Wikipedia:XfD today

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This page transcludes (or when this is not feasible, links to) all of the deletion debates opened today on the English-language Wikipedia, including articles, categories, templates, and others, as a convenience to XfD-watchers. Please note that because this material is transcluded, watchlisting this page will not provide you with watchlist updates about deletions; WP:DELT works best as a browser bookmark checked regularly.

Contents


Speedy deletion candidates

The category is at Category:Candidates for speedy deletion.

Articles

Guide to deletion
Centralized discussion
Proposals: policy other Discussions Ideas

For a listing of ongoing discussions, see the dashboard.

Purge server cache

The Chipmunks and The Chipettes: Born to Rock

The Chipmunks and The Chipettes: Born to Rock (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "The Chipmunks and The Chipettes: Born to Rock" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · HighBeam · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference)

No sources cited since April 2010 (7 years). DBZFan30 (talk) 03:03, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. DBZFan30 (talk) 03:05, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. DBZFan30 (talk) 03:05, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. DBZFan30 (talk) 03:05, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Deepak John J

Deepak John J (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Deepak John J" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · HighBeam · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference)

Non-notable businessperson that fails WP:GNG. A software he created got highlighted in the Hindu, so not A7, but there does not appear to be any substantial coverage of him independent of his companies. I'm doubtful that his companies or software are notable, but even if they were WP:NOTINHERITED would apply. TonyBallioni (talk) 03:01, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

The North Fork Championship

The North Fork Championship (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "The North Fork Championship" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · HighBeam · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference)

Non-notable. Most of the search results are self-published, local, or esoteric to kayakers. Esprit15d • talkcontribs 02:57, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Mercedes-Benz Hollywood

Mercedes-Benz Hollywood (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Mercedes-Benz Hollywood" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · HighBeam · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference)

Per WP:NCORP and WP:GNG. The article states the claim of significance as "its Hollywood location and for being a popular place for celebrities to buy vehicles." The article goes on to mention the dealership closed in '95 and the building now has new tenants. I would argue that this isn't a significant enough claim of notability for the dealership to receive it's own WP page, and therefore should be deleted. Comatmebro User talk:Comatmebro 02:37, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

WowBox

WowBox (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "WowBox" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · HighBeam · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference)

No claim to notability. A Japanese snack service of the same name has a higher number of search hits. Esprit15d • talkcontribs 02:27, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Samantha Gongol

Samantha Gongol (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Samantha Gongol" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · HighBeam · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference)

Poorly sourced and written, and not notable as a solo artist per WP:Notability (music)#Criteria for musicians and ensembles. { [ ( jjj 1238 ) ] } 02:15, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Ya no hay respeto

Ya no hay respeto (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Ya no hay respeto" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · HighBeam · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference)

A one-city radio program, not on the air (the station it aired on has moved to FM *and* changed hands since 2007). The bio of the host on his website says the show lasted just three months on this station. Raymie (tc) 07:32, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Radio-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 11:21, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Mexico-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 11:21, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 21:14, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

Living together before marriage

Living together before marriage (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Living together before marriage" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · HighBeam · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference)

It's an essay, Esprit15d • talkcontribs 02:00, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Zacari

Zacari (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Zacari" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · HighBeam · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference)

He may be famous one day, but his current claim to fame is his affiliation with Kendrick Lamar, and notability is not transferable. Gsearch revealed minor mentions in relation to the release of DAMN, and some hits at Discogs. Esprit15d • talkcontribs 01:55, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Nuclear Escalation

Nuclear Escalation (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Nuclear Escalation" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · HighBeam · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference)

It's an essay. Esprit15d • talkcontribs 01:51, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Matt Philie

Matt Philie (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Matt Philie" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · HighBeam · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference)

YouTuber with only 170,000 subscribers. May be notable one day, but not yet. Google search shows mostly primary sources and YouTube-centric sites. Esprit15d • talkcontribs 01:47, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Korea Kent Foreign School

Korea Kent Foreign School (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Korea Kent Foreign School" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · HighBeam · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference)

The subject fails WP:NCORP and WP:GNG. This article (and many like it) serve as promotional pieces for the schools as no independent critical coverage of the subject exists. Because WP:SCHOOLOUTCOMES can no longer be used as a rationale at AfD, this article has no quality to prevent deletion. Chris Troutman (talk) 16:41, 12 April 2017 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. Chris Troutman (talk) 16:42, 12 April 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of South Korea-related deletion discussions. Chris Troutman (talk) 16:42, 12 April 2017 (UTC)
  • Keep as a secondary school per longstanding precedent and consensus. The RfD has sadly been misunderstood. It wasn't about destroying the existing consensus, but merely about formalising it. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:12, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
  • Please reread the purpose of the RfD. It was intended to discuss whether we should formalise the consensus in writing. It was not intended to replace the consensus, since that has been arrived at over many years of AfDs. As I said, it's been misinterpreted (probably deliberately by a number of deletionists). And a number of secondary schools have been kept in AfDs since after the consensus has been cited. -- Necrothesp (talk) 15:10, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
  • You're confused, or you've lost your objectivity. If you can't make a policy-based argument then there's nothing to discuss. Chris Troutman (talk) 15:37, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
  • Neither of the above. -- Necrothesp (talk) 16:08, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
  • Merge: to Seoul's education section. Not notable on its own. SL93 (talk) 18:14, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, J947(c) 00:04, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 01:43, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Gyeonggi Suwon International School

Gyeonggi Suwon International School (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Gyeonggi Suwon International School" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · HighBeam · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference)

The subject fails WP:NCORP and WP:GNG. This article (and many like it) serve as promotional pieces for the schools as no independent critical coverage of the subject exists. Because WP:SCHOOLOUTCOMES can no longer be used as a rationale at AfD, this article has no quality to prevent deletion. Chris Troutman (talk) 16:42, 12 April 2017 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. Chris Troutman (talk) 16:42, 12 April 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of South Korea-related deletion discussions. Chris Troutman (talk) 16:42, 12 April 2017 (UTC)
  • Delete. Fails WP:GNG - just a non-notable school. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 05:53, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
  • Keep as a secondary school per longstanding precedent and consensus. The RfD has sadly been misunderstood. It wasn't about destroying the existing consensus, but merely about formalising it. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:12, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, J947(c) 00:04, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
@Doncram: So why make an argument (even if you believe in it) that the consensus has refused? Chris Troutman (talk) 21:21, 26 April 2017 (UTC)
  • One way to put it is that there was a bad decision reached, perhaps a wp:LOCALCONSENSUS, a temporary result that should be disregarded. A consensus to "Keep" at a number of AFDs since the RFC proves its supposed consensus is flawed. In general it is a stupid waste of time to have AFDs about secondary schools. It is American- and British-centric and evil in various other ways to delete the articles. You and I and most other longtime Wikipedia editors probably edited our own high school articles when we started. The articles should be kept. --doncram 21:28, 26 April 2017 (UTC)
  • So you know, being a ten-year editor does not give you the right to ignore consensus. That editors like you have been !voting against that decision does not make it flawed, only poorly-enforced. That you think deletion is "evil in various other ways" is illuminating. Chris Troutman (talk) 21:32, 26 April 2017 (UTC)
totally agree with Chris troutman. LibStar (talk) 00:55, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
You and I and most other longtime Wikipedia editors probably edited our own high school articles when we started ridiculous argument. LibStar (talk) 01:01, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 01:43, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
  • Delete given the recent RFC on WP:SCHOOLOUTCOMES, there is no longer inherent notability of secondary schools. as it stands it fails WP:GNG. if someone finds significant third party coverage in Korean I will happily reconsider. LibStar (talk) 01:46, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Jesse Litvak

Jesse Litvak (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Jesse Litvak" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · HighBeam · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference)

No claim to notability. Esprit15d • talkcontribs 01:32, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Hi, I thought this article was maybe borderline for notability but I created it anyway, because there is significant media coverage of the case and it led to a much wider investigation into fraud in bond-trading, which I also planned to write about. I don't really have a strong opinion about it necessarily, but obviously lean towards keeping it. Cypresscross (talk) 02:02, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 02:21, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 02:21, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
I've added a new sub-section connecting the case to broader implications for the government efforts to prosecute fraud in the bond market. I've also expanded the section on the details of the charges. Probably the key to the notability here is the fact that the Litvak case was the first and also most important case in a much broader regulatory effort. Cypresscross (talk) 02:28, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
  • Comment. The coverage seems to indicate that his case/conviction is a big deal in the financial world, and The Wall Street journal called the trial/re-trial "a case that sparked changes to Wall Street sales tactics".[1] I see three hits in GBooks with very minor coverage. The material probably belongs some place in Wikipedia (e.g. Jefferies Group, maybe an article about the court case), but this one is too soon for me to call. Sorry if that isn't very helpful. - Location (talk) 02:34, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
  • Comment I came across the same sources, including the book references. Increasingly I am of the opinion that the subject is notable because he has become the touch point for a much broader effort by regulators, and as the comment above indicates, both the person and the case appear to be leading to major changes on Wall Street. Cypresscross (talk) 02:41, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Bottle match

Bottle match (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Bottle match" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · HighBeam · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference)

The only reference provided here gives a passing mention of "the Bottle Cup", a hockey competition, not "the Bottle Match", a rugby competition. A search on Google books turns up only one book discussing this match, and that book was published by the Imperial College Press (which might not be independent from the subject matter). While I do not disagree that the match is old, age alone does not qualify this match as notable. Article lacks substantive discussion in independent reliable verifiable secondary sources, and existence alone does not normally equal to notability. KDS4444 (talk) 23:08, 12 April 2017 (UTC)

  • Comment Based on WP:NRIVALRY it appears that WP:GNG is the relevant guideline. The source in the article: [2] about hockey is is not really off-topic. The 2nd paragraph in the lead mentioned the mix of sports that began in 2006. There are other sources although some are not independent:[3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] It seems reasonable to assume there is much more coverage not online given that this series began in 1902. I'm undecided atm. Gab4gab (talk) 16:14, 14 April 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 05:44, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 05:44, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 05:44, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 05:44, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, J947(c) 00:09, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 01:30, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Toyota V transmission

Toyota V transmission (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Toyota V transmission" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · HighBeam · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference)

Fails WP:GNG. No references, reads like a technical specification manual. WP:NOTDIR. Some aspects certainly seem like OR (WP:NOR) MB 01:29, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. North America1000 01:38, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. North America1000 01:38, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Camtek Intelligent Imaging

Camtek Intelligent Imaging (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Camtek Intelligent Imaging" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · HighBeam · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference)

Seems like WP:SOAP to me. Being on the NASDAQ doesn't automatically give you the necessary publicity to pass WP:GNG. Nicnote • ask me a question • contributions 22:23, 13 April 2017 (UTC)

  • Delete unless better sources founded. Not enough notable sources.Knox490 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 01:20, 14 April 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 06:53, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 06:53, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Israel-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 06:53, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
  • Keep - plenty of sources in Hebrew קמטק ([9]) and in English ([10]) cover Camtek. This has been a public company for a very long time and received significant coverage from the Israeli press (including pre-listing in Israel, as its parent company פריורטק was listed and is essentially the same (mostly holds Camtek) - and some coverage from foreign press. The 3D printing line (which failed and was closed down) received coverage as part of the hype, but coverage extands more than a decade.Icewhiz (talk) 07:08, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
  • Delete Just being listed in not enough, unless its on the NYSE main board or a comparable exchange. At least the English language references are either just notices or PR reports or stock analysts' rating. DGG ( talk ) 00:49, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 04:07, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
  • Keep per plentiful, persuasive sources:
  • "Brown Shoe, Camtek: Biggest Price Gainers (BWS, CAMT)" Aug. 26, 2011. "Camtek Ltd. CAMT 2.44% topped the list of Biggest Percentage Price Gainers among common stocks on the Nasdaq Stock Market." WSJ [11].
  • " Camtek Receives First Conditional Order for 3D Inkjet System" Feb 2nd, 2015 [12] [[Jewish Business News]
  • It is certainly large enough to pay its execs handsomely "100 Israeli execs earned over NIS 3m in 2015" 23 March 2016 Globes [13]
  • More coverage in Globes: [14]
  • And a raft of coverage in Haaretz, search here: [15] . It suffices.E.M.Gregory (talk) 18:10, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 01:28, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

J2-L192

J2-L192 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "J2-L192" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · HighBeam · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference)

I am also nominating the following related pages because they are all suffer from the same faults:

J2-L271 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Haplogroup J2-L24 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

No indication that these particular haplogroups are notable; appear to be largely Original Research based on a series of non-Reliable Source community web pages hosted by a DNA testing company, from which unvetted scientific raw data is being extracted. Agricolae (talk) 16:57, 13 April 2017 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. Agricolae (talk) 17:06, 13 April 2017 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 04:17, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 01:28, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

RiskAdvisor

RiskAdvisor (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "RiskAdvisor" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · HighBeam · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference)

No claim to notability. Esprit15d • talkcontribs 01:27, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Lil Bre

Lil Bre (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Lil Bre" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · HighBeam · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference)

Does not satisfy WP:NMUSIC. The artist is not signed to a major record label, he has no charting singles or albums, he has not been nominated for a major music award, etc. There is one source, but it's a single article from a tabloid style website; definitely not enough for WP:GNG. JTtheOG (talk) 01:26, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Museum of Beigang Story

Museum of Beigang Story (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Museum of Beigang Story" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · HighBeam · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference)

fails WP:ORG. this museum only opened in 2012 and looks relatively small. I examined the 4 gnews hits from Chinese.

  • this one is mainly about a toilet paper factory.
  • this one is about a tourist pass to visit several sites in the county
  • this one is about a bunch of students from the county heading off to south america.

I also wonder if this is actually a shop masquerading as a museum, the google reviews of this place make it sound like a shop. LibStar (talk) 01:22, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Mathomat

Mathomat (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Mathomat" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · HighBeam · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference)

Unreferenced. See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mathomat, which merged the article to Geometry template. No indication that this is now notable. Robert McClenon (talk) 01:21, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

We need more foster care parents

We need more foster care parents (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "We need more foster care parents" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · HighBeam · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference)

It's an essay. Esprit15d • talkcontribs 01:20, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Social and economic stratification in Appalachia

Social and economic stratification in Appalachia (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Social and economic stratification in Appalachia" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · HighBeam · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference)

Article is a POV fork, focusing on (only) the bad stuff in the area. The most useful article for the issues is at Appalachia#Economy. – S. Rich (talk) 05:23, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

  • Keep this term is widely in use, article content can be expanded to include countervailing scholarship, but topic is notable one two three four etc. Seraphim System (talk) 06:00, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 05:51, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Economics-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 05:51, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Social science-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 05:51, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 05:51, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
  • Delete; hardly encyclopaedic and written like an essay. One large opinion piece about how terrible life is for people living there. Laurdecl talk 08:01, 26 April 2017 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 01:20, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Michael Cammarano

Michael Cammarano (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Michael Cammarano" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · HighBeam · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference)

Non-notable. Esprit15d • talkcontribs 01:13, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. —MRD2014 📞 contribs 01:31, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. —MRD2014 📞 contribs 01:31, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. —MRD2014 📞 contribs 01:31, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
  • Delete. As yet unelected candidates for political office do not get Wikipedia articles just for being candidates, per WP:NPOL — if you cannot demonstrate and properly source that he was already notable enough for an article for some other reason independent of his candidacy, then the mere fact of being a candidate is not enough in and of itself. For added bonus, this is written very much more like a campaign brochure than an encyclopedia article, and the only reference that's actually present in the article is a press release from his own campaign staff. But even an actual incumbent officeholder who does clear NPOL still doesn't get to source the article that way. Bearcat (talk) 02:20, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Syed Muhammad Kaswar Gardezi

Syed Muhammad Kaswar Gardezi (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Syed Muhammad Kaswar Gardezi" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · HighBeam · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference)

I couldn't find references in reliable sources which can demonstrate the notability of the subject. Cites references, except one, are from questionable and unreliable sources. Saqib (talk) 13:27, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 18:05, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 18:05, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 18:06, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 01:10, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Patrick Herron

Patrick Herron (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Patrick Herron" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · HighBeam · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference)

Not Notable WikiFanD 15:38, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

Weak Keep Found nothing in Google News, but As per Highbeam search, Weak keep. Found Indy Week's article 1, article 2. Someone check the notability. --Elton-Rodrigues (talk) 16:15, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Poetry-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 17:48, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 17:48, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 17:48, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Poetry-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 20:53, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of North Carolina-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 20:53, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 01:09, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Eric Semborski

Eric Semborski (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Eric Semborski" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · HighBeam · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference)

NN hockey player, overwhelmingly fails WP:NHOCKEY, the creation of an editor with numerous such articles up at AfD. The fellow's a practice rink employee (according to the ref) who sat on the bench for a game as an emergency goalie but didn't see action. No sources that don't run afoul of WP:ONEEVENT, and guys like this come a few times each season ... completely ephemerally. Ravenswing 19:25, 11 April 2017 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ice hockey-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 20:26, 11 April 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Illinois-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 20:26, 11 April 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Pennsylvania-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 20:27, 11 April 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 20:54, 11 April 2017 (UTC)
  • Keep: Fulfills WP:NHOCKEY: "Played one or more games in an existing or defunct top professional league." Hurrygane (talk) 19:42, 13 April 2017 (UTC)
  • Comment: Which, in point, he has not. It's long been established -- both by NHL rules and by WP precedent in such cases -- that if you don't take the ice during a game, you don't play, and you're not credited with having played. Ravenswing 00:38, 14 April 2017 (UTC)
  • Delete. Fails for two reasons. 1) Ravenswing wrote: '"NN hockey player, overwhelmingly fails WP:NHOCKEY, the creation of an editor with numerous such articles up at AfD. The fellow's a practice rink employee (according to the ref) who sat on the bench for a game as an emergency goalie but didn't see action. No sources that don't run afoul of WP:ONEEVENT, and guys like this come a few times each season ... completely ephemerally." 2) Ravenswing also pointed out: "It's long been established -- both by NHL rules and by WP precedent in such cases -- that if you don't take the ice during a game, you don't play, and you're not credited with having played." So there is no possible way this guy is notable enough to have a Wikipedia article at this time. Dean Esmay (talk) 03:11, 15 April 2017 (UTC)
  • Weak Keep While it is true that there are a few guys like this every year, his coverage has gone beyond the norm: here, [16], and you can order his jersey which has sold well. It should be noted that someone who appeared for two different teams (philadelphia as well) in one season can hardly be summed up by WP:ONEEVENT. 18abruce (talk) 09:38, 15 April 2017 (UTC)
  • Comment: I'd dispute that his coverage has gone beyond the norm. How so? Zero news hits in the last fortnight. Ravenswing 23:44, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
Well, he was included in the Topps trading card set. As this article points out it is an unusual situation and amount of attention given to an emergency backup. And again, maybe I am reading this ONEEVENT thing wrong, but does this mean that he applies to ONEEVENT twice?18abruce (talk) 09:41, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
  • Comment I can't really decide on this one whether ONEEVENT applies. During his call up with the Flyers as an emergency, they did try to get him on the ice at the very end of the game. However, he was called back to the bench by the refs because, officially, the emergency goalie can only play if all goaltenders are injured. So he would have had ice time had the rules not disallowed it. He did receive a fair amount of coverage for it, but they are borderline routine as "odd news". Yosemiter (talk) 20:03, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
  • Delete Definitely a WP:ONEEVENT situation and since he didn't take the ice he doesn't meet WP:NHOCKEY. -DJSasso (talk) 17:48, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
  • Keep - He got coverage for his day an emergency goalie for the Blackhawks, e.g., [17] [18], although that would be WP:ONEEVENT. But then he got coverage for getting an official Topps Hockey card [19], which puts him beyond a typical ONEEVENT hockey situation, although arguably ONEEVENT still applies since the hockey card was related to the day as an emergency goalie for the Blackhawks. But then he got more coverage for his day as an emergency goalie for the Flyers in April [20] [21] which was definitely a separate event from his Blackhawks event. And getting significant coverage for two events is more than one event so WP:ONEEVENT does not apply in this case (Wikipedia:BLP2E, admittedly an essay not a guideline but relevant here). Rlendog (talk) 22:10, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – Juliancolton | Talk 23:11, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kurykh (talk) 01:01, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

The Big Switch Off

The Big Switch Off (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "The Big Switch Off" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · HighBeam · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference)

Ineligible for PROD as it was de-PROD'd in 2008. Ironically, I was apparently the original PRODder, although given that it was nearly 10 years ago I honestly did not remember (and my bad for not checking before PROD'ing again). De-PROD rationale at the time was "removed prod press coverage seems to indicate reasonable notability so this should be discussed at AFD before deletion".

Per my most recent PROD, it is very difficult to find sources owing to the generic name, but even with "Melbourne" added, there were no results showing that this single event passes WP:GNG. No WP:LASTING effect or outcome either - no indication that it was ever held again, or that any policies, customs, or laws were ever created or changed as a result that would indicate a lasting impact. ♠PMC(talk) 00:59, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Boomerang in Instagram

Boomerang in Instagram (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Boomerang in Instagram" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · HighBeam · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference)

Perhaps should be merged with Instagram. Doesn't seem to warrant separate article. bojo | talk 14:42, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 16:37, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 16:37, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kurykh (talk) 00:59, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Renaissance College (faculty of the University of New Brunswick)

Renaissance College (faculty of the University of New Brunswick) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Renaissance College (faculty of the University of New Brunswick)" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · HighBeam · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference)

Completing nomination on behalf of an IP editor, whose rationale (posted at the article's talk page) is copied verbatim below. On the merits, I have no opinion as such - but if the article is kept, I'm betting there's a cleaner title to which it could be moved. UltraExactZZ Said ~ Did 14:00, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

As with Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Common_outcomes#Parts_of_schools_and_school-related_organizations, faculties within a university, college, or school are generally not considered notable unless they have made significant contributions to their field. Renaissance College does not seem to have significant notability. 118.143.145.237 (talk) 07:08, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. Everymorning (talk) 14:31, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 17:15, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 17:15, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
  • Merge in part to University of New Brunswick, where I've just added it as a wikilink. This had been an orphaned article. The college is apparently located a full kilometre from the main campus and I can understand why the article creator might have felt it should be addressed separately. This Maclean's profile on UNB certainly gives it attention, but I still agree it falls short . Shawn in Montreal (talk) 14:40, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kurykh (talk) 00:58, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Wigner fusion

Wigner fusion (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Wigner fusion" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · HighBeam · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference)

Can't find many references to assert notability from google search. Created by possible COI user. bojo | talk 13:36, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

Wigner fusion (talk) 13:43, 19 April 2017 (UTC)I just created this page in Hungarian as well, although I've found a couple of references to our sites, but I can tell you more if you would please specifiy what kind of references would you require.

I would suggest looking for articles that focus on the facility or organization, not necessarily on something that they are doing or planning. Something that is independent of the subject, but that tells someone why the subject is important or unique or otherwise notable. Also, note that an article with "We are..." as opposed to "Wigner Fusion is..." makes me think that someone from Wigner Fusion wrote the article - and that would violate several policies. Have a look at our policy on writing from a neutral point of view for guidance. UltraExactZZ Said ~ Did 14:11, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom. Boomer VialHolla! We gonna ball! 03:15, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
  • Keep The nomination comes 4 minutes after the creation of the article, and is against WP:BITE. The user might be having a COI issue, and it is being/will be discussed on their talk page. Meanwhile, I will try changing the tone of the article to be more neutral. I would suggest withdrawing the quick nomination, and nominating again in a week or so if the current problems seem unaddressed. RoCo(talk) 17:05, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 01:20, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 01:20, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Hungary-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 01:20, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
  • Comment. Hi, would you consider not to delete this page and remove the article-for-deletion notice please? The user name conflict has been solved and as I can see the text have been fixed. Many thanks. Tamas.Szabolics (talk) 08:31, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
Debates of this type usually last 7 days. This gives editors who might not visit the article regularly a chance to see and comment on whether the article should be deleted. That said, if the concerns above have been addressed, then the article will likely be kept and the notices removed. If you want to edit the article to address some of those concerns (say, by making it more neutral or adding additional sources or whatever), that would go a long way to helping make sure the article is Kept. UltraExactZZ Said ~ Did 12:10, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kurykh (talk) 00:58, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Waseem Badami

Waseem Badami (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Waseem Badami" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · HighBeam · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference)

Fails notability guidelines. Journalist with no reliable independent coverage. RoCo(talk) 13:18, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Journalism-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 17:19, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 17:20, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 17:20, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
  • Delete - the subject have received some press coverage (name checks and quotations) in reliable sources. However there are not sufficient references I could found that can be cited to curate a biography. --Saqib (talk) 13:04, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
  • Keep He is a notable television journalist and satisfies the minimum level of WP:GNG. Further coverage can be found in various news sources. Mar4d (talk) 13:15, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
I have somewhat improved the bio. What do you think of it @Mar4d:? --Saqib (talk) 11:50, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
@Saqib: Thanks for your improvement, the sources are decent. I will see if I can add anything of value too. Mar4d (talk) 12:26, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:03, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relist given rewrite and new information.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kurykh (talk) 00:58, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Danielle Pletka

Danielle Pletka (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Danielle Pletka" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · HighBeam · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference)

WP:BLP, with some overtones of résumé, of a political consultant. This is not based on reliable source coverage about her, but rather cites one news article that glancingly namechecks her existence, one newspaper op-ed where she's the bylined author and not the subject, and one glancing namecheck of her existence in a blog entry. This is not the type of coverage of her that it takes to clear WP:GNG, and nothing claimed here is an automatic pass of any inclusion criterion in the absence of enough coverage of her to clear GNG. Bearcat (talk) 18:35, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 18:43, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
  • Delete This looks more like a resume than an encyclopedia article.John Pack Lambert (talk) 20:07, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
Johnpacklambert, the way an article "looks" is not a criteria for deletion. Please weigh in on whether or not she is notable. Megalibrarygirl (talk) 00:00, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
She is not notable. The references to her are passing, not substantial citations. For example, one sentence that mentions her in a much longer article on Jesse Helms. This is not the stuff notability is made of.John Pack Lambert (talk) 02:51, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
  • Comment I've added some sources to the article. Doing a Google News search or a HighBeam search shows that she is featured as a talking head on a lot of news shows, including NPR, FOX, CNN and other stations. However, because she's written a large number of articles (esp for Washington Post), trying to tease through her authored works and her appearances is going to take time. My quick take on her is that she is likely notable. I'd like to have more solid sources in the article before I !vote, though. Megalibrarygirl (talk) 00:03, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
    • What we need is not articles by her, but articles about her.John Pack Lambert (talk) 02:52, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 01:26, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Journalism-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 01:26, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 01:26, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:08, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:08, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Washington, D.C.-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:08, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – Juliancolton | Talk 00:57, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

List of District Officers of Lubok Antu

List of District Officers of Lubok Antu (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "List of District Officers of Lubok Antu" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · HighBeam · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference)

Non-notable. No reliable or significant coverage. Alexander Iskandar (talk) 12:23, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists of people-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 17:23, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Malaysia-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 17:23, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 17:23, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kurykh (talk) 00:57, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Eduardo Russi Assumpção

Eduardo Russi Assumpção (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Eduardo Russi Assumpção" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · HighBeam · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference)

As far as I can see this is a non-notable tennis player. He doesn't appear to pass the notability guidelines for tennis player. He doesn't regularly compete on the ATP World Tour. His only three appearances in a World Tour event were Wild Cards (so not achieved on merit) for an event in his home country in doubles (which is less notable than singles anyway). Moreover all three of those matches and did not even win a set. Tvx1 12:11, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

  • Keep - meets WP:NTENNIS as he appeared in 3 ATP World Tour level matches. Unsourced but sources can easily be found. Just because he hasn't won, doesn't mean he doesn't fit the notability guideline. If you feel it is too weak, you can start a discussion for stricter guidelines. But as of now, he meets the criteria. Adamtt9 (talk) 12:15, 19 April 2017 (UTC)Note to closing admin: Adamtt9 (talkcontribs) is the creator of the page that is the subject of this AfD.
  • Literally speaking, you might be correct. However, I think some discretion should be used. Three ATP World Tour matches through wildcards for events in his home country resulting in three straight sets losses for the win of just 11 games can hardly be claimed to constitute "competing on the ATP World Tour". Experience has taught me that generally making the main draw of a World Tour event through merit (=successfully passing through qualifying or gathering enough ranking points to gain direct entry) is what is used as the bar to assert notability. Add to that that doubles is inherently less notable than singles (that's how it this, unfortunately. I can enjoy watching a good doubles match myself but I have to accept that it attracts less interest) and I don't think you can genuinely claim that this person is a notable tennis player. And yes, achievement does matter. What they achieve is inherently what makes sportspeople notable.Tvx1 16:57, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
  • FWIW, all three tournaments weren't home tournaments. One was in Spain, and you can't just twist around the notability guidelines to make them what you want. They say that a player must participate in an ATP level match, regardless of whether he received a wildcard or not. And he seems to be generally notable, as there are many hits if you search his name. Adamtt9 (talk) 17:03, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
  • The Spanish tournament was with a Spanish doubles partner Mario Vilella Martínez so it was effectively a home player wild card. By the way, the 6–2, 6–1 loss is Martínez' only ATP World Tour match. PrimeHunter (talk) 16:17, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
  • I mean, they could have easily given it to another Spaniard. Adamtt9 (talk) 17:20, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
  • I don't know if I would devalue wildcards the way that you do. Many wildcards have some requirement (e.g., the US Open usually gives wildcards to the NCAA champions, USTA champions, and top finisher from a series of Challenger tournaments). No idea how this player earned his, but considering its distinct tournaments in different countries, he must have accomplished something to earn those wildcards. I don't mean that to say I know he met a requirement, but if he achieved that little he would have maybe gotten one, but not three and not three in three separate tournaments in two different countries. I could see disputing the quality of a player with just one wildcard in their home country, but three is too many to just dismiss. RonSigPi (talk) 02:29, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 17:28, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Brazil-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 17:29, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
  • Delete - Agree with the nomination, and WP:NTENNIS needs revising. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 15:46, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
  • Weak keep - This is one of those players that makes it by the guidelines, but sucks. There's always a few, just like we have players who make it by GNG, but have never played a pro tournament in their life. Are the guidelines too lenient, possibly, but they are easy to follow. Fyunck(click) (talk) 19:19, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
  • Weak keep - So he meets the guideline, but that only gives a presumption. Here, two things make me say we stick with the presumption. First, this is a player from a non-English speaking country. How many editors evaluating speak Portuguese? I don't, so I don't think I can fairly evaluate sources or my lack of finding sources would be reasonable to indicate they are not out there. Second, he played in three different tournaments in three different years. Yes its doubles and yes he lost all three times, but his top-level career has spanned three years over multiple countries. Considering those factors, I say keep. RonSigPi (talk) 02:22, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kurykh (talk) 00:56, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

JovianDSS

JovianDSS (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "JovianDSS" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · HighBeam · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference)

Fails WP:GNG. I am unable to find any reliable sources on this product, besides the one already in the article. Searching for JovianDSS and JupiterDSS (its old name) bring up no possible sources. There are no possible redirect targets because the developer's article has also been deleted. Anarchyte (work | talk) 11:56, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 17:33, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kurykh (talk) 00:56, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Keep it: The Software Solution is real and the last links added show information related to the Company.User:crys123 —Preceding undated comment added 01:28, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

@Crys123: None of the sources in the article show why the topic is notable. Anarchyte (work | talk) 02:49, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Latur Municipal Transport

Latur Municipal Transport (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Latur Municipal Transport" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · HighBeam · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference)

Not encyclopaedic topic. No scope for improvement as no sources are available online nor offline. None of the provided links in the references section work either. In other words no source/refs to entire article. The topic of the article can be efficiently described within the article of Laturusernamekiran[talk] 11:48, 13 April 2017 (UTC)

  • Keep WP:AFDISNOTCLEANUP. As the public transport provider for a medium sized city this organisation is clearly notable. References are not required to be online. AusLondonder (talk) 00:31, 15 April 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 05:46, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 05:46, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 05:46, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, J947(c) 22:31, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

Yes, AfD is not cleanup. But keeping every article ever created is not "building encyclopaedia" either.

As it was mentioned in the article itself, the number of buses and ferries are considerably low. Not notable. It can be adequately covered in the article of Latur city. —usernamekiran (talk) 23:35, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 00:56, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

PCG (random number generator)

PCG (random number generator) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "PCG (random number generator)" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · HighBeam · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference)

NN fails GNG. (It is WP:INTERESTING so we do have userification / draft.) Widefox; talk 10:28, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:49, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kurykh (talk) 00:56, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Melbourne Murugan Temple

Melbourne Murugan Temple (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Melbourne Murugan Temple" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · HighBeam · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference)

Fails WP:GNG relies solely on primary sources. No independent verifiable references which establishes its notability. Dan arndt (talk) 08:28, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. Dan arndt (talk) 08:29, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Hinduism-related deletion discussions. Dan arndt (talk) 08:29, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Religion-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 11:19, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kurykh (talk) 00:56, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Stephanie Fryar

Stephanie Fryar (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Stephanie Fryar" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · HighBeam · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference)

First AfD was not reviewed by members of Wikiproject Equine. This individual is completely non-notable... NRODEO is a guide, not a policy that trumps GNG. Montanabw(talk) 00:55, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Mai Jindo

Mai Jindo (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Mai Jindo" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · HighBeam · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference)

While tragic, this particular individual doesn't meet WP:GNG, a case of WP:BIO1E. Onel5969 TT me 01:47, 12 April 2017 (UTC)

  • Keep. Has multiple sources from major news outlets. For example: These news outlets: Pakistan Today, The Nation and The Express Tribune. Amnesty International reported on this matter. Excellent story element in terms of article. Justice was fought for hard and very dramatically. Article indicates: "Hakimzadi and Zaibunissa, had to set themselves on fire in order to get authorities to take up their brothers cases", Knox490 (talk) 02:26, 12 April 2017 (UTC)
Comment - all of which deal with a single issue, hence WP:BIO1E. Onel5969 TT me 02:43, 12 April 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 04:43, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 04:43, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spirit of Eagle (talk) 05:22, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
  • Delete - the press coverage is on the incident, not on the subject. The incident doesn't makes the subject notable enough to warrant an entry on Wikipedia. Mai Jindo clearly fails to meet basic notability guidelines. --Saqib (talk) 13:07, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
  • Keep per Knox490. Mar4d (talk) 13:18, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
Comment - and still does not address the WP:BIO1E issue. Onel5969 TT me 03:03, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kurykh (talk) 00:54, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Jesus (Brand New song)

Jesus (Brand New song) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Jesus (Brand New song)" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · HighBeam · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference)

Non-notable outside of the album. Notability is not inherited. Mr. Guye (talk) 01:30, 12 April 2017 (UTC)

  • Keep. There are articles which have been at Wikipedia for a long time which are less notable. This is notable: "In the US, the single reached number 30 on the Billboard Hot Modern Rock Tracks chart." And so are these factoids: Song performed on Letterman and Conan O'Brien shows. Also, performed on television show Friday Night Lights.Article could use better footnoting. Knox490 (talk) 03:53, 12 April 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 04:39, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 04:39, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spirit of Eagle (talk) 05:19, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kurykh (talk) 00:54, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Saeko Zōgō

Saeko Zōgō (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Saeko Zōgō" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · HighBeam · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference)
(Find sources: "藏合紗恵子" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · HighBeam · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference)

Does not meet WP:ENT and it is WP:TOOSOON, her role in Chaika, Isuca, Maken-ki are all supporting or minor characters. Maybe one major role in Date A Live II, but that's about it. AngusWOOF (barksniff) 03:22, 11 April 2017 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. AngusWOOF (barksniff) 03:23, 11 April 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. AngusWOOF (barksniff) 03:23, 11 April 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. AngusWOOF (barksniff) 03:23, 11 April 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Anime and manga-related deletion discussions. AngusWOOF (barksniff) 03:23, 11 April 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. AngusWOOF (barksniff) 03:23, 11 April 2017 (UTC)
  • Keep. She has a decent work history and in the external link section I saw that she is listed in the Anime News Network which is a major news website for anime. I just found a IMDB page for her which I will add to the article in the external link section. Knox490 (talk) 04:46, 11 April 2017 (UTC)
IMDb is not a reliable source. Boomer VialHolla! We gonna ball! 05:03, 11 April 2017 (UTC)
  • Keep - Her roles apparently are mainly supporting (I'm not sure, the only show of hers that I've actually watched so far is Date A Live), but given that those roles include roles in anime where she is among the show's theme song singers, perhaps those roles aren't as minor as you think. She also performed the opening theme for Triage X; although the single charted poorly (peaked at #92 on the weeklies), it did receive some coverage, such as this. Admittedly, coverage for her isn't spectacular (some sources include this, as well as this interview with her and a fellow voice actress), but there does appear to be just enough coverage, and enough roles, to establish notability. If consensus determines that she is not notable, I would suggest a redirect to Date A Live. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 13:38, 11 April 2017 (UTC)
Is there something besides Date A Live that the person is notable for? I see only one single ranked at #111 in Oricon [22] and no albums [23]. This wouldn't be enough to keep. AngusWOOF (barksniff) 16:31, 11 April 2017 (UTC)
How about Sky Wizards Academy? She's listed eighth out of eight among the main characters? Is that enough? AngusWOOF (barksniff) 16:34, 11 April 2017 (UTC)
Passing WP:ENTERTAINER is somewhat questionable due to a lack of main roles (I'd say maybe she passes it, but barely). But it seems she does clearly pass WP:GNG for the coverage she's received in Japanese sources. Then Natalie and Animate Times hits seem promising. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 00:40, 12 April 2017 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Winged Blades Godric 04:27, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kurykh (talk) 00:54, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Affirmative action at the University of Michigan

Affirmative action at the University of Michigan (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Affirmative action at the University of Michigan" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · HighBeam · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference)

Orphan article, just a few random cherry picked incidents. No other university has its own "affirmative action" subpage, which has me convinced that this is some kind of point-making exercise. Ten Pound Hammer(What did I screw up now?) 04:09, 11 April 2017 (UTC)

  • Delete. I agree with Ten Pound Hammer. I think there should be consistency across university article subpages. Maybe there is some reference source which rates how well colleges/universities uphold their affirmative action obligations and this could be cited in the university articles themselves if they substantially deviate from the norm. Knox490 (talk) 04:35, 11 April 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Discrimination-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 10:33, 11 April 2017 (UTC)
  • I don't find part of this argument to be at all compelling: no other university has its own affirmative action article so this shouldn't. It's WP:OTHERSTUFFDOESNTEXIST. There may well be a case to be made against this article, but I'm not going to support deletion based on "consistency across university article subpages." Shawn in Montreal (talk) 10:43, 11 April 2017 (UTC)
  • I agree with Shawn in Montreal. The reason we don't have similar articles is because we don't have thoughtful editors like Shalor (Wiki Ed) coming here to make them, but we chase good editors off. There is going to be plenty of WP:RS for other universities--certainly for U.C. Berkeley, e.g. San Jose Mercury News, Washington Post, Atlantic, most of the RS of California_Proposition_209. Shalor: you might find useful information in those articles--not sure. --David Tornheim (talk) 03:24, 13 April 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 10:33, 11 April 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Michigan-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 10:33, 11 April 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 10:34, 11 April 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 10:34, 11 April 2017 (UTC)
  • Comment: I just wanted to drop a note that this is part of a school assignment, so if this is deleted and the teacher needs it for grading, can this be returned to the userspace? Also, is it possible that this could be merged into its own subsection in the main article for the school? It's mentioned there, but there's enough here to where this could probably justify its own subsection at least. Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 05:13, 12 April 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for your work. Sorry to see your hard work treated this way. --David Tornheim (talk) 03:24, 13 April 2017 (UTC)
Ditto. I have expressed concerns about the nominator's behaviour and grasp of policy at Afds past -- but I won't revisit them here. We shall see what we shall see: the matter is far from settled. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 14:46, 13 April 2017 (UTC)
  • I could find plenty of sources on any random topic. Just because you find several instances of something happening, does not mean that the "happening" is notable. This is just randomly cherry picked. It's an example farm. Ten Pound Hammer(What did I screw up now?) 05:47, 13 April 2017 (UTC)
  • I don't understand how that is relevant to the application of our notability requirement here. If the subject has multiple independent secondary sources, then it generally meets our notability standard. Are you suggesting we change that standard? If so, probably better to raise that at WP:GNG rather than here. If you believe it does not meet the notability standards, please state exactly how it fails, rather than make up your own standard. --David Tornheim (talk) 05:57, 13 April 2017 (UTC)
  • Grutter v. Bollinger, Gratz v. Bollinger and Schuette v. Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action are notable cases that have had articles on them for some time. The article creator has incorporated them into a referenced article that discusses the school's history with affirmative action within a larger context, particularly the Michigan Civil Rights Initiative, which bans affirmative action in the state. The clash between affirmative action at one of the country's leading universities and the state measure's prohibition of same is vitally important, notable, and referenced. So this is not a "random topic" being explored. Something socially and historically important is happening in Michigan and it's right and proper to have an article on it, if it meets WP:N + V, which it does. Keep. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 14:48, 13 April 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 16:43, 13 April 2017 (UTC)
  • Keep It is notable per WP:GNG - UMichigan's affirmative action program is covered extensively in secondary sources because of the legal history. These cases are major landmark United States Supreme Court cases. They are referred to as The Michigan Affirmative Action Cases in peer reviewed journals. It is hard to overstate the importance of Grutter and Gratz - I ran a search for Grutter in HeinOnline and got 6,059 hits. I think it may seem random for those who aren't familiar with American constitutional law but Grutter is not cherry picking, establishing diversity as a compelling interest in affirmative action cases was huge Seraphim System (talk) 01:22, 15 April 2017 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Winged Blades Godric 04:26, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kurykh (talk) 00:53, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Thomas London (author)

Thomas London (author) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Thomas London (author)" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · HighBeam · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference)

This is an author who appears to have produced only self-published works. Admittedly one of those works has received notable attention, and he produced a film that premiered at a notable indie film event, but I am not seeing WP:NAUTHOR criteria being met. Still WP:TOOSOON. Because notability is not inherited, a notable book does not automatically confer notability on its author. ~Anachronist (talk) 05:27, 11 April 2017 (UTC)

  • Keep: I have removed the IMDB reference and added valid references to this page [1] which show that the film referenced screened at more than one festival (Arpa). The film also appears to show at Valley film festival [2], and at Cannes film festival [3]. The creation of multiple notable works should make this author notable Victory1996 (talk) 07:07, 11 April 2017 (UTC) Victory1996 (talkcontribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

References

  1. ^ http://www.arpafilmfestival.com/short-film-rain-thomas-london-2016-arpa-iff/
  2. ^ http://www.valleyfilmfest.com/valleyfilmfest/app/films/2091/;jsessionid=9129E53F44E5679C6229553826E0C938
  3. ^ http://sub.festival-cannes.fr/SfcCatalogue/MovieDetail/35b4d793-9021-4499-a813-9f4d5761a936
You don't seem to understand the deletion rationale above. The fact that his short film has been merely screened anywhere does not make him notable. Exactly what part of WP:NAUTHOR does this person meet? Exactly where is the significant coverage of this person (not one or two of his works) in reliable independent sources? ~Anachronist (talk) 07:12, 11 April 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:52, 16 April 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:52, 16 April 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:52, 16 April 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Colorado-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:52, 16 April 2017 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Winged Blades Godric 04:25, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kurykh (talk) 00:52, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

SloTop50

SloTop50 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "SloTop50" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · HighBeam · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference)

A self-published chart, which does not contain any third party notability, nor does it contain any concrete methodology. I tried to search somewhere reliable where SloTop50 is mentioned, turns out that even the IFPI does not recognize it. —IB [ Poke ] 05:29, 11 April 2017 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:54, 16 April 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Radio-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:54, 16 April 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:54, 16 April 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Slovenia-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:54, 16 April 2017 (UTC)
  • Before declaring my preference I'd like to point out there are five lists of SloTop50 singles from years 2013-2017 plus a template (below). Should these be including in this debate as well? Ajf773 (talk) 10:05, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Winged Blades Godric 04:24, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
The methodology is clear for me, as it is an airplay chart, it just counts all the songs played on the monitored radio stations. Having the SAZAS backing the chart is more than many charts here on en-WP are able to. And I found some reception of the chart, but only domestic newspapers. It doesn't look like the chart is well-known outside of the country... [24], [25], [26], [27], [28]
My proposal: keep the chart, but move it to Slo Top 50 as this one is more recognized, as is seems. --Ali1610 (talk) 12:20, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kurykh (talk) 00:52, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

The Worlds Freshest (Dj.Fresh)

The Worlds Freshest (Dj.Fresh) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "The Worlds Freshest (Dj.Fresh)" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · HighBeam · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference)

Fails WP:BASIC, WP:ANYBIO, and WP:MUSICBIO. The article uses self-published sources and blogs to support notability. Reliable secondary sources make trivial mention to the musician, and a search online for secondary sources brought back more trivial mention. I have been unable to confirm the claim that Miracle & Nightmare on 10th Street ever charted. Magnolia677 (talk) 13:26, 13 April 2017 (UTC)

Keep On a very quick online search on the artist I was able to find 3 sources [29], [30], [31] that meet WP:MUSICBIO #1. Though the current article is not well sourced—probably due to inexperience from the author—I don't feel there was enough research before requesting its deletion: it could still be worked upon Wapunguissa (talk) 15:02, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
The first two sources you listed are interviews, which are considered primary sources. WP:GNG states that sources should be secondary. Magnolia677 (talk) 17:52, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 05:43, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 05:43, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, J947(c) 22:32, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
  • Comment WP:NMUSIC #1 criteria I cited earlier says "Has been the subject of multiple, non-trivial, published works appearing in sources that are reliable, not self-published, and are independent of the musician or ensemble itself." It refers "independent" in the sense of "The published works must be someone else writing about the musician, ensemble, composer, or lyricist, or their works." On the links I gave The Fader, and Noisey are independed publications, and they found the subject notable enough to write about him and interview him. They are not self-released they are top music publications. The fact that those are interviews and thus "primary source" is another issue. Wikipedia:Interviews says interviews may countain both primary and secondary sources. Secondary sources is when the interviewer talks about the artist, and both "interviews" do have a small introduction where they do. The third article—which was not contested—is by XXL (magazine) which is on of the main hip-hop publications in the US---one of the main publications in the subject's field finds him notable enough to write about him: I still defend keep Wapunguissa (talk) 22:59, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 00:52, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Kevin Boehm

Kevin Boehm (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Kevin Boehm" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · HighBeam · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference)

A promotional article about a chef, by an obvious WP:COI WP:SPA, Shelbeyboka (talk · contribs). The subject is conceivably notable, and some content might end up at Boka (restaurant), but any article should be (re-)written by a non-COI editor in a non-promotional tone.  Sandstein  15:08, 13 April 2017 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 05:42, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 05:42, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Illinois-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 05:42, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
  • Delete his restaurant group may be notable but he is not.John Pack Lambert (talk) 01:13, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, J947(c) 22:32, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 00:51, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Spacetoon (India)

Spacetoon (India) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Spacetoon (India)" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · HighBeam · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference)

Likely a WP:HOAX. No reliable sources to indicate that Spacetoon has a branch / subsidiary in India. The website listed on this page does not exist. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 11:43, 11 April 2017 (UTC)

This also needs to be deleted. List of programs broadcast by Spacetoon (Pakistan) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shinnosukeandme (talkcontribs) 11:38, 14 April 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 11:55, 11 April 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 11:55, 11 April 2017 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Winged Blades Godric 04:22, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:43, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
  • Comment: I don't think the article is a hoax, e.g., Business Standard has covered a channel named "Spacetoon Kids TV". I can't comment on its notability though. — Stringy Acid (talk) 20:14, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Note there are two articles nominated for deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kurykh (talk) 00:51, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Beware of Darkness discography

Beware of Darkness discography (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Beware of Darkness discography" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · HighBeam · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference)

Discography page is under 5kB, and artist page is just over 11 kB, which are not prohibitive lengths per WP:SIZE nor MOS:DISCOGRAPHY. --Jax 0677 (talk) 12:51, 11 April 2017 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. Jax 0677 (talk) 13:08, 11 April 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 18:20, 11 April 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:07, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Winged Blades Godric 04:21, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
  • Merge to Beware of Darkness (band). The articles are small enough that they don't need to be separated, but I see no good reason to delete here. --Michig (talk) 07:00, 26 April 2017 (UTC)
  • Reply - @Michig:, I concur with your merge proposal. --Jax 0677 (talk) 17:30, 26 April 2017 (UTC)
  • Given that there are no other opinions here, would you be amenable to withdrawing the nomination and merging the articles? --Michig (talk) 17:41, 26 April 2017 (UTC)
  • Reply - @Michig:, I tried to {{PROD}} the article, however, that got reverted, stating "The information on this page is needed because the discography section on the band's article is for studio albums only". Without a record of decision, my merge could easily be reverted before the article and its discography grow sufficiently. --Jax 0677 (talk) 17:54, 26 April 2017 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kurykh (talk) 00:50, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Anthony Wilson (ice hockey)

Anthony Wilson (ice hockey) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Anthony Wilson (ice hockey)" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · HighBeam · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference)

fails WP:NHOCKEY and WP:GNG Joeykai (talk) 03:31, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. Lepricavark (talk) 16:07, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ice hockey-related deletion discussions. Lepricavark (talk) 16:07, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:34, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kurykh (talk) 00:47, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Sam Bavin

Sam Bavin (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Sam Bavin" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · HighBeam · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference)

fails WP:NHOCKEY and WP:GNG Joeykai (talk) 03:28, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. Lepricavark (talk) 16:07, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ice hockey-related deletion discussions. Lepricavark (talk) 16:07, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:33, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kurykh (talk) 00:47, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Stwo

Stwo (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Stwo" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · HighBeam · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference)

Continues to fail WP:MUSICBIO. DBrown SPS (talk) 02:31, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:29, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of France-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:29, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
  • Keep On a quick search I could immediatly find articles by Fader and Pitchfork and other reliable sources on the producer. He is capable of meeting #1 on WP:MUSICBIO but article needs improvment to meet standards. Wapunguissa (talk) 18:42, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
  • Delete To comment on the "Keep" argument above, Fader and Pitchfork are, in fact, first person sources (interview with subject talking about himself) so do not constitute third party coverage. Other searches turn up the usual SPAM type coverage of announcements and credits in various user submitted sites, small-time sites, and sources such as Fader and Pitchfork, which partially exist as platforms for artists and companies to solicit promotional editorial content. Is there any difference between this article and the one on the same subject that was deleted 10 months ago? ShelbyMarion (talk) 14:53, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
  • Weak keep. A fair amount of coverage found, e.g. [32], [33], [34], [35], [36], [37], [38], although he doesn't seem to have done very much so far. --Michig (talk) 08:15, 26 April 2017 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kurykh (talk) 00:47, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Walkabout Clearwater Chorus

Walkabout Clearwater Chorus (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Walkabout Clearwater Chorus" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · HighBeam · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference)

I couldn't find any notability for this choir. SL93 (talk) 01:00, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:57, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:57, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
  • Merge to Hudson River Sloop Clearwater#Music and Festivals, the parent organization. It's remarkable that an organization with claimed links to Pete Seeger and a prominent environmental advocacy organization should have generated so little coverage, but here we are. The only reference is their own web page and searches return social media, self-published sources and passing mentions. No independent notability. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 23:53, 26 April 2017 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kurykh (talk) 00:45, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Extreme performance art

Extreme performance art (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Extreme performance art" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · HighBeam · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference)

Article has no citations, and is a subjective "sub-category" of Performance art listing artists that have not made major contributions to the genre. Netherzone (talk) 00:49, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

  • Keep - recall that notability depends on the existence of sources, not what's in the article. The subject is covered in reliable sources such as Newsweek at some length. It seems to be quite something in Contemporary China, also covered in HuffPost, and in Russia. Not to everybody's taste but definitely notable. Chiswick Chap (talk) 13:15, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
  • Keep: I have very little interest in art, but could tell you what extreme performance art was without having to look at the page. That and the popular press sources I've found make me convinced of its WP:Notability. My gut instinct is that its own article is warranted rather than attempting to merge with performance art, though a discussion could be had. If kept it does need to be better integrated into Wikipedia; it is not, for example, featured in the relevant Navboxes. PriceDL (talk) 00:30, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Arts-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:55, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kurykh (talk) 00:45, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Tickle.com

Tickle.com (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Tickle.com" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · HighBeam · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference)

As it is right now, this page will probably fail WP:GNG. Besides, there's hardly any reliable coverage about the website I can find on the web. ««« SOME GADGET GEEK »»» (talk) 00:26, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 00:52, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 00:52, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 00:52, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:50, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kurykh (talk) 00:45, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Diogenis D. Valavanidis

Diogenis D. Valavanidis (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Diogenis D. Valavanidis" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · HighBeam · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference)

I found no significant coverage and the three organizations that he is a part of have no articles. SL93 (talk) 01:01, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. SL93 (talk) 01:02, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Serbia-related deletion discussions. SL93 (talk) 01:02, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
  • Delete: GNews actually showed nothing meaningful to add failing GNG and BIO. KGirlTrucker81 huh? what I've been doing 01:21, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
  • Borderline keep. He has received decent coverage in Serbian mainstream press for his activities on Serbian and Greek cultural heritage:
    • "Diogenis Valavanidis receives Order of the Serbian Orthodox Church". Serbian Orthodox Church. 26 September 2013. 
      • "Orden cara Konstantina za čuvara srpskog nasleđa". Politika. 26 September 2013.  (concerning that same Order he received)
    • "Neobični Beograđani: Grk u potrazi za svetinjama". Večernje Novosti. 23 November 2013. 
    • "Nasilje je postalo jače od istorije" [Violence became stronger than history]. Svedok. 7 February 2017. 
    • "Otvoren novi muzej Akropolja" [New Acropolis Museum Opens]. Politika. 20 June 2009.  (only brief statement of his)
That being said, there is not much more than that in the mainstream press, other than occasional mention or statement by his. He seems to be currently a secretary of the Serbian embassy in Hungary [39], so he receives some coverage for activities there [40]. No such user (talk) 14:05, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – Juliancolton | Talk 23:03, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – Juliancolton | Talk 00:17, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

CANpie

CANpie (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "CANpie" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · HighBeam · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference)

Does not appear to be notable software; I could only find a single significant hit (in German), which appears to be some kind of blog and thus isn't exactly a reliable source. I couldn't find anything else other than the usual tech question sites and sites that host the code (like GitHub and SourceForge). Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 13:25, 16 April 2017 (UTC)

  • Delete. Narutolovehinata5 and I did not find evidence that it is a piece of notable software. Searched article and internet. Knox490 (talk) 14:03, 16 April 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 13:27, 16 April 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 13:27, 16 April 2017 (UTC)
  • Keep. CANpie is a predecessor to SocketCAN, as the maintainer and lead-developer of SocketCAN said himself in his dissertation (German[41]). While SocketCAN is not real-time capable as such, because it depends on the non-real-time Linux kernel scheduler, CANpie is an real-time capable alternative and still actively maintained. CANpie is also used in non-Linux environments like on QNX, Windows, macOS, and bare metal. CANpie presumably will become the defacto standard API for CAN based applications by CAN in Automation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MisterTS (talkcontribs) 13:07, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
  • Comment For classical CAN bus applications and the new CAN FD standard the article references a standard API (like e.g. can4linux or SocketCAN) which is widely used in industrial embedded systems and research facilities. Please refer to the iCC 2017 conference papers. For the same reason (".. anything else other than the usual tech question sites ..") you could mark e.g can4linux for deletion, what definitely makes no sense. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dolores88 (talkcontribs) 16:36, 16 April 2017 (UTC)
  • Comment 15 minutes from creation to AfD. Way to go, guys 8-( Andy Dingley (talk) 17:04, 16 April 2017 (UTC)
@Andy Dingley: Wikipedia:Perennial proposals#Grace period for deletion. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 10:14, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
  • List of References Here is a list of references found in the internet:
  • Gateway product [42]
  • A controller board from the beginning of the Maker scene [43]
  • One of the first references in a newsgroup back in 2001 [44]
  • Linux Home Automation, CANpie added in 2007 [45]
  • Implementation on NXP microcontroller [46]
  • Software Architecture for Modular Self-Reconfigurable Robots, Xerox Palo Alto Research Center [47]
  • Patent for SocketCAN (in German [48])
  • Diploma theses (Gajdos, English [49]) (Blumenthal, German [50])
  • Keep Additional references have been added to the article which disprove the reason for AFD (Does not appear to be notable software), links to commercial products have not been added. Open for more comments in order to improve the page. Dolores88 (talk) 11:03, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: More discussion is needed on the quality of sources to satisfy WP:GNG
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ‑Scottywong| gossip _ 00:16, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Nebojša Todorović

Nebojša Todorović (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Nebojša Todorović" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · HighBeam · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference)

Apparently fails WP:NACADEMIC. PROD removed w/o comment. —swpbT 13:26, 16 April 2017 (UTC)

  • Delete. Does not meet Notability for an academic criteria. Not an exceptional academic. Knox490 (talk) 13:59, 16 April 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. —swpbT 13:27, 16 April 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Serbia-related deletion discussions. —swpbT 13:27, 16 April 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. —swpbT 13:27, 16 April 2017 (UTC)
  • Comment: The PROD wasn't exactly removed without comment – the editor who removed it suggested we expand the article by translating from Serbian Wikipedia. The Serbian article appears to be completely unreferenced, though, so I don't think that would help in establishing notability. It would be good to get the opinion of someone who can read Serbian. --Deskford (talk) 14:02, 16 April 2017 (UTC)
  • Do NOT delete. The article is improved and will be additionally improved in the following days.Andrija (talk) 13:36, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
  • Delete. I am a native speaker of Serbo-Croatian, and was able to check the sources. I don't see anything particularly outstanding in the subject's biography that would suggest passing of WP:NACADEMIC. Yeah, Todorović is/was a professor of musicology on a couple of musical faculties and high schools in south Serbia, presided or was an advisor on a number of minor festivals or local cultural institutions, and wrote a musical critic here and there. pretty much par for a course of a typical academic career. Sourcing in the article is barrel-scraping, with multiple sources repeated, and multiple passing mentions listed. I'm particularly unimpressed with the subject's written bibliography on his official curriculum page [51], which consists of one monograph from 1981 and one work on Mozart's sonatas from 2007. That's pretty little output for a one of the leading musicologists and music theorists in Serbia. No such user (talk) 10:24, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
  • Comment Let me try to clarify some things:

“one of the leading musicologists and music theorist in Serbia” was a quotation from an independent source.

Todorović has taught at two universities in Serbia, of five that currently offer education in the field of music, and presented lectures at conferences organized by additional two universities.

Niš is the second largest city in Serbia [52], with the university, electronic industry, airport, symphony orchestra, youth philharmonic orchestra, etc., and several festivals, including the international choir festival of which Todorović was an artistic director and selector.That choir festival has a long tradition and is well known in Serbia (and not only in Serbia); as it was mentioned in one of the sources, last year it was reviewed by three well-known musicologists from Belgrade, including those from the national radio station Radio Belgrade. It is not a minor festival. Festivals in Leskovac and Vranje maybe don’t have such a long tradition, but are well organized and attract high quality participants, what can be easily verified any musician who reads their programs. We shouldn’t judge the quality of some institution or manifestation by its location, but by the quality of people included in it. There’s no reason to underestimate those in south Serbia. (And just to emphasize that I don’t live in those towns, nor am I affiliated with those festivals in any way.) Serbia is too small country to have some significant differences between its regions.

It is normal that somebody who lives and works in south Serbia (south-eastern actually) focuses his activities in that area, but Todorović had activities in other parts of Serbia as well. Invitations to give public lectures on the national radio station in Belgrade, to review a book published in the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina, present a scientific paper in the Serbian Republic, review a festival in Montenegro and publish reviews in their major newspaper certainly suggest his notability in the region.

As for his CV at the University of Niš’s website (published in 2013 and obviously not updated): in contrast to some Western countries, in Serbia Commission for Accreditation and Quality Assurance doesn’t require or allow professors to write their complete CV as a part of documentation reviewed in the process of accreditation. In order to prove his/her competency to teach certain subject(s), one has to list “at least five, not more than ten” most important publications/concerts/exhibitions…, depending on the scientific/artistic area, so, only examples, as Todorović probably did. And those works mentioned in his CV, presented at the scientific conferences organized by the Serbian Academy of Sciences and Arts (SANU) in Belgrade – the highest scientific and artistic institution in the country, or by Matica srpska in Novi Sad, almost equally important institution in north Serbia, are without doubt significant; Mokranjčevi dani (The Days of Mokranjac) in Negotin is a manifestation with a long tradition, attended by numerous musicologists and performers.

Complete CV with bibliography and proofs is submitted only when one applies for a position at the university. The complete documentation is then reviewed by at least three professors from the same scientific/artistic area, from different universities, in the same or higher rank than those for which a candidate applies. I don’t know who reviewed Todorovic’s work, but they all had to be full professors of Musicology or Music theory, probably from the Faculty of Musical Arts in Belgrade and to give positive review and recommendation for his appointment into the rank of full professor. I suppose that they wouldn’t give such recommendation if they weren’t sure that he was qualified for that position and academic rank.Andrija (talk) 10:37, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

Nobody here is saying that Todorović is not qualified for his position. However, just being a full professor of a university is not a sufficient achievement to earn him a Wikipedia article – WP:NACADEMIC bar is much higher than that, requiring research [of] significant impact; a highly prestigious academic award, or similar, and in the case of Todorović I just don't see it. Writing several papers for journal and conferences, and a textbook or a monograph is pretty par for the course for a full professor, and I don't see any "significant impact" there, even considering the full list at Serbian Wikipedia. Festivals such as Mokranjac Days in Negotin or Choir Festival in Niš (where he participated only as an art director, not as a founder or something), regardless of tradition, in my book qualify as "minor", as they are of regional importance and hardly world-rank events. And such activities (jurist or art director of a festival, writer of an occasional critic) are certainly expected for someone on a high academic position. No such user (talk) 11:35, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
  • Keep: WP:ACADEMIC is a supplement to WP:GNG, not something that supercedes it. GNG is met, and notability established. There's a fair bit of puffery in style that requires copyediting, but these folks in the Liberal Arts fields are not going to some up with the same types of publications as someone in the hard sciences nor will they get the popular coverage of rockstars. Here, we have numerous sources from third-party publications and I think this is more than adequate, particularly when you add in the national awards. WP:GNG is met. Montanabw(talk) 03:50, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
    However, Montanabw, I don't see GNG satisfied. When one digs deeper into the apparently impressive list of 36 references, and removes about a half of duplicated entries, it turns out to be more or less a digest of Google results about the subject – every school, festival or forum where he participated and where he got a passing mention is duly used as a reference. The sources that go any deeper into his biography aren't really independent – those are Vranje Piano Summer festival brochure, where he held a lecture about Skryabin, its rehash on the same festival, where he held a lecture on Gilels, and his faculty CV. No independent press, magazines, interviews. And I'm also concerned about Zero hits at Google books (the few hits are about another person) – even taking into account systemic bias, books in Serbo-Croatian tend to be at least indexed by Google, and there's nothing here. No such user (talk) 08:22, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
    I am hesitant to delete these non-English bios of folks in Eastern Europe because newspaper coverage and such may not be age-of-Google. I see a combination of academic accomplishment and musicianship. The "how many peer reviewed papers did he publish?" standard of NACADEMIC works for the hard sciences, but is not an adequate way to rank people in the arts. Here, we look to a multitude of different accomplishments, and even if some sources are duplicative, we err on the side of a presumption of notability until established otherwise, and here I think it's on the keep side of the line. But, of course, you have the right to disagree with my position on this matter, I've said my piece and I'm not interested in a lot of further debate, it will go as it goes, so am also taking this off my watchlist. Montanabw(talk) 20:44, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ‑Scottywong| prattle _ 00:13, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Files

Files for discussion

April 27

Categories

April 27

NEW NOMINATIONS

Redirects

April 27

Templates

April 27

User warning templates for unsourced or improperly cited works

Template:Uw-poorlysourced1
Template:Uw-unsourced1 (edit · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
Template:Uw-poorlysourced2
Template:Uw-unsourced2 (edit · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
Template:Uw-poorlysourced3
Template:Uw-unsourced3 (edit · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)
Template:Uw-poorlysourced4
Template:Uw-unsourced4 (edit · talk · history · links · logs · subpages · delete)

Propose merging: Uw-poorlysourced templates are not (yet) officially part of Wikipedia:WikiProject User warnings or listed in Wikipedia:Template messages/User talk namespace. The wording is very similar in these templates, main point being the user should add reliable sources. 80.221.152.17 (talk) 00:33, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Miscellany

Deletion review

27 April 2017

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:XfD_today&oldid=768967260"
This content was retrieved from Wikipedia : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:XfD_today
This page is based on the copyrighted Wikipedia article "Wikipedia:XfD today"; it is used under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License (CC-BY-SA). You may redistribute it, verbatim or modified, providing that you comply with the terms of the CC-BY-SA