. [3] this one has a whole paragraph talking about the song from the author's POV. Also, you should have notified the creator of these articles that you nominated these for AFD... DaniloDaysOfOurLives (talk) 18:34, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Keep they have WP:SIGCOV from multiple reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the group. As for supposedly not having any award nominations or wins, please see their awards here; they do. In addition, the amount of streams these songs have received on various streaming platforms is completely irrelevant to any notability guideline. Also, although unrequired, I find the fact I was not alerted to these articles being nominated for deletion as the creator of all 4 to be in bad faith and uncourteous. With that, the stale warnings placed onto my talk page and adding tags to several of my article creations, it's giving WP:WIKIHOUNDING. – Meena • 19:24, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Amad's Dream

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

Non notable, Fails WP:NFILM. No significant coverage in reliable sources. No critical reviews available. আফতাবুজ্জামান (talk) 17:50, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Film and Bangladesh. আফতাবুজ্জামান (talk) 17:50, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: : The article was first submitted as draft by A.kiphayet (they also declared their COI). Then Draft was declined by @Quinntropy: (Haj), @Thilsebatti:, @Afstromen:, and @Royiswariii:. Last month Kepayet75 created the article in the main namespace ignoring all of that (likely sock puppet or UPE). আফতাবুজ্জামান (talk) 18:05, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Irish Free Software Organisation

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

The only hits for the organisation (which appears from its website to be defunct), appear to be records of the mere fact of its existence, rather than any criteria matching Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies). Iveagh Gardens (talk) 17:47, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Technology, Software, and Ireland. Iveagh Gardens (talk) 17:47, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and Politics. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:08, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Jonathan Lee (satirist)

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

Lee appears to fail WP:NBIO and WP:CREATIVE. The current text of the page does not indicate notability, with claims like "perhaps best known for his work as the author of the spoof diaries of cricket captains Andrew Strauss and Ricky Ponting", "voted twenty-sixth best blog of 2010 by The Sydney Morning Herald", and "authors the successful blog series 'Responsibilities of an adman'" (which seems to be a series of LinkedIn posts).

The page also lacks citations; doing a search for other sources, there are no results about him that I can see in Google Books/News/Scholar (or at least they're lost in the results for the hundreds of other Jonathan Lees).

It seems there was already a discussion in May 2009 that was closed as delete, and User:Missfox recreated this article in July 2009 in contravention of that AfD. I can't see the deleted revisions, but the two articles seem to be about the same person, both described as "writer, satirist and humorist". Iiii I I I (talk) 04:51, 16 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: People, Authors, and Arts. Iiii I I I (talk) 04:51, 16 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. This is a text unimpeded by the obligation of proper citation, evidently serving no holier purpose than the promotion of our non-notable subject. Photo-portrait and text generated by a single-purpose account; no surprise there. In view of the proven persistence exhibited by the text's creator(s), our admins should consider a generous dose of Salt. -The Gnome (talk) 09:18, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: At this point, we could easily justify a soft delete, but even a little more discussion would help make this a more solid close.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 17:18, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The Zamboni (magazine)

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

The magazine does not warrant its own article due to not meeting the notability guideline. JasmineHolian (talk) 03:15, 16 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Journalism, Entertainment, and Massachusetts. JasmineHolian (talk) 03:15, 16 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Tufts University, it is a student-run humor publication at Tufts University, so it is best covered in the university article rather than as a standalone page. I could not find significant independent online press coverage outside The Tufts Daily, which has covered it mainly in relation to campus controversy. Xcccccccc123 (talk) 09:05, 16 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Hey all, I made the page (~18 years ago). I also didn't find anyone besides The Tufts Daily mentioning The Zamboni. However, all the references were fairly recent, and I remember there being some mentions predating what shows up in the results. If you don't mind the wait, I'm going to ask around some previous magazine editors to see if there are other mentions that are getting missed by search results. It doubt we will uncover that much more, though, so merging will probably be a good solution. I haven't been in college for 15 years, so I don't really have a horse in this race, just want to make sure we're not missing anything. How do folks feel about that? Pylze (talk) 01:04, 17 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
No one can find any such sources, so I am on board for delete and merge. Thanks! Pylze (talk) 16:04, 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!} 17:16, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Tufts University based on author's further search not turning up sources. M kuhner (talk) 21:52, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Owen Wister Review

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

Hello, this is now defunct. The magazine does not warrant its own article due to not meeting the notability guideline. JasmineHolian (talk) 03:07, 16 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Arts, Literature, Poetry, and Wyoming. JasmineHolian (talk) 03:07, 16 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Being defunct is not a reason to delete the article. Because it twice won an award from the Associated College Press, it seems possible that the magazine is notable. This kind of magazine sometimes attracts reviews of the individual issues. Before deleting, someone should do a focused search to see if any such issue reviews exist, because if there are several, that would be an indicator of notability. ~ le 🌸 valyn (talk) 16:41, 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!} 17:16, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

AIFF Super Cup

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

I propose merging to Federation Cup (India). Over the last few days, Эльдар Шукоров has attempted and asked to create an AfD for this article (at WT:AFD and on my talk page) because they don't have enough technical skills. I'll let them give a reason for merging the two articles now that I've created the discussion. FaviFake (talk) 17:58, 8 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Football and India. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:11, 8 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

https://www.olympics.com/en/news/india-football-2026-27-calendar-schedule Merge of cups confirmed

Sentence confirming merger to Federation Cup. Merging articles is logical step. Эльдар Шукоров (talk) 18:14, 8 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, so the 2 competitions were merged. Thanks! FaviFake (talk) 18:15, 8 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 18:38, 9 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose merge - two separate competitions that I can see? Not a change in name... Giant Snowman 18:44, 9 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Federation Cup (India) as suggested. There's a line in aforementioned source - "The AIFF Super Cup has also been rebranded as the Federation Cup"....so now they aren't two distinct leagues. BhikhariInformer‬ 📮 ^{(Ping me or else I won't see it)} 18:15, 15 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 02:12, 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!} 17:10, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The Man from G.R.A.M.P.A.

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

Perfunctory article for yet another Simpsons episode that entirely fails to establish notability. The vast majority of the anemic list of citations are Twitter posts (thinly veiled advertisements, really) and the rest are reviews from the usual TV-episode-review-mills that have reviewed all 5000 of the Simpsons episodes and will continue to do so until the heat death of the universe. Mere existence is insufficient to establish notability and this episode is mediocre even by The Simpsons standards. TPI81AF (talk) 20:47, 8 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Entertainment. TPI81AF (talk) 20:47, 8 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related AfD discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 20:52, 8 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to The Simpsons season 32 Per nom, who pretty much has the 'Fox cartoon episode article sourcing tree to pass GNG/N' down in their rationale (Twitter posts, ratings post, shallow recap from Bubbleblather that doesn't meet RS, and a 'neutral blog post' which is blatant native advertising for Final Draft), which worked with lesser standards, but not in 2026. Nathannah • 📮 21:09, 8 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Some references added, please consider while closing the case. Now, I believe it does meet notability guidelines. ~2026-34027-66 (talk) 08:42, 10 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
This isn't a source, it's another recap, and the other one 'sourcing' the title inspiration is explaining the obvious...in a recap. Don't source to recaps! Critical commentary beyond 'this episode is (good/okay)', please.Nathannah • 📮 14:37, 10 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Whilst some of the sources are not the best, I disagree that all the sources are simply recaps as they do have commentary and discuss the episode beyond the plot. Particularly this source [4] which discusses the episode in depth and compares it to the general Simpsons series and its direction and has a lot of commentary on it. Regardless it meets WP:SIGCOV and WP:BASIC. DaniloDaysOfOurLives (talk) 14:54, 10 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to The Simpsons season 32 as an alternative to deletion. Agnieszka653 (talk) 15:46, 15 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Redirect or keep?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BhikhariInformer‬ 📮 ^{(Ping me or else I won't see it)} 02:00, 16 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect I still believe it clearly fails to meet notability standards even with the single additional citation. There are plenty of notable The Simpsons episodes; just not this one. TPI81AF (talk) 18:01, 17 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Keep or redirect?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 17:10, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Jordan Rice (actress)

(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]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, Women, Television, Theatre, and United States of America. Se7enNationArmy2024 (talk) 17:08, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the list of Georgia (U.S. state)-related AfD discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:36, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Phillippa Phaneuf

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

This article (which includes edits from the subject as well as an excessive amount of non-BLP-relevant detail, undue praise/criticism, non-encyclopedic tone, and promotional language) is fundamentally a biography of a living person who received coverage for a single event -- coming out as trans. All of the coverage available about Phaneuf came in a single short burst over a few days in December 2025; otherwise, this is a low-profile person who has not received WP:SUSTAINED coverage prior to or after the coming out news. As a result, I do not believe WP:NBIO or WP:GNG is met here. Dclemens1971 (talk) 17:07, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: People, Sexuality and gender, Christianity, and New York. Dclemens1971 (talk) 17:07, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Text information provided by subject that is not found in a secondary reliable source (birth date, HRT start date, etc.) has been removed. As it has been claimed that the article contained an excessive amount of intricate detail, multiple paragraphs providing extra detail have been removed.

The article contains multiple paragraphs outlining both the positive and negative reactions the subject has received, demonstrating a WP:NPOV.

All of the coverage available about the subject did not come in a single short burst over a few days in December 2025. For example, the following news article from Spectrum News is coverage that was published on April 12, 2026 on the subject months after the coming out news, which demonstrates WP:SUSTAINED coverage.

WP:BIO1E states "If the event is highly significant, and the individual's role within it is a large one, a separate article is generally appropriate." For example, Marcy Rheintgen is a trans woman who was arrested for washing her hands in a women's bathroom, yet she has an article for this single event titled the Arrest of Marcy Rheintgen. As I believe the subject's coming out is also highly significant, I have moved the article from Phillippa Phaneuf to Coming Out of Phillippa Phaneuf.

As a result, I believe WP:NBIO and WP:GNG is met here. AnotherAnonUsername (talk) 19:29, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. The page creator has now moved the article to Coming Out of Phillippa Phaneuf, but even then, it fails the tests of WP:NEVENT. All but a single news item in the coverage (much of it WP:CHURNALISM in blogs and tabloids) of this event took place over a few days in December 2025 so there is no evidence of any WP:LASTING impact, nor is there any evidence of a significant impact with a broad WP:GEOSCOPE. (Sufficient impact can only be demonstrated by substantial non-contemporaneous coverage.) Nor did the coverage demonstrate WP:PERSISTENCE. Dclemens1971 (talk) 19:34, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
(The Spectrum News article from April is a local news source based in the subject's home region of Rochester, New York, and as the only post-December source in the article cannot be used to address the GEOSCOPE criterion for impact of the event.) Dclemens1971 (talk) 19:39, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom and per WP:NEVENT; it fails the majority of the criteria. The event did not "act as a precedent or catalyst for something else" (WP:LASTING), "have significant impact over a wide region" (WP:GEOSCOPE), or "receive coverage beyond a relatively short news cycle" (WP:PERSISTENCE). Astaire (talk) 21:32, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Becky Want

(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]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Radio, Television, and England. TurquoiseGoose (talk) 22:18, 8 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the list of Women-related AfD discussions. Shellwood (talk) 23:02, 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]

Delete since we evidently cannot scare up enough reliable, independent sources that could support our subject's notability. -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, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 17:06, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Zeeshaan Shah

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

Sources are mostly routine or brand affiliates. Fails GNG. Thilsebatti (talk) 04:30, 15 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Pakistan, and United Kingdom. Thilsebatti (talk) 04:30, 15 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: subject based on paid/thin sources. No independent coverage found from reliable outlet. Ontor22 (talk) 05:19, 15 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per WP:GNG, there are multiple reliable sources and he received multiple awards. Aqsis Bey (talk) 23:34, 15 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: some sources seem reliable but they are routine/ paid coverages not in-depth or independent of subject and winning an award does not automatically pass notability. Awards only establish notability if the award itself is notable and these are not at all. Ontor22 (talk) 18:51, 15 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The subject should satisfy WP:GNG through multiple independent reliable sources such as The Independent, Huffpost BBC, London Evening Standard, News International, Digital Spy, Business Recorder, Express Tribune, Khaleej Times and more coverage about his business as well. It is true that there are many routine/press release coverage cited in article but those can be cleaned up and the article can be improved and it should not negate the presence of reliable sources providing significant coverage on the topic. Parasiticfantastic (talk) 16:46, 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!} 16:46, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Ashish Tulsian

AfDs for this article:

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

Nothing has changed since last AFD. Just another promotional article about a non notable businessman. Fails GNG. Thilsebatti (talk) 11:32, 15 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and India. Thilsebatti (talk) 11:32, 15 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: for what it's worth, the non-nominator comments that led to the last deletion being anything but soft were from what turned out to be socks (there are seemingly-numerous sockfarms in terms of both creating and deleting notability-challenged topics in India). That alone might make it difficult to justify any pivot to a G4 if it were otherwise applicable (it appears to be the same creator as last time). No opinion beyond that. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:27, 15 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the list of Delhi-related AfD discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:28, 15 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, nothing changed much from the previous article, but the article was deleted solely based on two malicious bogy sockpuppeteers (@Iljhgtn and Zuck28) who are now blocked for their behavior. I do not trust their opinion as something solid. Their comments were also very short, did not cite any policy, and did not make any source analysis. The person is notable individual and have much press coverage to make him pass WP: GNG.

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ashish Tulsian - Wikipedia Ayudessie (talk) 07:13, 16 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep: I agree with the nominator that the article currently reads promotional and needs cleanup. However, the subject founded a notable company that has received significant coverage in industry publications and news sites. The subject himself has also been covered in detail in a few independent articles, and lot of passing mentions, which I believe he likely passes WP: NBASIC. My best suggestion would be to merge or redirect it to the company he founded, if that article already exists, since most of the article focuses on Restroworks. Xcccccccc123 (talk) 08:43, 16 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Not able to find any independent in-depth reliable source which is discussing about the subject. Fails WP:NBUSINESSPERSON. User:Nomadwikiholic1 (talk) 11:32, 16 June 2026 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nomadwikiholic1 (talk • contribs) [reply]
Weak Keep: The subject's media coverage is not very strong; however, the significant coverage available in multiple independent, reliable sources to establish WP:BASIC. There is also a scope of improvement in terms of promotional content. sock strikeCommanderF1 (talk) 10:36, 17 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Keep:The subject received independent coverage from mainstream Indian media, reported by their own editorial journalist, The Hindu, INC42, Economic Times satisfy requirements of WP:NEWSORGINDIA. Some of the coverage includes statements, this is common in business journalism and does not negate the independence of the reporting, Pass WP:NBLP.Lohysera (talk) 16:48, 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!} 16:46, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Korede Komaiya

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

Non-notable Nigerian clergyperson. Sources are limited to promotional Nigerian WP:CHURNALISM regurgitating Komaiya's social media posts ([5], [6], [7], [8], [9]), WP:NEWSORGNIGERIA and similar West African coverage that appears self-serving and promotional ([10], [11], [12], [13], [14], [15], [16], [17], [18], [19], [20]), a Self-published source, non-independent sources ([21], [22], [23]), a government press release, and an article that does not mention Komaiya. Didn't find anything in my BEFORE search and didn't see any independent reviews for his books to qualify for an WP:NAUTHOR pass. A previous draftification was contested without any qualifying sources, so AfD is the next step. Dclemens1971 (talk) 16:26, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: People, Christianity, and Nigeria. Dclemens1971 (talk) 16:26, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related AfD discussions. Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 16:32, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Emily Grierson

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

This should be merged to "A Rose for Emily" because there doesn't seem to be that much usable coverage of this character, who only appears in a short story by William Faulkner. Of the nine references, four are to copies of the short story, the second is a link to log into Academia.edu, the third is from a self-published journal (although it is a dead link, I found a copy from the article author on Medium, and the fourth is from a note-taking website. The only decent reference is the article from The Faulkner Journal. I don't see how she could pass WP:N. Nighfidelity (talk) 16:12, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements, Literature, and Mississippi. Nighfidelity (talk) 16:12, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to A Rose for Emily - This article is essentially just a summary and analysis of the short story itself, making it a WP:REDUNDANTFORK. There really is not any information on the plot or themes that is not already fully covered at the main article, so I do not really see a need for a Merge, but I am not opposed if anyone finds anything that they think should be moved over. Rorshacma (talk) 22:56, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Ghinnir Airport

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

Fails WP:GNG. I'm unable to find any reliable secondary sources that provide significant coverage of this airport. No opposition to redirecting this page to either Ginir or List of airports in Ethiopia. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 16:03, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Aviation, Transportation, and Ethiopia. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 16:03, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Another airfield stub I would have PRODed had I spotted it - two sentences of content, an almost empty infobox, and a single primary source which serves only to verify the place's existence. Fails GNG on every level. Danners430 _{tweaks made} 17:46, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Medical Hypothesis, Discovery & Innovation in Ophthalmology

AfDs for this article:

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

Still not a notable journal; I can't find any evidence that anything substantial has changed since the last AFD nomination. This article and related topics have been subject to editing by single-purpose accounts for a while now. Graham87 (talk) 15:59, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2026 June 23. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 16:11, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
- What a difference a missing brace can make ... fixed. I also notified the nominator of the last AFD. Graham87 (talk) 16:17, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I hate to disagree with the well intentioned nominator, but this journal is indexed in Chemical Abstracts Service [24], and SCOPUS. I am unable to provide a link for the SCOPUS entry, but it is there. This journal passes NJOURNAL. ---Steve Quinn (talk) 16:58, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
- Hmmm that's what I get for only skimming Wikipedia:Notability (academic journals) § Remarks. I'll leave this open for a little while longer but may withdraw it if keep !votes start snowing down. Graham87 (talk) 18:07, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Academic journals and Medicine. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:36, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Lessons of the Holocaust

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

Note: This formal merge proposal was incorrectly opened on the article's talk page. Following the March 2026 RfC, formal merge discussions are now held at AfD rather than the historical Proposed article mergers process (PAM). I've moved the discussion accordingly per WP:TPO.

Moved from Talk:Holocaust education § Merge from Lessons of the Holocaust

– FaviFake (talk) 15:55, 23 June 2026 (UTC)

Merge from Lessons of the Holocaust

Lessons of the Holocaust is a chaotic blurb tagged since 2023 and basically abandoned. I suppose it will stay abandoned, unless merged into some proper context. --Altenmann >talk 04:52, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: The nominator had originally tagged Holocaust education as the destination when placing the templates. FaviFake (talk) 15:55, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose this article is about deliberate teachings of, for the most part, objective facts about the Holocaust. The other article is about the various conclusions different people have drawn from the Holocaust, mainly outside of an educational context. The topics are mostly non overlapping and a merge would be effective deletion of the other article. Go ahead and improve the other article, but deletion is not cleanup. (t · c) buIdhe 05:02, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Colleague, you wrote this article yourself: The existence of specific lessons to be learned from the Holocaust is cited as a justification for Holocaust education - meaning direct connection and an important backround. Articles are split and merged all the time and information is preserved. --Altenmann >talk 05:20, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Don't twist my words. An appropriately thorough reading of the article and its sources would make it clear that the majority of the article topic is irrelevant to the subject of holocaust education, and therefore this is a backdoor deletion. (t · c) buIdhe 21:15, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per nominator's rationale above. FaviFake (talk) 15:57, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Iļja Novikovs

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

Martin Jurtom (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Fail WP:GNG as only personal profiles are sourced and there are no reliable secondary sources providing significant coverage. Slinetum (talk) 15:55, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related AfD discussions. Slinetum (talk) 15:55, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Latvia and Football. Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 16:29, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Bethel, Delta State

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

entire page is empty?? Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 15:55, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Nigeria. Shellwood (talk) 15:56, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I've tagged it for speedy deletion per WP:A3. In solidarity, Eyesinthefire (talk) 17:47, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Callebaut

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

Note: This formal merge proposal was incorrectly opened on the article's talk page. Following the March 2026 RfC, formal merge discussions are now held at AfD rather than the historical Proposed article mergers process (PAM). I've moved the discussion accordingly per WP:TPO.

Moved from Talk:Barry Callebaut § Proposed merge of Callebaut

– FaviFake (talk) 15:50, 23 June 2026 (UTC)

Proposed merge of Callebaut

I'd like to propose that Callebaut be merged into this page. Barry Callebaut already includes the Callebaut history, and the aforementioned page is sufficiently sparse to offer nothing of value that cannot be subsumed into this article, which is much more developed and better referenced. Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 23:14, 22 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per nominator's rationale. FaviFake (talk) 15:50, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Food and drink, Companies, and Belgium. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:35, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Ramnarayan Rawat

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

Article does not meet WP:GNG as most sources are primary or affiliated (university websites, campus newspaper) rather than independent reliable sources. It also falls short of WP:PROF criteria with no major awards, named professorship, or demonstrated significant scholarly. The WP:BLP concerns also apply given minimal sourcing for a living person. Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 15:34, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: People, Academics and educators, and India. Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 15:34, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Comment- I've added a Google scholar link and a list of potential sources to the talk page. I'm not familiar with how many citations it takes to be considered highly cited. The fellowship and award don't appear to be prestigious enough to establish notability per WP:NACADEMIC but if someone wants to take a look, please do. Se7enNationArmy2024 (talk) 20:25, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

North Adams Country Club

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

Similar as Santa Anita Golf Course, very detailed article, each golf hole one by one, and very few references. It is not even an active golf course, the tables of the article are almost empty, while there is no notability after a quick online research. Chiserc (talk) 15:19, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Golf and Massachusetts. Chiserc (talk) 15:19, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

AlphaChip (controversy)

AfDs for this article:

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

This article is a POV fork on a topic that is covered very well at Google Brain#Controversies.

It was created and subsequently expanded with obvious intent to serve as a POV fork by Qq8's sockpuppets (now mostly blocked); Qq8 has openly acknowledged that he is Igor Markov, a prominent AlphaChip opponent, whose papers are now cited 14 times in the article. (More than half the article's current content is still a product of Qq8 socks.)

I was encouraged to open this AfD by Vanamonde93 while acknowledging my own disclosed CoI; they assured me that this AfD should not be procedurally closed on this basis. LovinLifer (talk) 14:54, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I have no opinion on the article itself but I would encourage a substantive discussion here, as the closer of the previous AfD. There have been revelations of sockpuppetry since that discussion that should receive attention, even if the result does not change. Vanamonde93 (talk) 15:28, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

What is the evidence here? Can you specify the user names of the sock puppets, and show what text they contributed? How did you come up with the figure of half the text? Also, I followed the link where you claim Qq8 is Igor Markov, and it was not at all obvious to me (It appeared he was defending clock tree synthesis as a separate article). The standard of proof should be particularly high here, as you are (as you state) paid by a company that is at least partially based on the technology criticized here. Particularly as this is the third time you have tried to delete this article, I'd suggest a speedy administrative close until and unless these accusations can be documented. LouScheffer (talk) 16:35, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
The nominator has provided that information. The link attached to Qq8 has openly acknowledged shows an edit summary posted by Qq8 and signed as Igor Markov. This certainly supports the idea that Qq8 is Igor Markov. (It's not proof--Qq8 could be falsely claiming to be Markov--but it's as close as we're likely to get.) The user names of the sock puppets are at the SPI case linked in the nomination statement. The text contributed by each sockpuppet can be worked out from the article history--it is a lot of work and I personally don't feel nominator was obliged to go that far. If you need to see it, though, ping me and I can do it. It's a matter of objective fact (matching the SPI case against the article history) and it shouldn't matter who does it. M kuhner (talk) 16:54, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
You said "The text contributed by each sockpuppet can be worked out from the article history--it is a lot of work and I personally don't feel nominator was obliged to go that far." However, the nominator is proposing a fairly drastic action - deleting a page. It's up to him to provide at least *some* concrete evidence for his accusations. While certainly not exhaustive, I could not find *any* contribution to the page in question by *any* of the aliases in the sock puppet page. (Update: 'Bob the Guilder', at 7.2% of the text, is indeed in the sock puppet list. See below.)

Update: using the Wikipedia tool 'Who Wrote That', I have found only one link to the names mentioned in the sock puppet page. It appears that the article was created by "~2026-54236-5", and this text represents 39.7% of the current article. But I did not find this name in the list of sock puppets. Next was myself, "LouScheffer", at 31.2% of the article. Next is "Cdmx545467" at 8.2%. This name was not in the sock puppet file either. "Bob the Guilder" is at 7.2% (he is in the sock puppet list, but lists arguments on both sides), then lots of small contributions, such as "Twag45" at 2.3%. Interestingly (at least to me) there is only one sentence left from the original article which has not been modified by subsequent edits. So the article has been subject to significant editorial screening. LouScheffer (talk) 20:51, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Patrick McCormack

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

Biographical subject not shown to meet WP:NBIO or WP:SIGCOV. In terms of the sources, the main four (BabylonRadio 2021, CelticLife 2021, PantiBar 2021, GCN 2022) do not represent in-depth coverage and are not intellectually independent of each other (all contain effectively the same short text and derived from and/or specifically mention the same source podcast/blogpost). The fifth (Philips 2024 p.229) is a trivial passing mention (in which the subject's name/DOB simply appears in a list of 12 other names/DOBs - with no biographical information provided). In terms of the claims to notability, all of the sources (and the original blogpost) directly acknowledge that there is "[no] more available information about McCormack, apart from this historical [birth/death] record". While, perhaps, there is a possible WP:ATD/R target in LGBTQ history in Ireland (where the subject's name appears alongside other named people), personally I don't support this. As the main claim to notability, as "Dublin's [or Ireland's] first transgender person", doesn't appear to be established. Given that (a) the original blogposter frames/titles their research as a qualified question ("Dublin's first recorded transgender person? [question mark]"). And (b) so do the derived webpages ("could be the first transgender person recorded in Dublin"). And (c) the sources (like Philips 2024 p.229) list other transgender people who predate the subject. Like James Barry (c.1789–1865; born, died and "outed" decades before subject here).... Guliolopez (talk) 14:48, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Ireland, People, and LGBTQ+ studies. Guliolopez (talk) 14:57, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Trump Towers Pune

AfDs for this article:

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

The page should be deleted and redirect on List of Trump Tower-related places. Failing notability. No need for this page. Lordofhunter (talk) 14:19, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the list of India-related AfD discussions. Lordofhunter (talk) 14:19, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Maharashtra and Architecture. Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 16:31, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Stefan Gradmann

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

Article currently has only very limited citations and none that verify the notability under WP:PROF. There was a previous discussion that some additional citations might be possible Talk:Stefan_Gradmann#Notability_&_verifiability and whether WP:NAUTHOR is an appropriate standard for evaluating this article. Dbsseven (talk) 14:02, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related AfD discussions. Dbsseven (talk) 14:02, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Bearian, Asilvering, and SunloungerFrog: Notifying recent contributors to the article's discussion. Dbsseven (talk) 15:42, 23 June 2026 (UTC).[reply]

(Not sure if this is the correct procedure, but tried writing my AfD in a neutral tone so clarifying stance here) The current article lacks verifiability for a BLP. As far as I have seen, additional possible citation do not satisfy notability for WP:PROF, and WP:AUTHOR does not fit. Dbsseven (talk) 15:50, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
It was not correct to add a bolded "delete" vote, so I've removed that for you. Cheers. In solidarity, asilvering (talk) 18:58, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - I have added some additional works with critical reviews; for the Lexikon that the subject edited, there is only one review cited in the article, but that review mentions five others in its first footnote. So to my mind WP:NAUTHOR is met (multiple works with multiple reviews), and his presidency of de:Deutsche Gesellschaft für Information und Wissen for six years bolsters the case for notability. I have also added a couple of academic bios / CVs (granted one is hosted on academia.edu, and a better one would be nice) that should help verify some or most of the career information, though that section does need some copyediting and maybe slight expansion. I will try and do that over the next few days. Cheers, SunloungerFrog (talk) 16:25, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the list of Germany-related AfD discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:33, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

List of prime ministers of New Zealand by age

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

I see no indication that this is an encyclopedic topic. To me this, this seems like a collection of trivia. I honestly cannot image that anyone would care whether Henry Sewell lived 26,182 days or 26,282 days. Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. Surtsicna (talk) 13:19, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related AfD discussions. Surtsicna (talk) 13:19, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Lists of people and New Zealand. Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 13:38, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I do agree with your statement about it not being encyclopedic as you literally could just go to List of prime ministers of New Zealand,

and sort them. However on my part, if someone didn’t want to waste their time they could definitely have this article as handy as could be. Mrmacrobloxteleb (talk) 13:43, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. WP:TRIVIA discourages having such collections of miscellaneous facts unless "supported by a reliable source" and falling "within the scope of Wikipedia". The only sources I can find on the subject "prime ministers of New Zealand by age" are Grokipedia and what seems to be a mirror of Wikipedia ([25]). Impru20^talk 15:21, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as an article whose entire reason to exist is to avoid hitting "sort" on a different article is unjustified. Also it is unlikely any secondary sources discussing this can be found, unless the age of prime ministers in New Zealand has become contentious in the way that the age of Senators in the US has. M kuhner (talk) 17:00, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Francesco del Bene

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

Reads like a résumé. The only thing that might hold notability is the Knight of the Order of the Holy Sepulchre of Jerusalem, but even then it's sourced to a suspicious website called World Business Insights. Google Search also finds this article on Aspire Navigators. Both front pages seem to feature a man named Serge Deuvletian, so it seems this is a network of fake magazine mills puffed up with generic news stories. Gert7 (talk · contribs) 12:54, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Law, and Italy. Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 13:39, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Comment There is a discussion about Aspire Navigators at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard § Aspire Navigators. --Gert7 (talk · contribs) 16:10, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Simple membership in the Catholic Order of the Holy Sepulcher is in no way ~~notable~~ an indication of notability. Jahaza (talk) 16:50, 23 June 2026 (UTC) Jahaza (talk) 17:35, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Takaya Oishi

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

No good claim to notability, having only appeared 14 times (and probably only parts of those games) in Japan's top league. Moreover no WP:GNG. No sources in Japanese Wikipedia. Article creator was part of a sock farm and is blocked indefinitely. They have had hundreds of articles deleted. Geschichte (talk) 12:41, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Japan. Shellwood (talk) 12:54, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Unsourced BLP. I took a look at the article on Japanese Wikipedia, and the only source there is WP:PRIMARY (Yokohama FC). Gommeh ^{(talk! sign!)} 20:01, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Ketan Patel (investor)

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

The sources present are mostly about his company rather than the person. Fails GNG Thilsebatti (talk) 11:32, 16 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Finance, and United Kingdom. Thilsebatti (talk) 11:32, 16 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the list of England-related AfD discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:43, 16 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep - I reviewed all the sources and they're actually not mostly about his company Greater Pacific Capital. They are about his work at several companies, and his book and published research. The writings unfortunately are not themselves reliable sources. We need to see what people write about his writings for them to be encyclopedic. But what we do have is The Independent calling him an expert on global economics, lumping him with Thomas Friedman; The Globe and Mail profiling him years ago when he was Goldman Sach's Chief Futurologist; a review of his book in Business Standard; some modest hits on Google Scholar showing his citations; and coverage in Mint of a $750M fund his current company launched, out of a planned $1B total. I'd like to see independent sourcing for his early life, and anything Force for Good. but it's clear from the Globe and Mail coverage that Patel is press shy, so building this out will always be a challenge. So there's nothing that's in itself a slam dunk, but putting it together looks like enough for this to squeak by. I wavered between weak keep and weak delete, but feel better on the weak keep side. That being said, I encourage the author to disclose any conflict of interest, since they have a limited editing history, and stated this came about from seeing Patel speak at an AI conference, yet they had two professional quality photos of him to upload, claiming to be their own work. TheDeafWikipedian (talk) 00:31, 18 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Delete this clearly promotional text, put together by yet another single-purpose account (and curated mainly by yet another one). Sample fawn: He is a "strategist." The "sources" cited are so thin as to be invisible. A haphazard concatenation of our subject's own pen work, advertorials, and texts about their corporations. Nice photo, though. (Yes, it has come to this). -The Gnome (talk) 08:42, 23 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 12:26, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Jana Aastha National Weekly

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

Totally unsourced for years, not finding any secondary coverage. Mariamnei ✦ ^{reach out 🕊️} 09:40, 15 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: News media and Nepal. Shellwood (talk) 09:55, 15 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

draftify - From what i found on 1, 2, 3, 4 weekly seems to be notable(for controversial topics). i think it's better to draftify . Khagendra (talk) 16:45, 16 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: it is unclear why we would draftify here if the article was indeed notable.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 12:23, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Ailinglaplap Airok Airport

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

Fails WP:GNG. I'm unable to find any reliable secondary sources that provide significant coverage of this airport. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 12:12, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Aviation, Transportation, and Marshall Islands. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 12:12, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete: indeed, I would have been tempted to PROD this article if it hadn't been AFDd... single sentence lede, unsourced destination table with two destinations, and an empty infobox save for coordinates. The only source does nothing save to verify the airfield's existence. Danners430 _{tweaks made} 12:43, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Gayathri Ashok

(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]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Women, India, and Kerala. Thilsebatti (talk) 12:05, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related AfD discussions. Shellwood (talk) 12:53, 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]

Pârâul Negru (Someș)

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

At best a very minor river, supposedly a tributary of the Apa Caldă in Cluj County, but not shown on this detailed hiking map. Was prod-ed and de-prod-ed in May 2026 referring to this news article, which refers to a different river in Sibiu County. Markussep ^Talk 11:27, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Romania. Markussep ^Talk 11:27, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Dn42

If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.

However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end.

Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts: {{subst:spa|username}}; suspected canvassed users: {{subst:canvassed|username}}; accounts blocked for sockpuppetry: {{subst:csm|username}} or{{subst:csp|sock username|sockmaster username}}.

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

adding more news articles on it doesn't make it any more notable. it just makes it even more of an advertisement. AFD even more so! RingtailedFox • Talk • Contribs 22:23, 14 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral. I'm not going to give a view up or down on this, but this seems to be a case of a retaliatory AfD against dn42 as a project for legitimate moderation actions which the project has taken. I am aware that that doesn't mean that the page does not, indeed, merit removal. Ellenor2000 (talk) 22:49, 14 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Bias detected! what "legitimate moderation actions" are you even talking about? if you mean one of their admins calling people "help vampires" for accepting their offers of help, and then freaking out (Redacted) when they see this nomination and banning me becuase they can't handle their own medicine.. well, it sucks to suck. delete this thing already. it's not notable at all. RingtailedFox • Talk • Contribs 22:52, 14 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Nothing about the legitimacy of their moderation actions prejudices the notability or lack thereof of dn42.

The moderation actions I speak of were taken within the 4 hours immediately preceding your ProD. Did you believe DN42 was notable yesterday? Ellenor2000 (talk) 23:02, 14 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
No, i did not! I never believed it was notable enough for a wikipedia article. RingtailedFox • Talk • Contribs 23:06, 14 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Are you referring to the AfD party in Germany? What does a technical article about an overlay network have to do with politics? Mark22k (talk) 01:05, 15 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, I just noticed the abbreviation now. Mark22k (talk) 01:07, 15 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Articles For Deletion. Ellenor2000 (talk) 01:14, 15 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral while the scope of this article is fairly limited, this network is quite notable in the field of Hacker culture, with quite a lot of talks around it being made. FKszczot (talk) 23:19, 14 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
There are dn42 meetups (self-organized meetups, if I'm not mistaken) at CCC (Chaos Computer Club) events, and several Freifunk communities use it. Mark22k (talk) 01:10, 15 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Keep While the article could use some copyediting to better adhere to WP standards...there's nothing in it that raises the red flag to the point of deleting it. Fine as is. Cheers, atque supra! Fake scientist 8000 23:35, 14 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

~~Delete~~ Just in case my position on this isn't clear... RingtailedFox • Talk • Contribs 00:35, 15 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think restating your position like this is appropriate, and I don't think I've seen proposers do so on AfD discussions before. Ellenor2000 (talk) 01:17, 15 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Third editors, feel free to correct me on this. Ellenor2000 (talk) 01:18, 15 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Keep dn42 forms a notable and relevant part of hacker culture. It is unclear to me what supposedly changed about this that merits deleting this article after 16 years. Unfortunately the person creating this request for deletion has made no effort to elaborate on their reasoning. Lutoma (talk) 01:23, 15 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
It's off-platform, but he was banned from their support and social IRC channels for tedious behaviour and after bothering the network's support channel, had his account suspended from hackint. I am not privy to the exact reasons because I've had him on ignore on IRC since time immemorial. He has form for this; he's also put Libera Chat's article through the process (the result was keep because the subject is notable), also citing non-notability, apparently also after getting thusly banned for tediosity. Ellenor2000 (talk) 01:38, 15 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Trying to harass me for things off wikipedia doesn't help your case, Ellenor. Nor does my nomination of Libera Chat matter, as it was relatively unknown at the time. Please stop your continued harassment. RingtailedFox • Talk • Contribs 02:08, 15 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
It is hardly harassment, but provides important context on this deletion request. You also still have not produced any substantive rationale for your deletion request apart from WP:IDONTLIKEIT. I also just noticed that you initially attempted to remove the article using WP:PROP, which is explicitly only intended for "uncontroversial" deletions where "no opposition to the deletion is expected". This is clearly not the case here and leads me to believe that this deletion attempt was created in bad faith as part of a personal vendetta (as others have speculated). Lutoma (talk) 02:29, 15 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

You have reported me for vandalism with no conceivable page that I've vandalized (presumably it's this AfD discussion?). The correct venue for said complaint, as you have been told, is WP:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents. I trust the administrators will adjudicate the matter fairly. Ellenor2000 (talk) 03:00, 15 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related AfD discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:07, 15 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Keep As a member of dn42, I would of course be happy if the article stayed.

- dn42 exists. It currently has over 1,000 routes.

- It is active. There are many self-hosted services there (e. g. HackINT IRC network, games, chats, blogs, search engine, Looking Glasses, Network Maps, Speedtests, Forums, ...).

- The article is relevant. When I want information, Wikipedia is one of the first places I go. If you’re looking into overlay networks, you’re bound to come across dn42. Other overlay networks also have articles on Wikipedia. It would be a shame if dn42 were left out.

- Unlike other networks such as I2P or Tor, dn42 does not aim to provide anonymity or similar features, nor does it simply seek to provide a secure transport layer like Yggdrasil; rather, its goal is to actively explore network technologies. This makes it unique among overlay networks.

- DN42 meetups take place at many Chaos-related events. For example, https://events.ccc.de/congress/2025/hub/en/event/detail/dn42-network-operators-meetup or https://entropia.de/index.php?title=Spezial%3ASuche&search=dn42

- The dn42 is quite old. It originated early on from the diac24 (a smaller version of today's dn42; see also the "History" section in the article). So dn42 isn't just a small, short-lived project - it has a real history behind it. This history is also interesting from a technical standpoint. At the time, different technologies and documentation formats were used (text files instead of Git registry).

- The dn42 is unique. If you don't have the resources (e.g., money, as in my case) to participate in the "real" Internet of the IANA, the dn42 offers a great opportunity to experience similar challenges. Furthermore, the dn42 is well-suited for beginners, since you can experiment with much more than on the real Internet (e.g., offering transit) and don’t have to worry as much if you misconfigure something.

For context: dn42 is not a commercial entity. It is a network of many individuals who experiment with Internet technologies such as BGP. While there is a central registry, everything else is decentralized.

Further context: I haven’t read through the entire IRC history, but Ringtail seems to have wanted to join dn42 since around 2024. Apparently, he had problems registering with the central registry and subsequently connecting to other participants. It seems the impression arose that Ringtail was trying to waste other people’s time and effort. At some point, he was then banned from IRC. And he wanted others to deregister him. After his request was not fulfilled (among other reasons, because it is technically impossible with Git), he proposed deleting the Wikipedia article. This could lead to the suspicion that he is doing this out of revenge. Whether that is the case, I can only speculate; I do not know his motivation (or rather, I can only guess).

Personally, I hope this deletion request is closed just as quickly as https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Libera_Chat. Mark22k (talk) 01:51, 15 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The more people bring my edit history up, the less relevant it becomes. I honestly don't care, and i don't understand why you guys do. This isn't some sort of precedent-setting incident, and just further proves my claims of stalking, harassment and brigading.

Just NOMINATING this for deletion seems to have royally pissed off the DN42 community. You wanna fight dirty? fine, i'll drag ya into the mud with me.

I was told i was always welcome to ask questions and ask for advice on how to configure my router to work with dn42, but whenvever i did, i was told i was a "help vampire" due to having difficulties with configuration and eventually quieted, then banned, without a reason. Then when i stuck up for myself as anyone rightly would, I was given a 90 day ban from their network, of which i have zero plans to ever return.

The behaviour of the Dn42 members like you, ellenore, Grobe0ba , JLu5, Kioubit and others is beyond immature and beyond apalling, and i can't help but laugh at the insanity and arrogance prsented by you.

Mark22k, you can speculate all you want, but again, the more you obsess about Libera_Chat for whatever reasonm the more it proves me right.

DN42? no, DO NOT 42!

RingtailedFox • Talk • Contribs 02:16, 15 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

For further context, I have witnessed some canvassing-like activity in the DN42-related IRC channels in the time since the ProD and this AfD were posted. The canvassing seemed neutral enough, but it has brought a non-neutral, involved "keep" party out of the woodwork, evidenced in Mark22k's keep recommendation. RingtailedFox reported me for vandalism, and Mvcg66b3r reported Grobe0ba for vandalism related to edits apparently intended to disrupt this AfD (which, yes, would be vandalism). Ellenor2000 (talk) 03:14, 15 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for admitting the pro-DN42 brigading going on. even more evidence for speedy deletion if they're that desperate to keep the article! No, elenor... Nominating an article for deletion IS NOT VANDALISM. You guys really do get pissed off whenever someone either asks for help or disagrees with you! Too bad, deal with it. Just stop the seething and malding in here. go back to DN42's irc server if you wanna do that! Wikipedia is NOT your hugbox! RingtailedFox • Talk • Contribs 03:37, 15 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see a grounds for speedy which would fit (the closest I see is CSD A7, but credible claims of significance are made; in the ANI thread regarding grobe0ba you also claimed CSD G11, though not by name, which doesn't seem right). The tone of the article is maybe a bit unencyclopedic, but in the realm of deletion, it would seem that the AfD process is the correct process, not speedy or Pro-D (which was disputed wihin the 7 day window). Ellenor2000 (talk) 04:13, 15 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Need i remind everyone that Wikipedia is NOT your advertising service, either? If your only claim to fame, or ability for people to find you, is a wikipedia article... then you don't meet notability requirements! If you want to be found, go rent a Google search ad or something. For a group that enjoyed constantly telling me "RTFM", you definitely don't do the same for OTHER websites, especially ones beyond your petty control. Too bad, thems the rules! RingtailedFox • Talk • Contribs 03:51, 15 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I found out about DN42 by word of mouth, and didn't know there was a Wikipedia article about it until you Pro-D'd it. Ellenor2000 (talk) 04:18, 15 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Comment look i made my account after seeing the discussion on the article but i've found like 3 academic sources from 2018, 2022, and 2023 that discuss dn42 just searching google scholar for "decentralized network 42" so i mean dn42 is being discussed academically across multiple years idk how helpful this is but do what you will with the info Ibnqirtaiba (talk) 04:31, 15 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I mean, ellenor2000 already said she saw them planning to flood this place with "keep" votes on the dn42 irc server, so that's brigading and tosses the legitimacy of any fair vote on this matter here... it proves my point that it's not notable of an organization if they have to resort to such behaviour in the first place.

the fact that they erupt with such rage over something so inconsequential is deeply disturbing on many levels. No notable organization would have its members behave in such a manner. RingtailedFox • Talk • Contribs 04:37, 15 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

that's cool and all dog but i ain't used irc since like 2005 and got here from the giant thing on the dn42 article that says it being discussed for deletion, i aint "voting" anything but there are sources from google scholar that i listed and this place says according to this "the minimum search expected is a normal Google search, a Google Books search, and a Google News search; Google Scholar is suggested for academic subjects" like i said y'all do with em what you will but my point was mainly searching for the full name versus dn42 produced more mentions Ibnqirtaiba (talk) 05:49, 15 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

you write like you weren't even born yet in 2005... and if the only thing the dn42 crew has to do all day is monitor their own wikipedia article and sends out the bat-signal the second it's nominated for deletion... lol. lmao, even. RingtailedFox • Talk • Contribs 08:28, 15 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Reopening and relisting per WP:REOPEN. No valid reason for a procedural close.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 10:48, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

comment Here's my source assessment of @Ibnqirtaiba's mentioned academic sources. In my view, they don't meet GNG on their own.

Source assessment table prepared by User:Eyesinthefire
Source	Independent?	Reliable?	Significant coverage?	Count source toward GNG?
Distributed Real-Time Co-Simulation as a Service	research group at RWTH Aachen University - my brief spot check on the authors could not find any connection to dn42	Secondary source published in IEEE	Mentions DN42 in passing as a similar testbed to the type of testbed platform they're presenting	✘ No
Design, Development, and Operation of a SDN- Based BGP Playground for Networkers	Collaboration between researchers at several SEA universities - my brief spot check on the authors could not find any connection to dn42	Secondary source published in IEEE	Unsure - compares against DN42 as a similar BGP testbed to the one they're presenting. I'm not certain whether the section in this one significantly covers dn42. To me, it's on the edge.	? Unknown
BGP anomaly detection - a path-based apporach	research group at UESTC - my brief spot check on the authors could not find any connection to dn42	Secondary source published in IEEE	Compares dn42 BGP routing anomalies against baseline BGP anomaly data from the Internet	✔ Yes
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}}.

Nonetheless, I'm not convinced by any of the arguments for deletion and don't have a recommendation at this time. If consensus arrives at deletion, I think instead merging to darknet would be appropriate. In solidarity, Eyesinthefire (talk) 17:11, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

United Nations Youth Association of the Philippines

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

Totally unsourced, previously moved to draft (Draft:United Nations Youth Association of the Philippines) and restored without substantial improvement. Did not find WP:SIGCOV in secondary sources. Mariamnei ✦ ^{reach out 🕊️} 10:20, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and Philippines. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 10:23, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Keith Colon

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

WP:BLP with one source that confirms the existence of the subject but nothing beyond that. Previously moved to draft (Draft:Keith Colon) and restored with slight expansion (the unsourced "Professional Career" section was added) but still not nearly well sourced enough and I am finding minimal coverage. Mariamnei ✦ ^{reach out 🕊️} 10:13, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Boxing, and New Jersey. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 10:22, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Delete My search for sources didn't find coverage I believe meets WP:GNG. I found youtube, instagram, databases, fight results and announcements, and interviews. None of those are significant, independent coverage from reliable sources. He's nowhere close to meeting WP:NBOX. Papaursa (talk) 15:17, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Praxis Business School, Kolkata

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

Does not appear to meet WP:NORG or WP:GNG; no independent secondary coverage (only refs are promotional or primary); notability and verification maintainance templates up since 2018 - TurquoiseGoose•they/them•(talk) 10:09, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Business, Schools, and West Bengal. - TurquoiseGoose•they/them•(talk) 10:09, 23 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 keep. Withdrawing per author's clarification, I think it was my mistake to nominate without properly checking source. Apologies (non-admin closure) AristocrSirr 🗨️ 14:26, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Abnash House

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

Reads more like an advertisement, I don't think it passes GNG or SIGCOV. AristocrSirr 🗨️ 09:53, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the list of England-related AfD discussions. AristocrSirr 🗨️ 09:53, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Keep UK nationally listed building, so deemed notable under WP:GEOFEAT. Edwardx (talk) 10:05, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
@Edwardx Geofeat requires in depth coverage which I don't see it has. AristocrSirr 🗨️ 10:41, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. GEOFEAT requires "verifiable information beyond simple statistics", and the first citation alone provides this. Why not simply withdraw the nomination, so that we can spend our limited time on expanding this and other articles? Edwardx (talk) 13:07, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Isn't WP:NBUILD the relevant criterion? That says standard notability requirements apply. SmartSE (talk) 13:31, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the list of Architecture-related AfD discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 10:22, 23 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.

Romania national under-21 football team results

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

Fails WP:NLIST, no evidence that these have been discussed as a group or set by independent, reliable sources. Stevie fae Scotland (talk) 09:46, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Football and Romania. Stevie fae Scotland (talk) 09:46, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related AfD discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 11:26, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Romania national under-21 football team results (1977–1979)

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

Fails WP:NLIST, no evidence that these have been discussed as a group or set by independent, reliable sources. Stevie fae Scotland (talk) 09:46, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Football and Romania. Stevie fae Scotland (talk) 09:46, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related AfD discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 11:26, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Croatia national under-21 football team results (2020–present)

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

Fails WP:NLIST, no evidence that these have been discussed as a group or set by independent, reliable sources. Stevie fae Scotland (talk) 09:45, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Football and Croatia. Stevie fae Scotland (talk) 09:45, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related AfD discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 11:25, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Croatia national under-21 football team results (2010–2019)

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

Fails WP:NLIST, no evidence that these have been discussed as a group or set by independent, reliable sources. Stevie fae Scotland (talk) 09:44, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Football and Croatia. Stevie fae Scotland (talk) 09:44, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related AfD discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 11:23, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Croatia national under-21 football team results (2000–2009)

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

Fails WP:NLIST, no evidence that these have been discussed as a group or set by independent, reliable sources. Stevie fae Scotland (talk) 09:43, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Football and Croatia. Stevie fae Scotland (talk) 09:43, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related AfD discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 11:23, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Croatia national under-21 football team results (1942–1999)

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

Fails WP:NLIST, no evidence that these have been discussed as a group or set by independent, reliable sources. Stevie fae Scotland (talk) 09:43, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Football and Croatia. Stevie fae Scotland (talk) 09:43, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related AfD discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 11:07, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Techo International Airport (Colombia)

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

Defunct airport which closed in 1959, not convinced it's notable Danners430 _{tweaks made} 08:59, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Aviation and Colombia. Danners430 _{tweaks made} 08:59, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Strong keep: this was the first airport in South America (according to [26]) and Colombia's main airport for 30 years; there are plenty of sources online, mostly in Spanish, and doubtless many more offline sources given the era we're talking about. Rosbif73 (talk) 12:33, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Comment (probably ~~delete~~ keep). You claim it was the "first airport in South America": well maybe, your source says it was inaugurated in 1929. Los Cerrillos in Santiago dates from May 1929, so if Techo was first it was by a matter of weeks at most. Incidentally, ref. 1 in the article leads to "Not Found. The requested URL was not found on this server". I'm not impressed. Athel cb (talk) 13:46, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not particularly impressed by the current state of the article and its sourcing either, but that's not a reason to delete it. I don't know whether it was the first or not, but we have a source claiming it was, and enough other sources to meet WP:GNG. Rosbif73 (talk) 14:44, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, my "probably delete" was too strong. I've changed it to "probably keep". After all, if Los Cerrillos deserves an article (and I think it does) why not this one? Athel cb (talk) 16:45, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - various sources here [27] showing it meets GNG DaniloDaysOfOurLives (talk) 18:52, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Annisa Suci Ramadhani

(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]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians, Women, Law, and Indonesia. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:01, 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]

Spyro: A Realm Beyond

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

Nothing notable here and WP:TOOSOON at best. Tried to draftify but was immediately reverted. Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 18:25, 7 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related AfD discussions. Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 18:25, 7 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

It is a new entry in a very popular franchise that recently got announced. It was featured on Xbox's Game Showcase, and articles were written about it by IGN, Eurogamer, Variety, and The Guardian. I don't understand how this would not be notable enough for Wikipedia. Cloweee (talk) 18:31, 7 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

It also already has a store page on places like Steam. Seems notable enough to me AkaAko (talk) 17:20, 8 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

keep - there’s plenty of references for it to remain, it’s a notable franchise and information is likely to further expand the entry rapidly considering the game is likely to launch within 9 months - delays will only add. Little reason to draftify.

Awkwarddd (talk) 19:26, 8 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I have improved the article, and I believe it deserves to remain rather than be deleted. The article can be further improved as more information about the game is announced. Ryan York (talk) 18:43, 7 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Delete and keep working on the draft ~2026-32492-01 (talk) 18:46, 7 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Draftify, this has potential for improvement but is not yet ready for mainspace. The article has been improved by User:Ryan York, so I change my vote to Keep. Dabmasterars [RU/COM] (talk/contribs) 08:06, 9 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per Cloweee. Maxeto0910 (talk) 04:18, 12 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

My apologies, I must have edited while in you were in the midst of a draft move. No objections to dratifying this. There should also be a history merge ASAP. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 18:27, 7 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Delete for now. Article has apparently been draftified successfully and a deletion in mainspace will allow it to be moved back when the time is right. Agree that it is TOOSOON to be in mainspace. GSK 18:28, 7 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
- In light of the article being improved significantly by User:Ryan York, I change my vote to Keep. GSK 16:51, 9 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment: If this article does end up being deleted in favor of the draft, I would suggest moving the existing mainspace article into the draft, as it is clearly the superior of the two at this point. GSK 16:49, 19 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Draftify; this will inevitably be in mainspace, being a main installment in a major video game series, but it's clearly not ready yet. Signed, SleepyRedHair. (talk - contribs) 23:34, 7 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
- As with many others, I'm changing my vote to keep per recent edits. Signed, SleepyRedHair. (talk - contribs) 15:54, 16 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Spyro for now. It is WP:TOOSOON to have an article (unless we have preview coverage/interview in the coming days). OceanHok (talk) 00:45, 8 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per WP:HEY, now that previews/interviews are used. OceanHok (talk) 12:28, 10 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Draftify. TOOSOON; Certainly notable, but IMO too specific to warrant a redirect. If it has already been draftified, then deletion for now is the only remaining step. Quibilia, et al. (talk) 01:29, 8 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
- I concur that the changes are satisfactory for retention. I change my vote to Keep. Quibilia, et al. (talk) 21:21, 9 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect. Not enough information, make a draft.

Draftify is the appropriate solution here - it may have been reverted, but that's a behavioural and not a procedural issue with whoever's reverting, is it not? As others have said, this will almost certainly enter mainspace in the long run. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 05:11, 8 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The announcement didn't reveal much but everything it did reveal is well sourced. Why delete this only to inevitably recreate it in a few months? Connor Behan (talk) 15:19, 8 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
So much this! Like, there's already store pages for this. Even if I feel like the pre-order nonsense has gotten a little out of hand lately, it's clearly an established game already, not just a rumor or whatever. Plus there's already further info cropping up about it. AkaAko (talk) 20:27, 8 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

That's assuming the release date doesn't get postponed or cancelled. We don't have a WP:CRYSTALBALL that lets us see into the future and know for certain that "in a few months" an article will be warranted. Either way, draft space is better for games that only have run-of-the-mill announcements without a clearly established release date. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 22:42, 8 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Keep It might just be my past as a journalist talking, but it seems like it'd be better to keep this page up than just remake it further down the road. Some information is more than no information, and there are official pages for the game already AkaAko (talk) 20:29, 8 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

(Also sorry if my formatting is a bit off, I'm relatively new here) AkaAko (talk) 20:30, 8 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Just to clarify, it wouldn't need to be remade from scratch. Wikipedia has "Draft articles" where articles can be worked on before being published, and there's a draft of this at Draft:Spyro: A Realm Beyond. This article got turned into a draft but then split back into a main article due to a miscommunication between two users. ~2026-32492-01 (talk) 22:19, 8 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I see many pre-release video game articles at AFC and NPP. I feel like there needs to be a clearer guidance on how WP:TOOSOON applies, because I think it can be simultaneously true that the current informal practice is to avoid passing articles for upcoming games founded only on press releases and announcements, whilst also accepting managing these can create odd procedural outcomes and that it doesn't take guesswork to anticipate that major studio games are going to attain general notability. Is this a conversation worth having on the WP:VG talk page? ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 22:33, 8 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
There is still some element of WP:CRYSTAL involved. For example, let's say one makes an article about Elder Scrolls VI the moment it was announced. The game's still vaporware 8 years later, and it's highly debatable whether a page on it should even exist now. No one can predict whether a major game will actually be released, and the game can still be cancelled if some corporate bigwig somewhere woke up on the wrong side of the bed. Until a game is virtually locked in for release or has significant coverage in its pre-release state, it is too soon. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 10:26, 13 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I agree - some form of guidance is needed because pre-release certainty and significant coverage can coexist, or not. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 10:55, 13 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Keep It will need to be created anyway and contains relevant info already. Victor.spain (talk) 17:41, 9 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Keep It is official, but deleting it is just going to make it much worse to do more work. In addition, it is yet to be further developed so it's best to let the article grow down the road and keeping it maintained. 20chances (talk) 23:56, 9 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Keep keep with current coverage and maintain with additional news sr1jj (talk), 10 June 2026 (UTC)

Keep — Meets notability criteria; I see a lot of reporting on this title from great sources. Zero reason to delete. IPhoneEnthusiast (talk) 05:28, 11 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Spyro#Spyro Reignited Trilogy and Spyro: A Realm Beyond (2018–present). It's still WP:TOOSOON for a page, though eventually it will be recreated with more information. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 10:22, 13 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: The best response to canvassing is a thorough source analysis. Can one of our AfD regulars help, please?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 11:29, 15 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. New information about the game is coming out regularly through WP:RS. To address concerns raised about how to apply WP:TOOSOON, I propose adding sections similar to WP:UNRELEASED and WP:FUTUREALBUM to WP:NVG for clarity. UltrasonicMadness (talk) 23:09, 21 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - So you mean to tell me all the reliable sources on earth aren't saving an article on an upcoming game if it's simply created before a certain date? Lordy loo you people are why chatbots are so popular. Americanfreedom (talk) 15:42, 16 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia:Civility IPhoneEnthusiast (talk) 04:39, 17 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

BOTH reliable sources AND significant coverage are needed. The lack of any information on the game beyond "ooh it has Spyro and is a new game where you can fly around freely" is the problem, and results in an undercooked article where notability is still a wild guess. An article with lots of hype and no substance would be the kind of thing chatbots specialize in, but not Wikipedia. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 15:30, 19 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
The consensus is that coverage is significant. IPhoneEnthusiast (talk) 01:15, 20 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: I definitely see the WP:TOOSOON concerns but I think this one meets GNG, there are enough reliable sources with information from developer interviews and commentary on the trailers. MidnightMayhem (talk) 18:01, 16 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: As the previous relister noted, a thorough source analysis would be helpful if canvassing may have compromised the discussion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 07:34, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: seems to pass GNG Jishara (talk) 13:44, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Latchkey Kids

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

No evidence film has entered production, per WP:NFF BOVINEBOY2008 07:30, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the list of Film-related AfD discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 08:02, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Yuan Ping (scientist)

(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]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Women, Chemistry, China, and United States of America. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 10:30, 15 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: California and Wisconsin. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:55, 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]

Weak keep. At her present rate of progress she'll be there in a few years, but she's not there yet. Athel cb (talk) 13:51, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Arul Arulrajah

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

Appears to fail WP:NPROF. Mariamnei ✦ ^{reach out 🕊️} 10:05, 8 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators and Australia. Shellwood (talk) 10:52, 8 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Engineering, Malaysia, and Singapore. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:05, 8 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. I'm not ready to vote on this one. His Google Scholar profile is impressive (h = 90), but virtually all of his well cited articles have numerous authors: I found only one with as few as two authors. The article itself says almost nothing to allow an assessment of whether he might satisfy other criteria. I think it needs to be expanded beyond the stub we see at present before a judgement can be made. Athel cb (talk) 14:17, 8 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or Draftify - This article does not speak for itself. This article says nothing to tell a reader why the subject is notable. This article says only that he exists. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:47, 8 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. This is not a good stub, and should be improved. However, we cannot ignore his citation record. I checked his University Page and the awards in the "About" section and the "Professional Activities" look to be consistent with his citation record.Ldm1954 (talk) 07:15, 12 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)} 12:21, 15 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Keep — his Google Scholar h-index is 90 with 28573 citations. His Scopus h-index is 81 with 28972 citations. These scores and citation numbers indicate that he is widely cited and has had an impact on his field, which meets WP:NACADEMIC#C1 criteria: "1. The person's research has made significant impact in their scholarly discipline, broadly construed, as demonstrated by independent reliable sources." and also "The most typical way of satisfying Criterion 1 is to show that the academic has been an author of highly cited academic work – either several extremely highly cited scholarly publications or a substantial number of scholarly publications with significant citation rates." Admittedly I am not familiar with the publications associated with civil engineering, but these high h-index scores and high citation counts are compelling. If someone has commentary on the type of publications he is cited in, please ping me. — Chao Garden 🌱 ~ say hello 21:44, 15 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Per the discussion above, the subject's academic impact is significant. A Google Scholar h-index of 90 with 28,573 citations, along with a Scopus h-index of 81 and 28,972 citations, is in itself a strong indication of notability. However, the article still has considerable room for improvement, particularly in terms of sourcing, structure, and coverage of the subject's achievements. sock strike CommanderF1 (talk) 11:49, 19 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per above. --NYC Guru (talk) 02:38, 23 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!} 06:52, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

This LLM-generated text has been collapsed and should be excluded from assessments of consensus.

The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

Keep - he is a Professor at Swinburne University of Technology and a well established researcher in geotechnical engineering. His ORCID profile shows a very strong publication record with hundreds of peer-reviewed journal papers and extensive citation impact https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1512-9803.He has also been a Chief Investigator on multiple ARC Linkage and Discovery projects and other competitive research grants, reflecting significant recognition within the Australian research system. His work and profile are also publicly documented through Swinburne University https://experts.swinburne.edu.au/785-arul-arulrajah. He clearly meets Wikipedia:Notability (academics) based on sustained research output, funding success, and significant academic impact.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by ~2026-36527-78 (talk) 13:35, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

FLS0005

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

Complete lack of notability for this, not a topic of interest outside the website of the company that released it[28]. Fram (talk) 13:56, 15 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Albums and songs and Washington, D.C.. Fram (talk) 13:56, 15 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Couldn't it be added to a Wikidata thing to gather more information so then it becomes a topic of interest? Jbiafra4prez (talk) 12:19, 16 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Articles are not created to generate interest. Please see WP:NOTPUBLICITY. — CactusWriter ^(talk) 20:32, 22 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Also nominated, for the same reason:

Delete all - Fails WP:GNG. These pages appear solely to be promotional; solely sourced to the record company sales site. — CactusWriter ^(talk) 20:32, 22 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: A little more discussion with actual !votes could help this get a hard close.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 06:51, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Delete all No reliable independent sourcing found. Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 19:57, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Women's Health and Equal Rights Initiative

(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. SafariScribe^{Edits! Talk!} 15:04, 15 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and Nigeria. SafariScribe^{Edits! Talk!} 15:04, 15 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep. I adjusted some of the promotional language and added some citations, and I think the organization is borderline notable - there's at least some secondary independent coverage. I searched Wikipedia Library's default EBSCO database, Google Books, and JSTOR, but haven't exhaustively searched scholarly databases, so there could be more secondary coverage available. Note that another article was recently merged here: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/African Pride Accelerated. If the organization doesn't seem sufficiently notable, a good alternative to deletion would be to merge this material to the article about the founder of the organization, Akudo Oguaghamba. Dreamyshade (talk) 16:30, 15 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. This organisation has a few secondary source independent of the source that covered it, such as: Equitas.org (2). Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada (3): they covered it with other organisations. Rustin Times(10). Obinna Tony (talk) 06:38, 15 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I wonder what more you will say since you considered Equitas.org and Rustin Times as WP:RS. SafariScribe^{Edits! Talk!} 22:55, 15 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
If a website is not on Wikipedia's backlist for sources, what makes it unreliable? Personal vibes & feelings? Provided they are actually reporting an objective fact? Not a contested information? (Rustin Times is an LGBTIQ Nigerian outlet. If traditional Nigerian media, are not reporting on LGBTIQ people, organizations, people, identities etc, who does it). Nigeria is a homophobic country and you are not an arbiter of what qualifies as a reliable source. Obinna Tony (talk) 23:10, 15 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
@Obinna Tony, you've got to read WP:NGRS and for sources, you need to alert the reliable source noticeboard. WP:RSN. SafariScribe^{Edits! Talk!} 15:43, 16 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard#Rustin_Times_-_LGBTQ+_Nigerian_website Obinna Tony (talk) 10:53, 23 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.. SafariScribe^{Edits! 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]
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. SafariScribe^{Edits! 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. SafariScribe^{Edits! 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.SafariScribe^{Edits! 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]

Improved Sexual Health and Rights Advocacy Initiative

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

Fails WP:NORG. Running a WP:BEFORE shows nothing other than publications and passing mentions in unreliable sources. SafariScribe^{Edits! Talk!} 15:21, 15 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: LGBTQ+ studies, Organizations, and Nigeria. SafariScribe^{Edits! Talk!} 15:21, 15 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Source 3, 4, 5, 6 & 7 are clear significant coverages and not passing mentions. Unreliable source is just personal assertion. Obinna Tony (talk) 15:43, 15 June 2026 (UTC) — Note to closing admin: Obinna Tony (talk • contribs) is the creator of the page that is the subject of this XfD. [reply]
Delete: Subject fails WP:ORGCRIT; all the sources are deficient towards the regular independent and reliable sourcing requirement, some do not give the substantial coverage we're looking for, while most are blatantly unreliable pieces and fail independence to provide a neutral coverage of this subject. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 16:56, 15 June 2026 (UTC) I'd rather not participate in an AfD that has emotions all over the place instead really following very simple laid-down notability guidelines. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 11:53, 16 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
This user is accusing people of following emotions (because it’s not going their way) yet they were both on two nominated articles of mine by the same reviewer immediately they were tagged to be deleted. Begs about who is playing emotions. Obinna Tony (talk) 16:53, 16 June 2026 (UTC) — Note to closing admin: Obinna Tony (talk • contribs) is the creator of the page that is the subject of this XfD. [reply]
Weak keep. The New Telegraph coverage is not a passing mention. It is about their activities. There are some hits in Google Scholar. Some are just acknowledgements but the most promising one can't be read without paying. There's definitely some notability here. The question is whether it is enough. --DanielRigal (talk) 18:54, 15 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
There is definitely no notability here, @DanielRigal, and I keep wondering why you want to use one source—The Telegraph—to conclude that there, ofcourse, "must" be notability somewhere. Which place? Because it's obviously wrong to say Google scholar. SafariScribe^{Edits! Talk!} 22:37, 15 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep. Note that this article was nominated for deletion about five hours after it was created, but WP:BEFORE says "If the article was recently created, consider allowing the contributors more time to develop the article". This organization does have some secondary coverage in adequately reliable sources - I just added some additional citations to the article, so along with The New Telegraph, the article now has citations to The Guardian Nigeria, Punch, and Vanguard News. They're not super substantive or independent pieces, but relatively typical for Nigerian news media. I also consider the HeapNews piece to contribute to notability, since the author, Bunmi Yekini, is a reputable journalist. Dreamyshade (talk) 19:29, 15 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
For how many times will you keep trying to—perhaps—save an article that is not fit to WP:STANDALONE? Why find or advocate to use sources which doesn't meet WP:SIRS to support your wrong propaganda or whatever even in the face of what is clear here: non notability of this article. I wonder how much sources you will make up to change from weak to a strong keep. SafariScribe^{Edits! Talk!} 22:41, 15 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Dreamyshade, I also want to know how you concluded that Bunmi Yekini is a reputable journalist? Again, I wonder why you know and still added those ...not super substantive or independent pieces, but relatively typical for Nigerian news media" and still expect a WP:STANDALONE article. SafariScribe^{Edits! Talk!} 22:44, 15 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. Added a partial source assessment table, as follows, to support my recommendation. Dreamyshade (talk) 00:24, 17 June 2026 (UTC) Updated table. Dreamyshade (talk) 22:33, 17 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Source assessment table
Source	Independent?	Reliable?	Significant coverage?	Count source toward GNG?
Ojo, Yetunde Ayobami (2019-12-17). "Groups urge government to respect citizens' rights". The Guardian Nigeria News. Retrieved 2026-06-15.	~ News article by a reporter, but mainly reports what ISHRAI and another organization said	Reliable according to WP:NAIJARS	Article is about a joint statement made by ISHRAI and another organization, not a passing mention	~ Maybe
"Nigeria: Treatment by society of people living with HIV/AIDS and family members of people living with HIV/AIDS (2020–March 2022) [NGA200851.E]". Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada. 2022-04-13. Retrieved 2026-06-15.	Report written and published by the Canadian government	"Responses to Information Requests (RIRs) are research reports on country conditions. They are requested by IRB decision-makers."	~ Not significantly about ISHRAI itself, but significantly quotes ISHRAI as an expert source	~ Maybe
Adeyemi, Appolonia (2026-05-16). "ISHRAI Leads Push For Justice, Safer Reporting Systems For Marginalised Groups". New Telegraph. Retrieved 2026-06-15.	~ News article by a correspondent, but mainly reports what ISHRAI said	Reliable according to WP:NAIJARS	About an event organized by ISHRAI and another organization	~ Maybe
Yekini, Bunmi (2026-05-14). "When Silence Becomes a Crisis: Stakeholders Unite to Confront Rising Kito Violence Across South-West Nigeria". HeapNews. Retrieved 2026-06-15.	~ News article by a journalist (see also; additional source), but mainly reports what ISHRAI said	~ Digital news startup not listed at WP:NAIJARS	About an event organized by ISHRAI and another organization	~ Maybe
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}}.

Note: this discussion has been included in the list of Health and fitness-related AfD discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:18, 15 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep. Would support merging if there's an article where that would make sense. 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 ^💌 🌷 01:30, 16 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Similar to another discussion, I agree with Weak Keep, and what you have stated here. There needs to be time to let this article grow and expand. As stated above, it had only been mere hours after the article was created that it was nominated for deletion. Also, this AfD is blatantly unfair to the labor of those who wrote the article to nominate it for deletion, rather than the OP beginning a discussion on article on the appropriate talk page. Yet another case of deletion being used to engage in cleanup, when editing and improvements could have solved the issues that the OP believes are a problem. In solidarity - Historyday01 (talk) 11:36, 16 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - nomination took place way too soon after being published, and the coverage included in the article is sufficient for SIGCOV in my opinion. DaniloDaysOfOurLives (talk) 17:13, 16 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Keep for same reason Urchincrawler (talk) 16:58, 17 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - At least on this sourcing. The source analysis table is the wrong one. This organisation should be considered under WP:NORG and the newspaper articles are primary sources that do not meet WP:SIRS (which, in any case, applies to GNG as well). But the NORG assessment table asks editors to explicitly consider if sources are primary, and they are here. Consider: on the two alleged passing sources, what do these sources say about the organisation? Nothing. They are reports of the organisation's advocacy activity, but they provide no WP:ORGDEPTH coverage and do not meet WP:ORGCRIT. In particular, these sources fail WP:ORGCRIT because they are not independent of the subject, despite the source analysis table stating otherwise. The two articles are clearly written off the back of press releases, as is standard when organisations take part in such advocacy work. So as it stands, we have no independent reliable secondary sources from which to write an article and this is a clear WP:NORG fail. I think it needs scrutiny from more editors familiar with WP:NORG. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 10:31, 17 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Thanks for taking a closer look! I compared the recent New Telegraph article and Heap News article because I wondered if they were based on the same press release, but I'm guessing they're just based on the same event, since they vary in the details presented, order of information, and quotes. The earlier Guardian Nigeria article seems to be similarly based on an event. Looking at WP:ORGIND, these articles have independence of the author, which is what I was thinking about, but they don't really have "original and independent opinion, analysis, investigation, and fact checking that are clearly attributable to a source unaffiliated to the subject". Tricky since I haven't seen much of that style of reporting in the Guardian Nigeria, New Telegraph, or most of the similar newspapers listed at WP:NAIJARS. Dreamyshade (talk) 22:16, 17 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: It just does not meet WP:NORG. Allowing more time should take place in Draft space, so I would probably say, draftify it and let it come through AfC review, although I support the merge as well. This seems like a classic case of WP:ILIKEIT.

For the interesting source assessment table above, the first source is "a joint statement made by ISHRAI and another organization", obvious failure of WP:ORGTRIV, classic example of routine news coverage. The second one has absolutely no depth mentioning the subject and fails WP:ORGDEPTH. For the third one, an event-driven report, "mainly reports what the organization said", which is an obvious failure of WP:CORPTRIV. The fourth one is same as the third. Nowhere near notability... — Raihanur (talk) 14:54, 21 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I'm trying to read WP:CORPTRIV closely to understand this better, and I'm a bit confused - the list says "Examples of trivial coverage that do not count toward meeting the significant coverage requirement: [...] presentations, speeches, lectures, etc. given by organization's personnel", which seems to indicate that the presentations/speeches/lectures themselves are trivial coverage, not necessarily defining press coverage of presentations/speeches/lectures as trivial?

Not trying to argue for notability at this point though, since the best sources I've found are all borderline at best. Draftification probably wouldn't help much - I'd be surprised if anyone could find substantial sources I haven't found yet, so the org would need to attract substantial international press coverage, which seems unlikely in the near term. Best alternative to deletion would be a redirect to LGBTQ rights in Nigeria as the closest related article, but there are no incoming links to this article from other articles. Dreamyshade (talk) 01:42, 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!} 06:47, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Douglas Kendyson

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

Nothing notable about this person if not being the founder of yet a non notable company—Selar. It fails WP:NBIO and WP:BUSINESSPERSON. The sources are just blogs and personal essays published in magazines that doesn't meet WP:RS. WP:BEFORE showed nothing salvageable for WP:ATD. SafariScribe^{Edits! Talk!} 15:27, 15 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: People, LGBTQ+ studies, Businesspeople, and Nigeria. SafariScribe^{Edits! Talk!} 15:27, 15 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
These are just assertions. I need other reviewers to take a look at these sources. lol. Only one source is a personal essay and it’s just to support the individual’s sexuality. To say Selar, the biggest creator app in Africa is not notable is funny. lol. Obinna Tony (talk) 15:46, 15 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Not able? Popularity doesn't equal automatic notability. These are just assertions may be unassuming of not WP:AGF. Also, aren't you the article creator? ★ Campssitie (msg) (in solidarity, #943) 🧋🏖 17:51, 15 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I know popularity doesn’t mean notable. I am referring to them calling my sourced content random blogs as assertions. Those websites are credible sources not blogs. Even Wikipedia allows for blogs (not saying they are) when they are reliable. The only blog there is PiggyVest, a notable fintech blog. Obinna Tony (talk) 18:00, 15 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
This is a company he claims isn’t notable on google news. lol. https://www.google.com/search?sca_esv=6eb3871cd6a786af&rlz=1CDGOYI_enNG1042NG1042&hl=en-US&sxsrf=ANbL-n6dqU9VxNoBkB66Qfc8WQuMAUxBYA:1781546590457&q=selAr&tbm=nws&source=lnms&fbs=ADc_l-aN0CWEZBOHjofHoaMMDiKpaEWjvZ2Py1XXV8d8KvlI3ppPEReeCOS7s1VbbZz2TLutTM8bcskdZ5Z5EWAFJPjTelH6N3r7hJR53LpY69nh-STKMH81H7lHw74UT3nPqmHCo1KR4XMVtAXVidiInpWM6syD-a8N0jDYObEl2phyC5mcLfbWFytiSuxsBwGiBJsmSpbLETBJSoVdFv7B5rbUst61jQ&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjn37Kd6omVAxVyTEEAHR7-FX4Q0pQJegQIExAB&biw=414&bih=720&dpr=2 Obinna Tony (talk) 18:04, 15 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Please don't link Google Search results. I don't think there's any guarantee that we see what you saw, and in any case having a lot of search hits does not contribute to notability.

Could you please list three sources which have reliable, independent, substantial coverage of this company? That means they can't be advertorials, which is what I'm seeing in the search you posted. It would be really helpful to see what are, in your view, the best three. (Just three, please. It's fine to have far more sources in the article, but we need to know the best ones for notability.) M kuhner (talk) 20:44, 15 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
1) https://techlabari.com/how-creator-focused-platform-selar-is-bridging-the-digital-divide-in-africas-creator-economy/

2) https://businessday.ng/features/article/inside-selars-rise-the-platform-fuelling-africas-creator-economy/

3) https://techpoint.africa/insight/nigerias-creator-economy-may-finally-be-coming-of-age/

4) https://www.readcommunique.com/p/selar-africa-creator-economy-success-story (I was conflicted with the last one because they host on substack, but it’s a credible Nigerian newsletter). Obinna Tony (talk) 21:05, 15 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Seems to be mostly blogs and self-published sources supporting the claim for notability in the current state. I have to agree, with the nomination that he appears to fail BIO. The C of E God Save the King! (talk) 19:06, 15 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
There is only one self-published source, so saying “sources” makes me wonder if you actually went through the references or… lol.

And every website is a blog. What is in fact not acceptable are personal and self-published blogs. Obinna Tony (talk) 23:18, 15 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
- Please read WP:ASPERSIONS. The C of E God Save the King! (talk) 10:39, 16 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  Zero aspersions. Obinna Tony (talk) 16:44, 16 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete. Specifically support draftification. Because this is a WP:BLP article, draftification would make sense to me to give time for improving sources without leaving the article in the mainspace as it is currently. Pikkupapupata ^💌 🌷 01:57, 16 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Drafify: There seems to be more reliable sources added in this discussion, and because this is a WP:BLP article, It should have some time to improving sources.

★ Campssitie (msg) (in solidarity, #943) 🧋🏖 04:43, 16 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. The article itself should be worked on more and improved before moved back into the mainspace. I'm not a big fan of the draft process, but in this case, as you, and Pikkupapupata, have stated, it would help this article. Hence, I say Draftify. In solidarity - Historyday01 (talk) 11:32, 16 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Historyday01, you are agreeing on what exactly? Draftifying what you cannot prove to meet notability? Or even be sure that there are sources out there to save it or improve it? SafariScribe^{Edits! Talk!} 15:38, 16 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

My comment is clear: I am saying that the page should be draftified. Your tone in your response is hostile and I do not appreciate it. Deletion is not, and never will be, a "solution" to article cleanup, as you seem to be doing with unnecessary nominations like this which are wasting everyone's time. Please respect fellow contributors on here. Thanks. In solidarity - Historyday01 (talk) 15:46, 16 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, but I agree, including the recent comments I saw from this WikiProject.

I'm still going wear my good faith hat, but please, Safari, your tone is too open to misinterpretation. It is causing unintentional hostility. I'd recommend for you to use tone indicators and use less-subjective language, whilst not leaning too far into aspersions and personal attacks. You should be finding alternatives to deletion and save articles, and never AfD articles that only needs more sources. See WP:AFDISNOTCLEANUP. ^{/nm (Not mad.)}

I won't be responding to this comment or this AfD anymore. I don't want to get hot-headed or cause meaningless debates. Great cheers. ★ Campssitie (msg) (in solidarity, #943) 🧋🏖 05:28, 17 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Stop presuming, no reliable source was shown in this discussion. If you insist, logically show them. SafariScribe^{Edits! Talk!} 15:36, 16 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

You tagged the company non notable and I defended it. Someone asked I provide them and I did, yet you ignored them. Obinna Tony (talk) 16:45, 16 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

So, tagging the company (barely notable), yet I provided sources, begs the question if your nominations are actually good faith and you are doing any thorough review (maybe stick to topics you are familiar with). Obinna Tony (talk) 16:48, 16 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Here's a few sources I found:

The Star
Visionary Leadership Conference [bio] (possibly)
Punch
Disrupt Africa (possibly)
Pulse
Condia

Just to say, you could, and should, have done this kind of research before this nomination. In solidarity - Historyday01 (talk) 17:22, 16 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Lets run a source review then. SafariScribe^{Edits! Talk!} 18:18, 16 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you.

But he claims he is neutral while nominating it with others and having another Nigerian a few minutes supporting the delete. (I’m to believe it’s not targeted). Obinna Tony (talk) 18:19, 16 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Obinna Tony (talk) 18:21, 16 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Multiple sources have been shared demonstrating SIGCOV. At least one of the sources, BusinessDay (Nigeria), is listed at Wikipedia:WikiProject Nigeria/Nigerian sources as generally reliable. I don't know what level of consensus the Nigerian RS page has, but the nominator suggested in another AFD that this page should be consulted. Several of the other sources appear reasonable. —Myceteae‍🌈 (talk) 19:39, 16 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Keep for same reason as Myceteae Urchincrawler (talk) 17:01, 17 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - plenty of sources provided in here and they seem to be independent, reliable sources with significant coverage. Jishara (talk) 17:53, 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!} 06:47, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Let us take a look at the sources in the articles first before this ones here.

Footnote 1: this is a blog, and of course fails WP:RS. It is a routine interview that has no in-depth analysis except fanciful things about the person being interviewed.

Ft 2: This is the article owner's website, hence it is a primary source, but still fails to verify or go in-depth how he is "a Nigerian writer, software engineer, and entrepreneur".

Ft 3: It is his company's website and fails to explain, as the article said, what is Selar about. This is purely an WP:original research.

Ft 4: Fails WP:RS. It is a puff written by the page owner in his medium website, an unreliable website. (See WP:MEDIUM).

Ft 5: this is an interview] (WP:INTERVIEW) and fails WP:RS. Again, the source/website is a blog or perhaps a one man editor platform) (See WP:BLOG).

Ft 6: Tech Cabal is reliable to info about technology. In this context, it is an interview. It fails WP:RS.

Ft 7: This is an interview which is not reliable since the person interviewed talks about himself and those things are unverifiable. Nigerian CEO Magazine is generally unreliable since it lacks byline.

Ft 8, 9, and 10 are all pufferies from unreliable sources: www.thecreativebrief.africa, CIO Africa, and Business Elites Africa (see WP:NGRS).

Let us see the sources listed in this discussion:

Ft. 1 is a list of new articles about Selar and not about the founder. Hence this fails into WP:INHERIT. It was listed by User:Obinna Tony.

This same user, in listing his WP:THREE, he listed 4 and here are the analysis. Ft. 1 i.e. Tech Labari is a pure blog and its lack of in-depth research on articles is relevant to being a one man managed platform. Again, it is not independent of Douglas since rather than the founder, it was all about the company (see WP:INDEPENDENT).

Ft 2: BusinessDay is a reliable source, however this particular article is obviously a paid stuff, writing about the history of Selar. It, too, doesn't make Selar notable since it is a simple paid puffery. User:Myceteae, I wonder what you will say here because from your !vote above, it seems you never read the content of that article; you probably presumed that because it is a reliable source work, it must have been through, independent and verifiable or that you are a person that cites a website without checking its content for the sake of the website being reliable. Or don't you know that a website can be reliable and still write rubbish once in a time it even frequently?

Ft 3: Techpoint Africa is a reliable source per WP:NGRS but the content of the article is never about Douglas but about the company called Selar which he founded. That doesn't automatically make him notable (See WP:INHERIT).

Ft 4: this is a Substack writer's work and it is highly promotional and unreliable since it often contains, like this one, personal essays.

Let us also see the five sources listed by User:Historyday01:

Ft 1: The Star is a reliable source, however this particular article is a commentary, which means an original research, perhaps an opinion of the author, in this case, by Martin Mwita.

Ft 2: A database collection of the conference's speaker's information. This is clearly an unverifiable primary source and fails WP:RS.

Ft 3: The Punch is notable per WP:NGRS, however this is an interview, a promotional puff, as well as a failed verification. How? The travel guide adviser Waka Waka Doctor is different from Douglas, the founder of Selar. It is obviously now clear that this user who cited this either didn't read it or perhaps understands not what a reliable and verifiable information is.

Ft 4: this piece from disrupt article is a pure blog post. Disrupt Africa is a one man run portal for startups. It lacks credibility and may have been copy and paste work because one person, logically, cannot handle reliable information of vast research without helpers like reporters. Again, the website itself is a blog platform.

Ft 5: Pulse NG is reliable, however they made it clear that this is a sponsored post using the tag #FeaturebySelar. Also, the paid stuff is showcased at the end of the piece, written as "You can go to selar.co and sign up for free and start selling your digital products and services. It takes less than 5 minutes to sign up on Selar." Is this not obvious?

Ft 6: Condia is an unreliable source. Again, should we consider the piece, then it fails WP:RS because it is not of Douglas but a passing mention of him.

I have exhaustively reviewed, like I did before this nomination, all sources and now the ones presented here. I see an illogic move here. The editors seem to lack some knowledge on WP:RS criteria. Maybe the article itself is explainable. They often think that a reliable source cannot publish nonsense or even brown envelope journalism. It is common here in Nigeria but that is anyway doesn't mean that when we see good pieces, we won't know. It is typical to any Nigerian editor who's actually editing to help bridge the gap we are having with African contents. In this case, I do not think, like any rational being will do, that saving an article that is not notable just for a particular reason is any worthwhile because it is of no use and wastes the community's time like this. I support WP:ATD but not for things I know that are evasively non notable. Cheers!SafariScribe^{Edits! Talk!} 07:51, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Draftify or else just delete. Agreeing with the source assessment above. It is not impossible that more and better sources will be found, such that this could be reliably sourced, but it is not right now, and neither do we have evidence that this meets WP:ANYBIO. I'd suggest draftify as an ATD for 2 reasons. Firstly, because, in an under represented locale, where good sources are harder to find, it is quite possible this should be someone treated as notable, and good sources may emerge, and secondly, because the editor who wrote this is clearly in good faith, but not fully aware of the sourcing requirements on Wikipedia, and I would encourage them to keep at it, and seek out those better sources. Even if they eventually come to their own conclusion that this subject is not notable, they will gain invaluable experience in the search. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 09:31, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
That is surely correct. I fear that when draftified, who knows the author might move it to namespace again, and then we'll start another AFD. In your presentable terms, I support to draftify. SafariScribe^{Edits! Talk!} 11:32, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I will refrain from responding to SafariScribe's thinly veiled insult but these should be discounted by the closer.

Ft 5: this is an interview] (WP:INTERVIEW) and fails WP:RS. Again, the source/website is a blog or perhaps a one man editor platform) (See WP:BLOG). African Folder may have been founded by an individual but per the About Us page you linked, they are part of a larger multimedia conglomerate. Their editorial standards and policies appear in line with other generally reliable sources. This is not a personal blog nor are there major red flags that suggest they are not reliable.

Ft 1: The Star is a reliable source, however this particular article is a commentary, which means an original research, perhaps an opinion of the author, in this case, by Martin Mwita. Commentary or analysis can contribute to notability and may be a reliable source with attribution.

Some of the other sources about Kendyson specifically are weak. I would still lean keep as there is evidence of likely notability here. As alternatives, I would support draftification or development of a Selar (company) article where some content from this article could be merged. As SafariScribe notes, several reliable sources provide SIGCOV of the company. —Myceteae‍🌈 (talk) 14:38, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Analysis

Source 1: Piggyvest is a blog, but a blog is not unreliable because it's a blog, according to Wikipedia. It's a Piggyvest blog, a reliable fintech that has a page redirected to the founder. PiggyVest

Source 2: Primary sources are allowed on Wikipedia, but should be used sparingly when secondary sources are available. It was used to support his job.

Source 3: It was used to usher people who might read the article and want to understand what Selar is about.

Source 4: It's a medium piece only used to support his sexuality.

Source 5: It's an interview and a look at the politics and movie sections alone; there are five different bylines.

Source 6: This is a feature interview that incorporates both personal analysis and the interviewee's opinion, not a plain interview.

Source 7: This is, in fact, an interview, but their about page clearly indicates it's a reliable source with physical offices: https://nigerianceomagazine.com/contact-us/

Source 8: This is a Creative Brief substack published by Tima Agency, as stated on their substack: https://tima.agency/

Source 9: Unreliable source? CIOAfrica The Team: https://cioafrica.co/about-us/

Source 10: The article has a byline from Wale Ameen, who has a portfolio on Muckrack (https://muckrack.com/wale-ameen/portfolio) and journalist.net (https://journalist.net/wale.ameen), and has been published in various reputable outlets.

SOURCE DISCUSSIONS

SOURCE 1: Back to the sources I listed on that chat, because they accused Selar of not being notable, and when I said it's notable for being popular, someone said that being popular doesn't mean notable, so I shared these. So, I didn't share these to support Douglas Kendyson but rather Selar. Not sure why they are trying to flip it.

Techlabari might be a one-man-run website, as with most poorly funded Nigerian websites, but it doesn't necessarily post misinformation. There has to be proof to make a case for the argument.

Source 2: user:Myceteae, this could be a paid article (like a lot of articles on reputable sources), but "them" accusing something of being a paid article without evidence doesn't make it a paid article. What do you think?

Source 3: This source was shared because this user, SafariScribe, accused Selar of not being notable, and someone told me to prove it's notable, not to support Douglas. I don't know why they are trying to flip it now.

Source 4: Comminique is a reliable subtack website. The owner's portfolio: https://www.davidadeleke.com/writing . They have been published on Al Jazeera and were a former editor at the Rest of the World.

Obinna Tony (talk) 10:05, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

There is no evidence that the BusinessDay article is a paid contribution but it is somewhat promotional in tone. As for the Substack, sometimes self-published sources can be cited in articles when the author is a recognized subject matter expert. The use case is quite limited and these generally cannot contribute to reliability. —Myceteae‍🌈 (talk) 14:40, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Yeah! Promotional voice is something unique with profiles and feature pieces.

btw, see this: Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard#h-Substack-20260616182500 Obinna Tony (talk) 15:38, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for sharing. I only skimmed the RSN thread but I agree with what I read there about the approach to Substack. I believe this is largely covered in WP:BLOG, WP:ABOUTSELF, and WP:EXPERTSPS. Much of our determination of reliability comes down to editorial standards, processes, and track record. A blog or newsletter almost always fails on this assessment, though there are exceptions. —Myceteae‍🌈 (talk) 16:52, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Obinna Tony, incase you skipped reading the full discussion, per WP:SPS, Never use a self-published source as a third-party source about living people, even if the author is an expert, well-known professional researcher, or writer. I hope this helps? SafariScribe^{Edits! Talk!} 17:36, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Salish Matter

(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. ConeKota (talk) 23:54, 15 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Businesspeople, Women, Internet, and New York. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:28, 16 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 the sourcing issues already noted, I don't see WP:GNG or WP:ANYBIO being met here. Coverage is limited and mostly connected to Jordan Matter. A standalone article isn't justified, but a redirect makes sense given the association. Waypoint47 (talk) 03:31, 18 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]

Keep per WP:ANYBIO: "The person has received a well-known and significant award or honor, or has been nominated for such an award several times". The subject has received twice a well-known and significant award, the Nickelodeon Kids' Choice Award for Favorite Female Creator (in 2025: https://parade.com/celebrities/salish-matter ; https://variety.com/2026/tv/news/salish-matter-jordan-netflix-1236650905/) and in 2024 the NKCA for Favorite Creator Family (co-won with her father; https://asianews.network/filipino-boy-band-sb19-wins-favourite-asian-act-award-at-nickelodeon-kids-choice-awards-2024/). A redirect to her father's page is probably manageable for now but is it necessary when the guideline indicates a standalone article could be kept? and would not that end up in cluttering the page about him (with her individual award and filmo....)? Deletion, on the other hand, is clearly not necessary.--~2026-35976-24 (talk) 23:26, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

2014 British cabinet reshuffle

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

Seeing as 2026 British cabinet reshuffle is proposed for deletion currently at Articles for Deletion (AfD), I have decided to nominate other articles of that series so that debate can be put to rest in a very definitive manner. The significance of this topic is not obvious to someone who did not follow British politics closely in 2014 and is a routine event. Qwerty123M (talk) 05:16, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: People, Politicians, Conservatism, Politics, and United Kingdom. Qwerty123M (talk) 05:16, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Notified: User:Dz5t 8O12, User:Simon373737, Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Politics of the United Kingdom, User:Moondragon21, User:AadamentAardvark, User:OGBC1992, User:RandomEditsForWhenIRemember and User:Ivanhardybirt. Qwerty123M (talk) 05:39, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the list of Events-related AfD discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 09:07, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - this has been up for years has proper sources and has a bunch of other stuff no reason to delete it Ivanhardybirt (talk) 09:23, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Thanks for flagging this issue. The 2014 case was definitely a reshuffle, so keep.

I think the best way to judge a reshuffle vs ministerial changes between reshuffles is to check the individual Ministry pages. In this case Cameron–Clegg coalition.

This shows there were 3 Cabinets in this period (2010-2012, 2012-2014, and 2014-2016) so the reshuffles were 2012 and 2014.

Other ministerial changes in between reshuffles (e.g. resignation of Ben Wallace) were not reshuffles, just filling vacancies.

A reshuffle will be announced by the Prime Minister’s office and involves ministers walking up Downing Street in front of the cameras (including those remaining in current posts). Also, media sources will call it a reshuffle.

The Cabinet reshuffle article is also useful. I spotted a couple of errors so corrected this. A new prime minister appointing their first cabinet is not considered a reshuffle.

The Starmer ministry article shows two cabinets (2024-2025 and 2025-present). Hence, 2026 ministerial changes were not a reshuffle.

Hope this helps. Simon373737 (talk) 10:55, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I should have said 2014-2015 Cabinet above. Changes after general election are not reshuffles either. Simon373737 (talk) 11:01, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The difference between this and Starmer is that Cameron's move were deliberate sacking, demotion, and pushing out of certain cabinet members. Starmer's moves were in response to resignations that he did not ask for. Also, the reception of Andy Burnham in Parliament and his easy victory in the Makerfield by-election show his power in the ability to pressure Starmer to resign and cabinet members to leave. Hence Starmer's moves are not a reshuffle in the traditional sense. I could see an argument for merging with the Cameron-Clegg coalition article but I'm not sure that's necessary here. AadamentAardvark (talk) 18:29, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

2026 Italy–US diplomatic crisis

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

I propose merging to Italy–United States relations because there is no reason that this needs to be a separate article. The target article is only about 2,500 words. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 05:02, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians, Italy, and United States of America. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 05:02, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Merge, but only a brief sentence. This article was likely LLM generated and contains large swathes of unsourced content. Katzrockso (talk) 05:37, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Bilateral relations and Politics. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 07:31, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the list of Suspected AI-generated articles-related AfD discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 07:31, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, sort of. I don't see any solid evidence of LLM usage, and the incident has been covered in multiple news. It's also likely it will have a lasting impact in the history of US-Italy relations. Now, this is of course a biased assessment since we're in the midst of it; later we could well assess its relevance as secondary. But to merge/delete it now out of haste, only to then recreate it from scratch, seems to me a waste of time. Given that there are no serious grounds for deletion I'd wait and see, no prejudice for a renom later. --cyclopia ^speak! 10:17, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I think that all the LLM generated content has been removed. Martin Mystère (talk) 10:38, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Merge as it is too early per WP:NOTNEWS. Geschichte (talk) 12:49, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep: Unfortunately, this AI gets in everywhere, Google Translate is not reliable. Google Translate alters the translation in its own way. One part that was built with AI that was removed was the 'begged' issue.
However, you removed parts that in my opinion were important and clarified the Italian position. Putting a merge makes no sense, the link is already there and this article is for more information. If we start thinning or removing some parts then the article no longer makes sense. Iran's ability to strike from Cyprus to Diego Garcia should have been left in because it was essential to the explanation. Furthermore, it does not seem that the crisis will end anytime soon. Rapidfirreee (talk) 14:26, 23 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 soft merge to Nawwaf Moussawi. This uncontroversial nomination is treated as a soft merge. Editors are free to reverse the merge by splitting the articles back out. Closing this early as an WP:INVOLVED participant per WP:IAR. There's a snowball's chance in hell anyone would oppose this. (non-admin closure) FaviFake (talk) 16:00, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Nawaf al-Moussawi

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

I propose merging to Nawwaf Moussawi because they appear to be the same person, just different translations of the name. SGwikipedian123 (talk) 04:56, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: People and Politicians. SGwikipedian123 (talk) 04:56, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the list of Lebanon-related AfD discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 07:32, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per nominator's rationale. FaviFake (talk) 15:57, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Why on earth was this nominated? It's 2 sentences. FaviFake (talk) 15:58, 23 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.

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 speedy keep. WP:CSK #1 (non-admin closure) Yes I am a nerd -XCBRO172 (How could you tell?) 04:01, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Vanessa Bishop

AfDs for this article:

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

~~Fails WP:NBLP. It appears that no significant or reliable secondary sources exist on this writer. Yes I am a nerd -XCBRO172 (How could you tell?) 03:57, 23 June 2026 (UTC)~~ Withdrawn: I am a fucking moron who needs to check for previous deletion discussions. Yes I am a nerd -XCBRO172 (How could you tell?) 03:59, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Women and Science fiction and fantasy. Yes I am a nerd -XCBRO172 (How could you tell?) 03:57, 23 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.

Coalition for Positive Sexuality

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

An unsourced article. I searched and could find nothing that meets WIkipedia guidelines. Themeparks (talk) 03:08, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related AfD discussions. Themeparks (talk) 03:08, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: this is actually one of the older articles on Wikipedia, dating back to 2002, but that probably just means it is a remnant of our "wild west" days (it's not a reason to keep). There have been very few non-maintenance edits since 2008 (and no edits from all from 2012 to 2020), most significantly a quickly-reverted COI expansion (but that's not a reason to delete either). No specific opinion, but one must think that a stub this old would have been expanded past a permastub by now if there was any sourced/P&G-based reason to do so… WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:29, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Education and Websites. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:29, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Coney I-Lander

AfDs for this article:

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

No source are listed on the article, failing GNG. OWaunTon (talk) 00:33, 16 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Food and drink and Oklahoma. OWaunTon (talk) 00:33, 16 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: The article previously had sources but all four were removed in this March 2025 edit by an IP claiming to be affiliated with the subject. मल्ल (talk) 01:03, 16 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: long before the COI IP edit, this survived the first nomination from 2008 under the lower standards of the era (but also after a sourcing beef-up that was clearly challenged by the IP). No opinion. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:26, 16 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related AfD discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:27, 16 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)} 02:38, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

History of Superman

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

No sources, poorly written, etc. Really this article is a case where it'd be more difficult to find a guideline this actually follows. Also topic matter overlaps entirely with Publication history of Superman ModlordD (talk) 01:42, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements and Comics and animation. ModlordD (talk) 01:42, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Publication history of Superman per nom. No sources and entirely redundant to the other article. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 03:29, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Publication history of Superman: this had been a stable redirect to that title for 13 years (before then, that article was actually at this title) before being newly overwritten with this unsourced iteration, which would certainly explain the obvious topic overlap. This probably could have simply been reverted without an AfD, but we're here. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:33, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the list of History-related AfD discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:34, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Restore Redirect to Publication history of Superman, which is what this was until earlier today. As Wcquidditch said, this could have easily been an uncontroversial reversion without the need of an AFD. Rorshacma (talk) 04:08, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

It was not poorly written! I bet you can't do any better, freak! ~2026-36531-73 (talk) 22:54, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Qutb Shah

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

This article was BLARed in 2025 by User:Sutyarashi with the rationale "Repeated vandalism and little to nothing is known about him from RS sources. Converting into redirect." But he seems to be potentially notable to me, and there are sources in the article. Bringing to AfD for a full discussion. Natg 19 (talk) 01:31, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Religion, Islam, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iran, and Iraq. Natg 19 (talk) 01:31, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I ran searches in both English and Urdu (Urdu searches often bring results in Persian/Arabic as well), and unfortunately, there's nothing to substantiate notability for this person. Just because notable people descend through this person, doesn't establish individual notability. Thus fails WP:GNG, and there's not subjective notability either. _signed,Aafi (guesthouse) 07:50, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
The only thing we have is that Khokhars attribute their origin to Qutb Shah. See this and this. Martial races of undivided India also gives some account of this person, but overall I think there's scarcity of information in general. I still lean to delete but would be happy to change my opinion if resources follow up. _signed,Aafi (guesthouse) 08:00, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. There's five pages here, that compiles and translates a variety of references[29] Jahaza (talk) 15:19, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Nordine Raymond

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

Does not meet WP:POLITICIAN or WP:GNG. He was a candidate in a recent election, however, that does not equate to notability at this time. Unable to find additional sources other than passing mentions related to the election. FiddleheadLady (talk) 01:05, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: People, Politicians, and Politics. FiddleheadLady (talk) 01:05, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: A regional election candidate doesn't pass notability. Some mentions in the press of harassment issues [30], that's not really notable either. I don't see enough to keep the article. Oaktree b (talk) 01:16, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the list of France-related AfD discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 07:32, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Keep : a candidate for European election, legislative elections (almost elected MP), regional election and municipal election in the sixth most populated city in France (almost elected city councillor). Extensive regional press coverage and national press coverage (Libération, L'Humanité, France Info...). I thought it was enough to prove notability even though I'm okay with deletion. Sincerely. --Uchroniste 40 (talk) 08:43, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per "almost elected city councillor". Come back if elected. Geschichte (talk) 12:46, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Nginx (disambiguation)

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

This does not actually disambiguate more than one page. All of the information on this dab page is available at nginx. ~ A412 ^talk! 01:03, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Software and Disambiguations. ~ A412 ^talk! 01:03, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Delete under G14, as a disambiguation page that list only one extant Wikipedia page. ScalarFactor (talk) 04:05, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Omniarchive

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

Propose a merge to Minecraft as an WP:ATD for a non-notable topic. There is a lack of significant coverage about the site itself. As a WP:MERGEREASON, the overlap is fairly direct: the sourcing mentions in passing that Omniarchive is the repository of various builds of Minecraft that have been found, and it seems simple to briefly mention this in the main article without the need for a separate article (given version histories tend to fall afoul of typical subject matter in an article). VRXCES (talk) 00:27, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Video games and Websites. Shellwood (talk) 00:29, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Minecraft. There both appears to be very little to say about this site ("they preserve old versions of Minecraft") and very little the sources have to say about it. Not independently notable from the game and its versions. ~ A412 ^talk! 00:43, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Files

File:New London School (New London, Texas).gif

File:New London School (New London, Texas).gif (delete | talk | history | links | logs)

This was the New London School in New London, Texas, which exploded on March 18, 1937 as a result of a natural gas leak. Maybe this image or a replacement image is in the public domain because they were published without a copyright notice. Candidyeoman55 (talk) 20:00, 15 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: we need more than speculation to determine that the image or a replacement is in the public domain. ―Howard • 🌽³³ 00:10, 18 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per Based. ―Howard • 🌽³³ 22:30, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Delete and replace wtih File:New London School before explosion.webp. No evidence of contemporary publication for this photo as far as I can see. Based5290 :3 (talk) 00:06, 21 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 04:16, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@CaptainEek: I've struck out my "delete" statement now. ―Howard • 🌽³³ 22:31, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

File:Oldham Athletic FC.svg

Delete. Invalid purpose claim for non-free use. The File:Oldham Athletic AFC (emblem).svg already performs the same purpose ("help the reader identify the organization, assure the readers that they have reached the right article containing critical commentary about the organization", etc) and seems to be used in the Oldham Athletic A.F.C. article for solely decorative reasons. C 679 12:40, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

File:Uzbekistan Football Association.svg

File:Uzbekistan Football Association.svg (delete | talk | history | links | logs)

Verify Uzbekistan's threshold of originality. This is below American threshold of originality. Candidyeoman55 (talk) 19:23, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

File:Félicien Kabuga.jpg

There might be a free image of him? In this webpage of the US State Dept., two photos of Kabuga are provided. The text when hovering over the image reads: "Date: 12/12/2016 Description: Felicien Kabuga - State Dept Image". The photos were obviously not taken in 2016, but if this is a State Dept image then it would be a US govt work and thus a public domain alternative. According to his article, the US govt (including the FBI) actually did spend resources trying to track him down and arrest him. However, I worry that these wanted images also could be outsourced third-party works tagged on with a default State Dept. credit. I would like to know other people's thoughts on whether the current non-free image on the article can be allowed or not in light of this. ―Howard • 🌽³³ 22:27, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

File:Chicago Bulls logo.svg

This was originally nominated under the theory that this logo was public domain but was closed as no consensus (IMO the evidence provided by 999real was more than enough but whatever). There is ample evidence that this logo is public domain. A look through various ebay listings shows that ticket stubs for Bulls games did not have copyright notices:

1970: [31][32]
1971: [33]
1976: [34]
1977: [35][36][37][38]

Therefore, this logo is public domain. However, as pointed out at Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2026 June 7#File:National Basketball Association logo.svg, the vectorization of the logo likely has a separate copyright. Therefore, this file should be deleted, and a raster version (or a free vectorization, if it can be found or made) should be uploaded on Commons in its place. Based5290 :3 (talk) 23:10, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Redirects

M60 motorway

M60 motorway → M60 motorway (Great Britain) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Ambiguous. This redirect is the byproduct of a pagemove in 2020. Retarget to dabpage M60. 162 etc. (talk) 23:24, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

McCornick

McCornick → McCormick (surname) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

No people with the surname "McCornick" are currently listed on McCormick, but it may be a plausible spelling/typo or variant. There is also a non-surname DABpage at McCormick.

There are two currently existing McCornicks on titles on Wikipedia - McCornick Building and McCornick, Utah - should this be a DAB for them? Are the spellings close enough for this to redirect to one of the McCormick dab pages, and which one? ScalarFactor (talk) 22:48, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

As the page creator, I realize it should probably be redirected to McCornick, Utah. On matters of the surname, McCornick, the town, was actually named after a man with the surname, which proves its existence somewhat. It is also testified here: https://en.geneanet.org/surnames/MCCORNICK whose source is the Dictionary of American Family Names by Patrick Hanks. Wheatley2 (speak to me) (watch me) 22:51, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Redirecting with a hatnote for McCornick Building (and a {{distinguish}} for McCormick, potentially) seems sensible to me. ScalarFactor (talk) 23:21, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Tatty

Tatty → Potato (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Original rationale of creator was {{R from incorrect spelling}} of Tattie, which is tagged as {{R from alt lang}} for Scots Language. Most search results I see online for "Tatty" are the dictionary definition (Collins), and this could just as easily be a nickname for a Tattoo. Could delete, DABify, or turn into a soft redirect to Wiktionary. ScalarFactor (talk) 16:57, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I think disambiguating or redirecting to wiktionary works

though I should note that Tatty is the name of a 2004 book by Christine Dwyer Hickey. It is missing a page currently, but it is most likely notable as it was the One Dublin One Book for 2020 Froglord (Finnfrog99) (talk) 17:02, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Pretty easily passes WP:NBOOK, yeah:

Humphreys, Simon (2005-01-09). "Gripped by a life of Filth". Mail on Sunday. p. 72. ProQuest 328857862.
Hand, Derek (2004-03-13). "The telltale signs of a family life in tatters". The Irish Times. p. 60. ProQuest 309651894.
McCarthy, Gerry (2004-02-29). "Through a glass starkly". The Sunday Times. p. 24. Gale A114027037. Full access available to users of The Wikipedia Library.
Dukes, Gerry (2004-03-06). "Growing up in a dysfunctional family". Irish Independent. p. 36 – via Newspapers.com.

ScalarFactor (talk) 17:21, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

I'll add it to my to-do list Froglord (Finnfrog99) (talk) 17:35, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Tatty Froglord (Finnfrog99) (talk) 17:48, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

wait, wiktionary says tattie is an alternate spelling of tatty (scots for potato) wikt:tattie wikt:tatty Froglord (Finnfrog99) (talk) 17:54, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The evident ambiguity/confusion makes the case for the DABpage stronger, in my opinion. ScalarFactor (talk) 19:41, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I heavily expanded the draft diambig Draft:Tatty, if anyone wants to expand further feel free Froglord (Finnfrog99) (talk) 21:07, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

"Tatty" is a song in Smart (Sleeper album). Possible retarget? Mathguy2718 (talk) 20:55, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Disambiguate as an ambiguous term without a clear primary topic. Draft disambiguation page started below the redirect. Searching returned a bunch of WP:PTMs that include the term, so I may have missed some items when drafting the page. - Eureka Lott 21:00, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
oh, I was already drafting a disambig at Draft:Tatty Froglord (Finnfrog99) (talk) 21:09, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Tattykeeran should be merged into this disambig page Froglord (Finnfrog99) (talk) 21:11, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I'll copy everything from Draft:Tatty into the redirect's WIP disambig Froglord (Finnfrog99) (talk) 21:44, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Java (cachaça)

Java (cachaça) → Cachaça (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

not a plausible synonym, as cachaça is not actually coffee (despite what some people would like you to think). not a well-known manufacturer or plausible as a disambiguator either. it is a manufacturer, it's just so unnotable in that regard that i could only find one result confirming that it's real consarn _{(talk beige) (count ribs)} 12:33, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Prince of Wales's 2nd Brigade, Eastern Division, Royal Artillery

Prince of Wales's 2nd Brigade, Eastern Division, Royal Artillery → Norfolk Militia#Prince of Wales Own Norfolk Artillery Militia (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Prince of Wales's Own 2nd Brigade, Eastern Division, Royal Artillery → Norfolk Artillery Militia#Prince of Wales's Own (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

These redirects seem to refer to the same unit. If so, they should probably target the same place. I assume "Norfolk Artillery Militia" would be the more specific target (assuming it is part of the Norfolk Militia?) but the nomenclature of British artillery units baffles me, so checking with others. Mdewman6 (talk) 07:23, 16 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The second version (Prince of Wales's Own 2nd Brigade, Eastern Division, Royal Artillery) is the correct one: it was the official title of the unit 1882-1887 (see Norman Litchfield, The Militia Artillery 1852–1909). The first version omitting 'Own' is incorrect and could be removed. The first version redirects to the specific section in the article, which seems to be the normal procedure with military units that had several different titles during their history.Rickfive (talk) 10:28, 16 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting for consideration of whether to delete the first redirect per Rickfive's comment. The phrase does not appear to be in use outside of Wikipedia and forks thereof.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (they|xe|🤷) 11:31, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

As Soon as Possible Rocky

As Soon as Possible Rocky → ASAP Rocky (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Delete. Page gets extremely few views and is an incorrect extension of an acronym. ~2026-35381-94 (talk) 09:28, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Tag as {{r from incorrect name}} and uh... keep as a way you could misremember his name and try to search for him, I suppose. Dingolover6969 (talk) 09:40, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and tag per Dingolover. Plausible misremembering of the name. Thryduulf (talk) 11:16, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

What do you mean by incorrect extension? Doesn't "ASAP" mean "as soon as possible"? KT System (talk) 15:01, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

In his name it means Acronym Symbolizing Any Purpose, according to his page. Dingolover6969 (talk) 19:17, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Delete My searches don't indicate this is actually a common misnomer. I don't see the need for a redirect when people aren't actually using this term. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 16:56, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
We can keep rare misnomers as well. It's fine 🙂. Also: on my theory people wouldn't be committing this misnomer to writing, just mistakenly searching for it on the way to learning his real name. Dingolover6969 (talk) 19:45, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Sea bottle

Sea bottle → Clavelina australis (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Common name not used in reliable sources, created by a now blocked account. Ethmostigmus 🌿 (talk | contribs) 09:27, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Sea tree

Sea tree → Dendronephthya klunzingeri (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Common name not used in reliable sources, created by a now blocked account. Ethmostigmus 🌿 (talk | contribs) 09:02, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Sea sun

Sea sun → Pachycerianthus fimbriatus (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Common name not used in reliable sources, created by a now blocked account. Ethmostigmus 🌿 (talk | contribs) 08:43, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Sea button

Sea button → Pseudoboletia maculata (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Common name not used in reliable sources, created by a now blocked account. Oxford English Dictionary (paywalled) defines "sea-button" as an obsolete term meaning "A sea urchin", based on Walter Charleton's 1668 book Onomasticon Zoicon which uses it to refer to Echinus minimus, now recognised as a synonym of Parechinus angulosus, though I cannot find any usage of this common name for this taxon in any modern texts. This common name does not appear to be widely used for any particular species, so I would suggest a WP:RETURNTORED. Ethmostigmus 🌿 (talk | contribs) 06:35, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Since these options both refer to something within the same taxonomic class, I could see redirecting to Sea urchin. However, Porpita porpita (part of a separate class of sea creatures) is also known as the "blue button" and if that is too close, I would support returning to red. TNstingray (talk) 17:19, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Homestuck characters mentioned in passing without dedicated headers

Peregrine Mendicant → List of Homestuck characters#Peregrine Mendicant (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Jack Noir → List of Homestuck characters#Jack Noir (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Courtyard Droll → List of Homestuck characters#Courtyard Droll (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Aranea Serket → List of Homestuck characters#Aranea Serket (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Kurloz Makara → List of Homestuck characters#Kurloz Makara (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Meenah Peixes → List of Homestuck characters#Meenah Peixes (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Rufioh Nitram → List of Homestuck characters#Rufioh Nitram (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Rufioh → List of Homestuck characters#Rufioh Nitram (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Kurloz → List of Homestuck characters#Kurloz Makara (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Bec Noir → List of Homestuck characters#Jack Noir (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Meenah → List of Homestuck characters#Meenah Peixes (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Various characters mentioned in passing without dedicated headers; those headers were probably removed during a cleanup in the past. Rufioh receives nontrivial commentary under Tavros Nitram's section, some characters possibly should have had sections, rest are probably too minor. –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 06:22, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

A case could be made to keep the antagonist Jack Noir, maybe the Peregrine Medicant, and late protagonists Aranea Serket and Meenah Peixes, if someone is willing to write those sections, but the rest can be deleted. — Nameless^(?) 06:46, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I mean, if you want to find out who, e.g., Peregrine Mendicant is, these redirects do in fact tell you. What if we {{vanchor}} or {{anchor}} these names? (To remove the need for headers.) That's my suggestion. Dingolover6969 (talk) 08:56, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Unmentioned Homestuck characters

Wayward Vagabond → List of Homestuck characters#Wayward Vagabond (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Aimless Renegade → List of Homestuck characters#Aimless Renegade (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Windswept Questant → List of Homestuck characters#Windswept Questant (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Writ Keeper → List of Homestuck characters#Writ Keeper (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Draconian Dignitary → List of Homestuck characters#Draconian Dignitary (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Hegemonic Brute → List of Homestuck characters#Hegemonic Brute (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Spades Slick → List of Homestuck characters#Jack Noir (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Diamonds Droog → List of Homestuck characters#Draconian Dignitary (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Hearts Boxcars → List of Homestuck characters#Hegemonic Brute (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Clubs Deuce → List of Homestuck characters#Courtyard Droll (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Damara Megido → List of Homestuck characters#Damara Megido (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Mituna Captor → List of Homestuck characters#Mituna Captor (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Kankri Vantas → List of Homestuck characters#Kankri Vantas (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Meulin Leijon → List of Homestuck characters#Meulin Leijon (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Porrim Maryam → List of Homestuck characters#Porrim Maryam (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Latula Pyrope → List of Homestuck characters#Latula Pyrope (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Cronus Ampora → List of Homestuck characters#Cronus Ampora (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Horuss Zahhak → List of Homestuck characters#Horuss Zahhak (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Porrim → List of Homestuck characters#Porrim Maryam (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Latula → List of Homestuck characters#Latula Pyrope (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Meulin → List of Homestuck characters#Meulin Leijon (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Mituna → List of Homestuck characters#Mituna Captor (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Horuss → List of Homestuck characters#Horuss Zahhak (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Various characters who are not mentioned at all in the target article, and most of which point to nonexistent section which were probably removed at some point in the article's history. –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 06:17, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

A case could be made to keep the carapacians (e.g. Wayward Vagabond, Aimless Renegade) and the Midnight Crew (e.g. Spades Slick, Diamond Droog, Hearts Boxcars, Clubs Deuce), if someone is willing to write those sections, but the rest can be deleted. — Nameless^(?) 06:46, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Some of these seem to be alternate names for characters, so perhaps they could be easily converted into the category of characters who are mentioned without sections if we put a little parenthetical AKA next to their name with their other name. Dingolover6969 (talk) 09:36, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, mostly so that I have the chance to delete myself. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 14:08, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Zoosmell Pooplord

Zoosmell Pooplord → List of Homestuck characters#John Egbert (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Alias that isn't mentioned at target. –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 06:15, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Sea sunflower

Sea sunflower → Stichodactyla helianthus (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Common name not used in reliable sources, created by a now blocked account. Ethmostigmus 🌿 (talk | contribs) 05:57, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Sons of the Prophets

Sons of the Prophets → Nevi'im (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Not in target page Dingolover6969 (talk) 05:34, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Judging by googling, this term is probably meant to denote a different topic than the biblical books of the prophets. But I'm no expert. Dingolover6969 (talk) 05:42, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

It's probably like this because this biblical encyclopedia Wikipedia takes some inspiration from has an entry on "sons of the prophets" that just says "see prophets". I didn't look into it further. Dingolover6969 (talk) 10:33, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Sea mulberry

Sea mulberry → Alcyonium acaule (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Common name not used in reliable sources for the target species. Oxford English Dictionary (paywalled) defines "sea-mulberry" as an obsolete term meaning "A variety of coral", based on a quote from a 1753 issue of Philosophical Transactions: "The soft lithophyton, usually call'd the sea-mulberry". I was able to find the common name "sea mulberry" used in academic sources (via Google Scholar) for several taxa: Cudrania tricuspidata, Conocarpus erectus, Ceratophyllum species, Sonneratia caseolaris or other Sonneratia species. It does not seem to be an especially widely used common name for any of these taxa, but at any rate, the current target is not appropriate. Ethmostigmus 🌿 (talk | contribs) 05:13, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Sea beard

Sea beard → Amathia verticillata (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Common name not used in reliable sources, created by a now blocked account. Ethmostigmus 🌿 (talk | contribs) 03:56, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

isnt sea beard another name for pirates? Froglord (Finnfrog99) (talk) 21:48, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Shy Guy colors

White Shy Guy → Mario (franchise)#Major characters (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Light Blue Shy Guy → Mario (franchise)#Major characters (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Black Shy Guy → Mario (franchise)#Major characters (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Green Shy Guy → Mario (franchise)#Major characters (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Yellow Shy Guy → Mario (franchise)#Major characters (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Gray Shy Guy → Mario (franchise)#Major characters (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Blue Shy Guy → Mario (franchise)#Major characters (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Pink Shy Guy → Mario (franchise)#Major characters (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Red Shy Guy → Mario (franchise)#Major characters (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Currently targeted to Mario (franchise) § Major characters, where shy guy is not mentioned. Could either retarget to List of Mario franchise enemies § Shy Guy or delete, as no mentions of any alternate colors are made there, which may be misleading. ScalarFactor (talk) 03:32, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Both fine suggestions. I lean retarget, since I think the colors of Shy Guy are immaterial, so the main info about Shy Guy suffices. Dingolover6969 (talk) 05:45, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The entry says "A timid masked creature wearing a robe, which comes in many different colors and variations", which sort of covers all of the colors, if you think about it. Dingolover6969 (talk) 05:47, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to List of Mario franchise enemies#Shy Guy, clearly a minor character with info in the correct place, so targeting to the anchor makes sense. Whether they are all variation of the same minor character or the different members of a family of minor characters is immaterial here I think. Noting that the anchor is "Shy Guy" capitalized, so the link in the nomination does not work even though the anchor is there already. Choucas 🐦‍⬛ 14:39, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

That's what happens when I write without a preview button in MassXFD... fixed. ScalarFactor (talk) 16:36, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

delete all as too obscure of a distinction for wikipedia. without info on what exactly color variations mean in any given context (i.e. the gray shy guy is instead anti guy in paper mario, and a boss in the same game is a white shy guy with a fancy hat) or for shy guys in general, a reader will get nothing

i keep forgetting that that boss's name is general guy. book of mario brainrot requires that i refer to him as "common man" consarn _{(talk beige) (count ribs)} 17:40, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

M6 rocket

M6 rocket → Bazooka#Rocket-borne shaped charge weapons development (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

there are two main issues here

the rocket is only mentioned in passing, in a context that suggests that it's mentioned elsewhere as an unreliable piece of shit handed off to soldiers more likely to spawncamp themselves than to know what a weapon is
if it's to be defined somewhere, it wouldn't be here, so this isn't a particularly good target
it's a vague as fr*ck name, being used to refer to seemingly multiple types of rockets that go boom (which don't seem to be exclusive to use in bazookas), rockets that take people to the one place not corrupted by capitalism... SPACE! and i guess a lego piece
despite having found a good few results for the specific m6 rocket that was jammed into bazookas, i could only find passing mentions. the only ones that had anything more than raw info were usually in the context of "what the fuck were they doing", which is pretty funny

yes, that's two, don't question it~ consarn _{(talk beige) (count ribs)} 11:43, 25 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see a problem. The section covers M6 rockets. I'm not an expert but from this section and a brief Google these "m6 rockets" seem to be bazooka rockets. If there are other M6 rockets that need to be covered maybe it could get a dab... Dingolover6969 (talk) 12:51, 25 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

this part isn't important to note due to the aforementioned context of the passing mention issues, but #world war ii mentions them in (relatively) more detail in the same article, so it would already be a better target

more importantly, mentions of m6 rockets (specifically m6, not the improved versions) in wikipedia seem to be primarily about the lvm3-m6 (which was not itself the rocket), with some more passing ones about m6 rocket bags (which are not themselves rockets), such as in isro and m18 recoilless rifle respectively

mentions outside of wikipedia were similarly torn between different sources related to lvm3-m6 and assorted rocket-related stuff used in wars that had the code "m6" for whatever reason, veering more towards the former, suggesting that the rocket used there might be the primary topic for the term? at this point, though, i'm actually still a little unwilling to suggest retargeting there, as the rocket itself isn't mentioned in too much detail aside from "it's an lvm3"

on an even less important note, there were also a few results related to golf clubs, like whatever this is, but a lego piece was funnier to note consarn _{(talk beige) (count ribs)} 13:46, 25 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

there's also m6, which is already a dab that could potentially cover this redirect, but without a detailed enough mention somewhere, it's better off left off consarn _{(talk beige) (count ribs)} 13:50, 25 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Consarn: please can you tone down the attempted humour in your RfD noms, I have no idea what soldiers more likely to spawncamp themselves than to know what a weapon is is intended to mean and I can't work out whether it is actually relevant to this redirect or not. Your third bullet would be just as informative and much easier to understand with about half the words. Your goal should be to convey your point as clearly as possible not to be entertaining. Thryduulf (talk) 12:59, 25 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
wikt:spawn camp is relevant here. the gist of it is that the soldiers burdened with those rockets generally didn't have the training to properly handle said rockets. it's probably good to make it a little clearer that those mentions of the rockets themselves were also in passing, usually more focused in the aforementioned context of the soldiers' poor training and the conflicts in which they were thrown, that there were no more than two of said passing mentions per accessible source, and that this also applies to the sources that only mentioned them as raw info (that is, just listing them among the supplies they had) consarn _{(talk beige) (count ribs)} 13:14, 25 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 19:46, 7 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 02:27, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Keep as is, I do not see an issue here, and I disagree that it is mentioned in passing: The M6 seems to have been a step in the development of bazooka rockets, which is appropriately explained in this section. I do not find the nomination statement very clear in general, so I also do not see a preferable alternative to what I think is currently a satisfactory target. Choucas 🐦‍⬛ 14:58, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Sea mushroom

Sea mushroom → Actinia striata (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

This is a common name that is not used to refer to the target species in reliable sources. It was included in the target article (having been added by a a temp account without an apparent source) until I removed it earlier today. A google search for "sea mushroom" pulls results for several unrelated taxa that might be colloquially referred to by that term including aquatic/marine fungi (which typically do not form mushroom-like fruiting bodies) and marine animals such as corals and jellies with mushroom-like appearances. Ethmostigmus 🌿 (talk | contribs) 08:05, 7 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: I only realised after nominating this redirect that the user who created it (and is now blocked) also created several other similarly made-up common name redirects for marine life. Most of these fake common names are present within the target article... but were recently added by rather suspicious single-edit temp accounts without any sources and probably ought to be removed. I would appreciate any help verifying these and cleaning them up where necessary. Ethmostigmus 🌿 (talk | contribs) 08:42, 7 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Possible vandalism per the nom's assessment. Does not appear to be a common name for this or any other organism although the name may occasionally used for any of several organisms. —Myceteae‍🌈 (talk) 01:51, 10 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Probably retarget to the target of Sea Anemone Mushroom which was created in 2011. Jay 💬 03:56, 17 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 02:26, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Goes to Washington

Goes to Washington → Dr. Buzzard's Original Savannah Band Goes to Washington (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

There's no good reason to have a redirect for one of the 20 partial title matches. Partial title matches are discouraged in general. Danbloch (talk) 15:59, 28 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Delete The AllMusic shortening is clearly just some publishing drone saving keystrokes. The other sources use the full album title including the "presents" part. No evidence that the phrase is used anywhere else for anything, including the film that established it. Paradoctor (talk) 16:09, 28 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, this is the exact title if the name of the band is excluded. It's plausible to presume the "Dr. Buzzard's Original Savannah Band" part is referring to the artist instead of the name of the album. -- Tavix ^(talk) 16:11, 28 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
See my comment above. Paradoctor (talk) 16:14, 28 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I have. -- Tavix ^(talk) 16:24, 28 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Then what you said makes no sense. Nobody uses it, therefore it is not "plausible". If it was plausible, it would be just as plausible for any of the other targets. Paradoctor (talk) 16:41, 28 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Mr. Oscar Brown Jr. Goes to Washington It is worth noting that AllMusic did not shorten that one. Paradoctor (talk) 16:47, 28 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
That you were unable to find use does not preclude potential use from a mis-parsing of the title which would not show up in your searches. We're discussing two different things. It makes sense that Mr. Oscar Brown Jr. Goes to Washington isn't shortened, the album art doesn't separate the 'Goes to Washington' part and he's not known as Mr. Oscar Brown Jr. Most of the rest of the PTM's seem to be TV episodes or films that would not have the issue I have identified. -- Tavix ^(talk) 17:14, 28 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, I'm tired. Let me just clearly state my opposition, and then make tea. Feel free to have the last word. Paradoctor (talk) 18:11, 28 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Nah, I don't need the last word. You can have it. Tea does sound nice... -- Tavix ^(talk) 18:22, 28 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
delete. tavix's rationale seems to be the equivalent of having "forever" as a redirect to duke nukem forever; it's only really plausible as a shortening in the specific context of the band. if this was a plausible title for anything, it seems the primary topic would be mr. smith goes to washington, with the act of going to washington as a distant second consarn _{(talk beige) (count ribs)} 18:23, 28 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Duke Nukem isn't the name of a band, but while we're on the subject...what's your opinion of the Land of the Babes redirect? -- Tavix ^(talk) 20:51, 28 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

dude dudem not being a band doesn't matter too much here, seeing as it would then still have the same issue of things other than duki nuki foreba also having "forever" as a subtitle or part of the title. same case here, and judging by views and results, this seems to be on the less likely half for this shortening, being somewhere above the girls: sappho goes to hollywood, but below mooch goes to hollywood, and definitely above the aforementioned movie by a shot long enough that it would've caught up to some certain people's egos count dante

if you want to be strict about this being a subtitle (or something close enough), then this would contend with spot goes to hollywood, mother goose goes hollywood, and garfield goes hollywood, and seemingly only be more likely than that last one. i'm not really aware of any rules that would give bands special privilege in this area, but if there are none, the remaining two alone would make this vague

as for that redirect, i can't say i think too much of it myself, but it would almost definitely be kept here. it's the only thing this name is associated with on wikipedia, and results that didn't involve randy pitchford's punching bag were unnotable books (all of which were ptms), a passing mention of one of said books in an article about the author's coworker's crimes against fashion, and a fanfic posted to... reddit. why consarn _{(talk beige) (count ribs)} 22:59, 28 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per Tavix. This is an entirely plausible search term for the target article because it is not common for the name of a band to be included as part of the title of one of their albums. When it is so included we have redirects from the non-band name portion of the title (unfortunately all the examples I can think of off the top of my head are ambiguous). Thryduulf (talk) 21:33, 28 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Not voting yet, but use of "Goes to Washington" by itself looks extremely sparse. There were only 10 results for googling "the Goes to Washington". (This is contrast to over a hundred thousand results for "the Land of the Babes", the example Tavix gave above.) Out of the 10 results was "The Devil Goes to Washington" with "Devil" being removed for whatever reason on Singaporean Amazon, a comment referring to Mr. Smith Goes to Washington as "the Goes to Washington film", and a discussion referring to Dr. Buzzard's Original Savannah Band Goes to Washington as "the 'Goes to Washington' album". There is also a forum comment referring to "Goes to Washington" as a memorable part of Mr. Lisa Goes to Washington. The rest contained bad grammar, potentially intending "that goes to Washington". That said, a blog, a personal website, and a forum are not reliable sources. Mathguy2718 (talk) 22:36, 28 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. The keep votes above are wholly unconvincing with some really tortured reasoning. This is not the name of the album, obscure as it is, and it's not particularly plausible that anyone would search for it like this, AND that even if such a search failed, that they wouldn't be able to pick out what they were looking for in search results, or simply amend the search. It would be bad enough on its own, but as already pointed out, there are a bunch of other works with this as a suffix, rendering this extremely ambiguous to boot. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 23:45, 28 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I can far easily imagine that someone inputs "Goes to Washington" into the Search while trying to remember the name of the Frank Capra film than that they're looking for this. Iveagh Gardens (talk) 05:41, 29 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Neither of the keep !votes have plausibly disputed the nominator's rationale that this is a partial title match by which the album is not commonly referred to as. And, as other users have noted, there are a significant number of PTMs for this phrase. Leaving this phrase open for readers to search seems best here. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 00:18, 30 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per all. There's nothing special with the target title; if it was Dr. Buzzard's Original Savannah Band's Goes to Washington or Dr. Buzzard's Original Savannah Band - Goes to Washington, the title argument would have made some sense. Jay 💬 08:33, 16 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
J947's argument is new, and I would support it if a disambiguation is plausible, especially since the nomination did say no PTMs. Jay 06:14, 21 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Disambiguate at this title. Mr. Smith Goes to Washington has inspired a lot of media that end with these three words, not just this album. It's not some arbitrary PTM; it's a long-running gimmick. See Mr. Smith Goes to Washington#In popular culture for some examples; unfortunately, it doesn't list all the title matches. I know search results do a good job of listing that. And I'm fully aware of WP:PTM. However, I think there's enough, potentially 40-odd entries, to justify something halfway between a dab page and a set index article. I imagine there's some sources commenting on this pattern, which would strengthen my recommendation, but they're difficult to find. J 947 ‡ ^edits 00:34, 21 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 02:02, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Quicken Loans

Quicken Loans → Rocket Mortgage (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

I am an employee of Quicken Loans and have a disclosed conflict of interest. I am nominating this existing redirect for discussion because the corporate and legal structure has changed significantly since the 2021 rebrand, when the redirect was initially introduced. Currently, "Quicken Loans" operates as a home loan marketplace licensed to LMB Mortgage Services (#167283), while "Rocket Mortgage" (the redirect target) is a direct lender (NMLS #3030) This can be verified on the NMLS website - https://www.nmlsconsumeraccess.org/EntityDetails.aspx/COMPANY/167283 These are now distinct entities with separate business models and regulatory licenses. Maintaining the redirect misleads readers by implying they are the same company. I request that the redirect be removed so that the Quicken Loans page may be brought up to speed with it's current status. Argruber (talk) 19:41, 15 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Keep for now. We don't seem to have an article about the current incarnation of "Quicken Loans", so the current target is the best we have. If you think that the new company licensed to use the name meets the corporate notability guidelines, you could draft a new article and propose it at AfC, as suggested at WP:COIEDIT. Only then could we consider retargeting the redirect. Rosbif73 (talk) 08:22, 22 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
@Rosbif73 - Thank you for the feedback. I was actually hoping that instead of the other company getting its own article, that the Quicken Loans page just become a stub article. The article could still contain a redirect to Rocket Mortgage. Proposed Language for the stub article would be:

Quicken Loans is an online financial marketplace operated by LMB Mortgage Services (NMLS #167283), a subsidiary of Rocket Companies. Founded in 1999 as a direct lender, the brand transitioned its direct lending operations to Rocket Mortgage in 2021. In 2023, the brand was separated into its current structure as a home loan marketplace, no longer acting as a direct lender.

Sources for this are the NMLS website listed above. If needed, I can provide other sources as well. Your assistance is greatly appreciated Argruber (talk) 20:45, 22 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 01:49, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

RfD isn't the right venue for this discussion: any editor can boldly transform the Quicken Loans redirect into an article – but given your COI I'd suggest making an {{edit COI}} request at the redirect's talk page. Rosbif73 (talk) 06:42, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
That is true. Dingolover6969 (talk) 08:44, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

It seems like both editors above have the same idea, which also seems like the right one to me: make a new article for Quicken Loans itself, if it is WP:NOTABLE. The standard way to do this seems to be for User:Argruber to go through the WP:AfC process. Or maybe Wikipedia:PROPSPLIT. Note that you will need to understand WP:RS, slippery as it is. The NMLS website seems to be just a database listing which isn't enough to support an article, so I'm hopeful about your other sources.

I've now read Talk:Rocket_Mortgage. Argruber, what if Quicken Loans targetted Rocket Mortgage#Quicken Loans? Adding info to just that section might be less of a quixotic task.

Honestly reading the current Rocket Mortgage page is pretty confusing, because various things rebrand to be other things so many times. Dingolover6969 (talk) 08:35, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
@Dingolover6969 thank you so much for that feedback. Yes, its is very confusing! I don't think that Quicken Loans, as it is now, would be considered WP:NOTABLE. I like the recommendation to go to the Rocket Mortgage #Quicken Loans section. As you will have seen in the Talk:Rocket_Mortgage section, I wasn't very successful at getting anything through that way. It may be helpful to have another editor help with the proposals.

Primarily, another bullet should be added to the Quicken Loans History section:

• In 2023, Rocket Mortgage licensed the brand name Quicken Loans to LMB Mortgage Services (NMLS #167283)

The other suggestion is to change the opening paragraph. Rather than saying "formerly Quicken Loans" a new sentence could be added at the end of the paragraph. The justification would be that in it's current state, it can read that Quicken Loans is an American mortgage lender, which is no longer true. If we change it to the end, to say "Previously, Rocket Mortgage operated under the brand name Quicken Loans, LLC. it removes confusion for users and LLMs.

Any guidance/assistance with these requests is really appreciated. Argruber (talk) 17:33, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Adjust target to eponymous section. As long as there is no separate article there is no reason to redirect to any other page; I would have boldly targeted to the section if there was not an active discussion open, because I do not think this is controversial. Choucas 🐦‍⬛ 15:07, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Chinese

Template:Chinese → Template:Infobox Chinese (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

There is a move discussion taking place to rename {{lang-zh}} to {{Chinese}}, but this redirect currently points to {{infobox Chinese}} and has nearly 4k transclusions. Procedurally I believe an RFD is required to nuke the redirect before a discussion about renaming the template can be considered, though I have no opinions on the request itself.

I suppose the question to be asked: is this redirect a reasonable alternate name for the infobox? Primefac (talk) 18:41, 22 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

If I'm not mistaken, I think WP:RM is sufficient to move over a redirect. Personally, due to the many existing uses of this template redirect, I'm inclined to keep. I've also created a template disambiguation page at Template:China (disambiguation), which can be hatnoted. Duckmather (talk) 19:22, 22 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget to move {{lang-zh}} overtop. It would be reasonable were it not for (as that discussion mentions) templates like {{korean}} and {{nihongo}}. — Preceding unsigned comment added by COArSe D1RTxxx (talk • contribs) 17:11, 23 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Not sure if this is the best venue for this discussion, per above. I am in favor of lang-zh being renamed to "Chinese" though. The existing uses aren't a major worry for me; just need a bot to change them. grapesurgeon (talk) 04:22, 24 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Disambiguate per Duckmather, this should be disambiguated. It would not make sense to be Template:China, since this is for the language. -- ~2026-25149-07 (talk) 03:56, 25 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Grapesurgeon's thoughts mirror my own. I oppose disambiguation and support replacing all uses of this redirect with Infobox Chinese so that the proposed move can take place. I don't see why "Template:China (disambiguation)" should list templates for the Chinese language. They aren't even partial title matches, they're...four-letter matches? Toadspike [Talk] 15:08, 26 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget per COArSe D1RTxxx; should be replaced with {{Infobox Chinese}} so {{lang-zh}} can be moved to {{Chinese}} to match the naming of other templates.Yeeno (talk) 04:47, 27 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. {{lang-zh}} follows the same naming convention as the other excluded templates in Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2024 September 27/lang-?? templates, and {{Infobox Chinese}} follows the naming convention of, e.g., {{Infobox Japanese}}. For consistency, I think {{Korean}} and {{Nihongo}} should be moved to {{lang-ko}} and {{lang-ja}}, respectively.

Snowman304|talk 01:08, 28 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Arguing for consistency with templates that no longer exist is rather novel...as is pointing out that Infobox Chinese follows a standardized format, while opposing the removal of a redirect inexplicably outside of that standardized format. Toadspike [Talk] 17:32, 2 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Toadspike, it's not the templates that no longer exist, it's the templates that weren't deleted. Primefac (talk) 10:03, 6 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

That makes more sense, thanks. I still don't find it a compelling argument, though. Those templates are very different from this one – Chinese is the only one to have a bespoke module, and none of the others come close to covering a dozen or two dialects and romanization systems, plus a bunch of other languages. Toadspike [Talk] 18:16, 8 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

It would certainly make a bunch of page histories/versions look rather weird even after replacing the transclusions, though I suppose that is also relatively normal with various template changes... 1234qwer 1234qwer 4 01:32, 6 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, voorts (talk/contributions) 23:56, 15 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

As a minor note/update, the RM in question closed as "no consensus to move". I don't know if that will affect anyone's opinions of the matter. Primefac (talk) 08:54, 17 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per above. ProgramT (talk) 01:38, 21 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 01:48, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguate or delete (and salt). This is a horrible name for a template as it doesn't indicate at all what it does. Is it an infobox? a lang template? A navbox? All are viable options. Convert usages to the actual template and then either disambiguate or delete this template. Gonnym (talk) 05:29, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Jaimee Grubbs

Jaimee Grubbs → Tiger Woods#TWInfidelity (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Not mention at the current target and unlikely to be mentioned there again, reasonably. Mentioned in passing at Tool Academy season 1, but I am unsure if redirection there or deletion is better. Casablanca 🪨^(T) 16:30, 4 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note the page is currently untagged due to being fully protected, but I did leave an edit request on the talk page. Casablanca 🪨^(T) 16:31, 4 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I requested unprotection at WP:RFPP...either way. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 19:50, 4 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note I've tagged the redirect, but I've not looked whether the protection should remain. Thryduulf (talk) 20:23, 4 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: The protection was downgraded to extended confirmed protection. Retarget or delete?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Chess enjoyer (talk) 06:18, 15 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 01:46, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I am a bit confused because this looks like a redirect to an anchor (I assume), but I cannot find it anywhere, so I assume it was removed alongside the name itself. The mention on Tool Academy season 1 is completely trivial so there is no reason to redirect there. Choucas 🐦‍⬛ 15:16, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The anchor was removed in this 2021 revision that was otherwise entirely minor copyediting. It pointed to the Tiger Woods#Infidelity scandal and fallout section (which still exists). "Jaimee Grubbs" was removed in this 2012 edit with the relevant part of the edit summary being remove some uncited and excessive content. Thryduulf (talk) 18:21, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Appropriation Act (Northern Ireland) 1921

Appropriation Act (Northern Ireland) 1921 → Appropriation Act (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Appropriation Act (Northern Ireland) 1922 → Appropriation Act (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Appropriation (No. 2) Act (Northern Ireland) 1922 → Appropriation Act (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Appropriation Act (Northern Ireland) 1923 → Appropriation Act (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Appropriation (No. 2) Act (Northern Ireland) 1923 → Appropriation Act (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Appropriation Act (Northern Ireland) 1924 → Appropriation Act (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Appropriation (No. 2) Act (Northern Ireland) 1924 → Appropriation Act (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Appropriation Act (Northern Ireland) 1925 → Appropriation Act (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Appropriation (No. 2) Act (Northern Ireland) 1925 → Appropriation Act (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Appropriation (No. 2) Act (Northern Ireland) 1926 → Appropriation Act (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Appropriation Act (Northern Ireland) 1927 → Appropriation Act (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Appropriation Act (Northern Ireland) 1928 → Appropriation Act (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Appropriation (No. 2) Act (Northern Ireland) 1928 → Appropriation Act (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Appropriation Act (Northern Ireland) 1929 → Appropriation Act (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Appropriation Act (Northern Ireland) 1951 → Appropriation Act (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Appropriation (Number 2) Act (Northern Ireland) 1951 → Appropriation Act (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Appropriation (Number 2) Act (Northern Ireland) 1952 → Appropriation Act (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Appropriation Act (Northern Ireland) 1953 → Appropriation Act (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Appropriation (Number 2) Act (Northern Ireland) 1953 → Appropriation Act (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Appropriation Act (Northern Ireland) 1954 → Appropriation Act (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Appropriation (Number 2) Act (Northern Ireland) 1954 → Appropriation Act (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Delete The closest to this on Appropriation Act#Northern Ireland is a footnote to the 1923 Act. Why these approbation acts in particular? It's not as if individual budgets passed in the Northern Ireland are likely to get many incoming links. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Iveagh Gardens (talk • contribs) 20:44, 28 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Keep They are all specific names of appropriation acts, and the article is about appropriation acts in general. Mauls (talk) 08:04, 29 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

There were also appropriation acts in all years of the Northern Ireland parliament, from the 1920s to the 1970s. What's special about these that there should be a redirect? For that matter, the are been 106 Appropriation Acts on the Irish Statute Book. Why need is there for redirect targets for a routine piece of legislation. They add clutter to categories, where there's no realism to a possible expansion. Iveagh Gardens (talk) 20:05, 29 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Why would they need expansion? The entire article explains what an appropriation act is, and is therefore a valid place to direct someone who looks up one of these specific pieces of legislation. They are, effectively, synonyms or members of the class that the article deals with as a whole.

This is absolutely standard practice: redirecting lots of similar items to a joint article.

That there might be other possible examples which haven’t got redirects currently, doesn’t mean these aren’t valid.

Which of the reasons for deletion of a redirect do you believe is engaged here? Mauls (talk) 10:16, 30 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Chess enjoyer (talk) 05:59, 15 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 01:45, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I see no reason to delete but I do see reasons to keep as is. The fact that we do not have more of them for other years is immaterial to the fitness of the ones we have. Them adding clutter to categories or no realism to a possible expansion are not valid deletion rationales. Per Mauls they are all actual acts, even if possibly banal; and from what I can see they actually also do show some traffic. Choucas 🐦‍⬛ 15:23, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Templates and Modules

Template:Kazakhstan 2014 Women's Rugby World Cup Squad

Template:Kazakhstan 2014 Women's Rugby World Cup Squad (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Team navbox with only 1 blue player. Not enough to navigate to. Gonnym (talk) 19:00, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Barbarians August 2015 squad

Template:Barbarians August 2015 squad (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:Barbarians Autumn 2023 squad (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:Barbarians Autumn 2025 squad (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:Barbarians Autumn tour 2008 squad (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:Barbarians Autumn tour 2009 squad (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:Barbarians Autumn tour 2010 squad (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:Barbarians Autumn tour 2011 squad (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:Barbarians Autumn tour 2013 squad (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:Barbarians Autumn tour 2014 squad (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:Barbarians Autumn tour 2015 squad (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:Barbarians Autumn tour 2016 squad (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:Barbarians Autumn tour 2017 squad (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:Barbarians Autumn tour 2018 squad (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:Barbarians Autumn tour 2019 squad (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:Barbarians Autumn tour 2021 squad (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:Barbarians Autumn tour 2022 squad (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:Barbarians NSW tour squad, October 2017 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:Barbarians Summer 2023 squad (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:Barbarians Summer 2024 squad (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:Barbarians Summer 2025 squad (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:Barbarians Summer tour 2010 squad (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:Barbarians Summer tour 2011 squad (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:Barbarians Summer tour 2012 squad (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:Barbarians Summer tour 2015 squad (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:Barbarians Summer tour 2017 squad (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:Barbarians Summer tour 2018 squad (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:Barbarians Summer tour 2019 squad (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:Barbarians World XV 2023 squad (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

These navboxes are used incorrectly as tables in the middle of the article at Barbarian F.C.#Previous squads. These should be converted to regular wikitext, subst and the templates deleted. Gonnym (talk) 18:54, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Convert as suggested by nom. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 19:24, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
;; Whats the suggested plan of action for listing previous squads? Rugby.change (talk) 20:07, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
If you are asking about this proposal then I wrote above, convert the navigation template into a regular wikitext. That can be a table, a prose, or combination, then subst the template and finally delete it. If you are asking something else about the content, then probably ask at the talk page or maybe the relvent WikiProject talk page. Gonnym (talk) 23:17, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Shizuoka Blue Revs squad

Template:Shizuoka Blue Revs squad (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Following this TFD, requesting deletion as I forgot to include this template. Nomination and comments remain the same. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 18:09, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Template:The Amazing Digital Circus

Template:The Amazing Digital Circus (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Only 2 articles here are related specifically to The Amazing Digital Circus (those being the show's article itself, and it's series finale) while the rest just seem to be taken from the Glitch Productions navbox. With 2 in mind, I fear that is too little for it's own independent navbox, and this should probably be deleted since those two already fit the Glitch Productions navbox with no issues. ConeKota (talk) 00:52, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

This was because the articles were moved back into draft space. Monathephantom (talk) 01:57, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Could be recreated in the future if the drafts become articles. 🫀 Crash // Organhaver ( it / he | talk to me, maybe? ) 04:26, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Delete or Merge into {{Glitch Productions}}. Per WP:NAVBOX, navigation templates are intended to connect a robust network of existing, closely related mainspace articles. Currently, this template only links to the parent article and a single episode article ("Remember"). The remaining links are for voice actors, crew, and the production studio, all of which are already comprehensively covered by the parent {{Glitch Productions}} template. Creating a standalone navbox for only two distinct show-specific articles causes unnecessary fragmentation. If more individual episode or character drafts pass AfC in the future, a dedicated navbox can be reconsidered at that time. Per the guideline text on WP:NAVBOX, navigation footers don't render for the ~70% of readers on mobile devices, making micro-templates with minimal link density functionally useless for navigation. A standard category or inline "See also" link is much more appropriate here until a larger cluster of distinct mainspace articles is established. ChPo ^_^ ^(talk) 05:12, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Template:Glitch Productions – Agreed with ChPo and ConeKota, as this template should be deleted, however primarily merge into the Glitch Productions template, as The Amazing Digital Circus, is obviously already categorised, in the Glitch Productions template, however, merging The Amazing Digital Circus template, with the Glitch Productions template, should categorise Remember, into a seperate "Episodes" section, in the Glitch Productions template, alongside with adding actors/employees into the Glitch Productions template, which are mentioned in The Amazing Digital Circus template, however not the Glitch Productions template. MrDevolver (talk) 17:49, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

There's only one seperate episode article, and it is already mentioned in the template. The "actors/employees" are also already mentioned. I don't think merging is necessary. Maybe just redirect the template. 🫀 Crash // Organhaver ( it / he | talk to me, maybe? ) 18:33, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Froggy Radio stations

Template:Froggy Radio stations (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

The Froggy article was drafted and most of other radio networks have a page to keep the other template. OWaunTon (talk) 00:23, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Miscellany

User:Angry Red Hammer Guy/Userboxes/LarryDisagree

Userbox promotes/references op-eds on Wikipedia policies written by an editor now banned for off-wiki canvassing, making doxing threats, and general disruptive behavior, after discussion at ANI. Royz-vi Tsibele (talk) 19:07, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

User:Angry Red Hammer Guy/Userboxes/LarryAgree

Userbox promotes/references op-eds on Wikipedia policies written by an editor now banned for off-wiki canvassing, making doxing threats, and general disruptive behavior, after discussion at ANI. Royz-vi Tsibele (talk) 19:07, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion review

Michael Jackson sexual abuse allegations

ArbCom has found that most of the editors who voted to delete this article were involved in meatpuppetry and off-wiki canvassing across this and other Michael Jackson-related discussions, producing a skewed consensus. Another editor who voted to delete, 2BOARNOT2B, was not included in the ArbCom case but is now suspected of being a sockpuppet of Mr Boar. See Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/2BOARNOTOOB. Popcornfud (talk) 11:19, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Popcornfud: what is the remedy you are seeking? Owen× ☎ 11:22, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I think the article ought to be restored. Popcornfud (talk) 11:22, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Overturn to no consensus and, optionally, start a new AFD. This AFD was heavily influenced by canvassing/meatpuppetry as all but two of the redirect voters were included in the linked ArbCom case (of the two, one had four edits prior to that AFD and the other is currently being investigated for sockpuppetry, though that case is still open). With, at best, two good faith voters supporting redirect, there is not a quorum to do so and the article should be restored. The presence of keep votes makes NC the best option. No fault to the AFD closer as it was closed correctly based on information known at the time. Frank Anchor 12:45, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Comment What is the current problem that DRV needs to solve here? I'd be inclined to Vacate the AfD and allow anyone to un-redirect without this discussion being labeled as consensus, but at the same time I would be hesitant to spontaneously un-redirect it ourselves, as a lot may have happened since the article was first redirected. Also, I really don't like the naming of the two articles and am almost positive a better naming convention could be established with community discussion that we're not going to hold here at DRV. Jclemens (talk) 15:14, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I initially just un-redirected the article myself, then discovered the DRV process and thought that seemed like the more proper route, so self-reverted. Happy to do it myself if DRV is deemed unnecessary. Popcornfud (talk) 22:36, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

v t e Wikipedia community
For a listing of current collaborations, tasks, and news, see the Community portal. For a listing of ongoing discussions and current requests, see the Dashboard.
General community topics	Administration News The Signpost Goings-on In the media Meetups Mailing lists Wikipedians Statistics The Wikipedia Library Centralized discussion Village pump Idea lab Policy Proposals Technical Miscellaneous WMF Holidays Bots
Contents and grading	Requested articles Most-wanted articles Images needing articles Articles needing images Articles for creation WP:AFC/R WP:AFC/C Creating articles Help Vital articles Articles for improvement Peer review Good article nominations Featured article candidates Lists Pictures Topics Article translation Pages Main Page Errors
WikiProjects and collaborations	Directory Culture and the arts Geographical History and society Science, technology and engineering Wikipedia assistance and tasks Patrols Recent changes Counter-Vandalism Unit Accessibility Organizations category
Awards and feedback	Reward board Contests A nice cup of tea and a sit down Charitableness WikiLove Compliment before criticism Kindness Campaign Thanks!
Maintenance tasks	Task Center Open tasks Backlog Category Admin category Edit requests Category Database reports Category tracker Dusty articles Special pages New pages Recent changes Controversial issues
Administrators and noticeboards	Administrators' noticeboard Incidents Edit warring Vandalism Admin dashboard Admin requests Closure Page protection User permissions Sockpuppets Open proxies Revision deletion Oversight Request Usernames Changing Title blacklist OTRS Bureaucrats' Requests for adminship and bureaucratship Arbitration Committee Requests Enforcement
Content dispute resolution	Requests for comment Third opinion Dispute resolution noticeboard Biographies of living persons Conflict of interest External links Fringe theories Neutral point of view No original research Reliable sources
Other noticeboards and assistance	Regional notice boards Requests for help Category Asking questions Teahouse Help desk Reference desk Adopt-a-user Copyright assistance Copyright investigations Text problems Media questions Resource requests Mergers History mergers Moves Page importation Spam Blacklist Whitelist Bots Education General sanctions Editor sanctions Long-term abuse
Deletion discussions	Guide Admin Today Articles Templates Files Categories Redirects Miscellany Speedy Proposed BLP LLM Review Undeletion Arguments to avoid Arguments to make Article Rescue
Elections and voting	Requests for comment (meta) Wikimedia Foundation elections WP Democracy Milestones
Directories, indexes, and summaries	Departments Edit summary legend Editor's index Essays FAQs Glossary Abbreviations Help Manual of Style Simplified Rules Five pillars Policies Guidelines Shortcuts Templates Citation templates Tips Today Tools Wiki markup
Media Category Templates

Speedy deletion candidates

Articles

Files

Categories

NEW NOMINATIONS

Category:Legal software companies

Category:Codrington, Barbuda

Category:Men by social class

Critics of Israel by religion

Terrorist incidents by decade

Category:Port Adelaide Football Club players (all competitions)

Category:Friendslop video games

Category:Free-to-play video games that got offline versions

Category:Angry Birds spinoff games

Category:19th-century Unitarian Universalist church buildings

Category:Russian directors by federal subject

Category:Scholars of business at Durham University

Category:Fictional revenge seekers

Category:Educational theorists of Durham University

Category:Japanese Lutheran theologians

Category:Superheroes who are adopted

Category:Books by Levon Helm

Category:Converts to Roman Catholicism from deism

Category:New Zealand Thomists

Category:Sanamahist communities

Category:Aquatic superheroes

Category:Fictional underwater divers

Category:Fictional water sports people

Category:Fictional aquatic characters

Category:Wikipedia cheese-inspired shortcuts

Category:1359 establishments

Redirects

M60 motorway

McCornick

Tatty

Java (cachaça)

Prince of Wales's 2nd Brigade, Eastern Division, Royal Artillery

As Soon as Possible Rocky

Sea bottle

Sea tree

Sea sun

Sea button

Homestuck characters mentioned in passing without dedicated headers

Unmentioned Homestuck characters

Zoosmell Pooplord

Sea sunflower

Sons of the Prophets

Sea mulberry

Sea beard

Shy Guy colors

M6 rocket

Sea mushroom

Goes to Washington

Quicken Loans

Template:Chinese