Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/People

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

Note: In most cases there is another, more specific category than this one.

If possible, please use one of these instead:

Note: The following pages are transcluded onto the Biography Deletion sorting page

Note: the following pages are not transcluded onto the Biography Deletion sorting page

Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Bands and musicians
Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Fashion (e.g. models)
Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Fictional elements
Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Women
Wikipedia:WikiProject Pornography/Deletion for adult film actors and actresses

Adding a new AfD discussion

Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:

Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary, it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|People|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.

Note that there are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.

Removing a closed AfD discussion

Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.

Other types of discussions

You can also add and remove links to other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to People.

Further information

For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.

Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at:

Purge page cache

watch

People

Herbert Harold Disley

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

Fails WP:GNG (General Notability Guideline). Subject appears notable primarily as the father of Olympic athlete John Disley. No evidence of significant coverage in reliable sources independent of the subject. Role as quarry manager, while locally important, does not demonstrate notability per WP:BIO. See also WP:NOTINHERITED - notability is not inherited from notable relatives. Keironoshea (talk) 17:05, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Keironoshea (talk) 17:05, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Wales-related deletion discussions. jolielover♥talk 17:28, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

N. S. Raju

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

Not notable, not in coverage, a big article stands on only two sources, looks like unsourced article. Dirty Dolphish (talk) 15:59, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Academics and educators, Asia, India, Andhra Pradesh, and Telangana. Dirty Dolphish (talk) 15:59, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Michelle Hinn

AfDs for this article:

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

Minimal notability demonstrated. Go D. Usopp (talk) 12:52, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Women, Video games, United States of America, and Virginia. Go D. Usopp (talk) 12:52, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Fails WP:SIGCOV and WP:NACADEMIC. The sourcing here is not great. The Next-gen.biz. piece was clearly a republication of PR bio, likely written by the subject, as the author of the piece actually works as a PR promoter. The second source was written by the subject. And the third piece is the newsletter of the IGDA from the time Hinn had a leadership role there, making it not independent. There are zero sources here qualifying her for notability. She doesn't any of the SNG criteria either.4meter4 (talk) 13:10, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Dennis Gehlen

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

Little established notability. Sources are of dubious reliability; only source close to passing GNG is a Daily Dot article. Go D. Usopp (talk) 12:40, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Video games, and Germany. Go D. Usopp (talk) 12:40, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Chanchalapathi Dasa

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

There are too many press releases, interviews and primary sources including biography profiles and foundation websites. I am unable to find any independent sources and the National Award for Child Welfare 2017 was awarded to his organization, not to him. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 11:27, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Spirituality, and Karnataka. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 11:27, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

4cf (singer)

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

Not passed in WP:BANDMEMBER and WP:SINGER. There is no significant coverage about him. ROY is WAR Talk! 10:13, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Bands and musicians, Music, and United States of America. ROY is WAR Talk! 10:13, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 16:25, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Fails WP:NMUSICIAN. Did a Google News search and found nothing useful. Unregistered Biohazard! 18:17, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Alex Kantrowitz

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

Fails all notability requirements. Sources in the article are primary and WP:BEFORE doesn't indicate notability Ednabrenze (talk) 07:58, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Journalism, and United States of America. Ednabrenze (talk) 07:58, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politics, California, and New York. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 08:15, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Jason Parker (security researcher)

AfDs for this article:

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

Bringing this back to AfD after a previous no consensus decision as it was referenced on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Blake Welsh. There remains no significant coverage of the subject of the article. Notability is not inherited and discovering vulnerabilities, even if notable, does not make the discoverer notable. Brandon (talk) 04:54, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Computing. Brandon (talk) 04:54, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Law and United States of America. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 08:19, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete passing mentions of article subject in the news coverage, but no WP:SIGCOV on this individual. Does not pass WP:ANYBIO. Nayyn (talk) 08:52, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, dude you don't get to rehash the same arguments over and over again. The sources haven't changed significantly and neither has any of the guidelines. My previous argument still stands. -- Sohom (talk) 14:39, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

For context, "I think having ArsTechnica, a variety of legal sources, TechCrunch and SC Media go into depth about a specific vulnerability and explicitly accredit the discovery of said vulnerabilities to a person, should push the said person over the bar of WP:GNG, since, such coverage is pretty rare in the field of cybersecurity and would count as significant coverage in my opinion" was what I said before and I still stand by it. -- Sohom (talk) 14:45, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Pogačar

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

Procedural listing of this disambiguation page due to a WP:WRONGFORUM issue. The nominator User:Orangesclub believes this page should be deleted and redirected to Tadej Pogačar as the primary topic. To quote the statement of the nominator: "He has 1000x the page views as the golfer [1] and over 90% of clicks on Pogačar are to him [2]" ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 03:57, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Disambiguations. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 03:57, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment By the way, to forestall arguments that a set index article cannot be deleted per WP:ONEOTHER, this is actually a disambiguation page. Whilst labeled as a set index, a set index article must pass WP:LISTN guidelines, and there is no indication this name does. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 04:09, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

As I wrote at Talk:Pogačar, we would not be solving any real problems by doing any of this. (Keep) --Joy (talk) 06:20, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: this is not a dab page, where primary topic is relevant, but a surname page. We only redirect from surname to person in cases where they are overwhelmingly the most significant person and often referred to by name, like Einstein or Obama. PamD 07:31, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Surname pages must actually be notable as a surname, mentioned in reliable sources. So if it's a surname page, it fails notability criteria anyway and should likely be deleted for that reason regardless. It does seem like the cyclist is the only one specifically referred to by just that name alone. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 13:38, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
What do you mean by a surname page? Is it an article, or a set index? This is the same distinction as the one we were talking about at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Konstas. --Joy (talk) 14:07, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Blake Welsh

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

Subject lacks significant coverage by the sources in the article. Their name has been mentioned reasonably frequently in connection with discovering vulnerabilities, however not a single article spends any time discussing the subject aside from crediting them with the discovery. Brandon (talk) 15:29, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Computing. Brandon (talk) 15:29, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There is precedent for similar cases where security researchers were kept despite most coverage being in the context of vulnerabilities. For example, in the AfD for Jason Parker (security researcher) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jason_Parker_(security_researcher)

(2024), the article was not deleted. Editors there noted that repeated attribution in independent, reliable sources across multiple incidents demonstrated sufficient notability, even if no single profile piece existed. This situation is comparable. AxiomGaming (talk) 16:36, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm nothing if not consistent: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jason Parker (security researcher) (2nd nomination). Brandon (talk) 04:58, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Brandon has stated "I'm nothing if not consistent" (here) and previously "Please ignore the admin icon, I'm just someone who used to spend too much time on Wikipedia and enjoys computer security. My AfD nominations end with the article being kept as often as anyone else" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Jason_Parker_(security_researcher)

). In the second nomination for that article, he also argued: "discovering vulnerabilities, even if notable, does not make the discoverer notable" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Jason_Parker_(security_researcher)_(2nd_nomination).

The reasoning in this discussion seems different from those earlier AfDs on similar subjects, raising concerns about consistency in applying WP:SIGCOV https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability#significant_coverage. Per WP:NPOV https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view, each case should be judged neutrally on the basis of independent sources and coverage, not on an editor's changing stance across discussions. AxiomGaming (talk) 19:26, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Maryland-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 21:07, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'd like to note that the inclusion of this discussion in the list of Maryland-related deletion discussions is directly supported by a reliable source. For example, TechCrunch explicitly confirmed my Maryland connection, stating: "and Welsh is a student at Anne Arundel Community College in Maryland." (TechCrunch, June 30, 2015) https://techcrunch.com/2015/06/30/vulnerability-in-security-service-lifelock-could-have-exposed-logins-and-passwords/. This demonstrates clear sourcing for the Maryland relevance of the article. AxiomGaming (talk) 21:26, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The standard is significant coverage, not merely being mentioned in passing by a reliable source. Brandon (talk) 04:58, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Similar to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Ian_Coldwater, coverage of my work is significant - multiple reliable sources directly reported on vulnerabilities I discovered, not merely in passing. Several of these disclosures were substantial, involving adversaries potentially gaining access to the personal information of entire customer bases at companies such as MetroPCS, Verizon, and Charter. AxiomGaming (talk) 06:23, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

AfD debates do not set precedent and no consensus outcomes with 2 participants are especially unpersuasive. Coverage of your work is not the threshold, there needs to be significant coverage of you. Your name and place of residence does not constitute a Wikipedia article. Brandon (talk) 07:25, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Per WP:SIGCOV, significant coverage means more than a passing mention, but does not require that the subject be the sole focus of an article. In this case, multiple independent, reliable outlets (Vice, TechCrunch, Gizmodo, The Register, BuzzFeed, etc.) provided detailed reporting on vulnerabilities that directly attributed their discovery to the subject. This meets the standard for significant coverage under WP:BIO. AxiomGaming (talk) 08:04, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as WP:BLP article subject lacks WP:SIGCOV from WP:RS to WP:V claims beyond the discovery. Don't think this person counts for WP:BLP1E. Discovery used in a WP:UNDUE fashion with regards to notability. Nayyn (talk) 08:48, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Per WP:SIGCOV, significant coverage means more than a passing mention, but does not require the subject to be the sole focus of an article. In this case, multiple independent and reliable outlets directly attributed discoveries to me:

The Register: "Cinder researchers Eric Taylor and Blake Welsh say the vulnerabilities were simple to exploit up until a patch was dropped."

https://www.theregister.com/2015/11/16/metropcs_patches_hole_that_opened_10_million_user_creds_to_plunder/

Vice: "Security researchers Eric Taylor and Blake Welsh, who both work at secure payments firm Cinder, found the bug in mid-October."

https://www.vice.com/en/article/nasty-bug-in-metropcs-website-left-personal-data-of-subscribers-open-to-hacker/

TechCrunch: "Welsh is a student at Anne Arundel Community College in Maryland. They have previously discovered basic but dangerous vulnerabilities at PayPal."

https://techcrunch.com/2015/06/30/vulnerability-in-security-service-lifelock-could-have-exposed-logins-and-passwords/

https://web.archive.org/web/20160318225931/https://www.paypal.com/webapps/mpp/security-tools/wall-of-fame-honorable-mention

Yahoo News: "Cinder researchers Eric Taylor and Blake Welsh say the vulnerabilities were simple to exploit…"

https://tech.yahoo.com/general/article/2015-11-15-metropcs-site-exposed-subscriber-data.html

Fierce Wireless: "Report: MetroPCS customers' personal information had been vulnerable due to website security."

https://www.fierce-network.com/wireless/report-metropcs-customers-personal-information-had-been-vulnerable-due-to-website-security

in addition to coverage in multiple independent reliable sources

The AT&T Bug Bounty Hall of Fame (archived at https://web.archive.org/web/20181228020539/https://bugbounty.att.com/hof.php#archive

) explicitly lists Blake Welsh under the research group "Cinder." This confirms both individual recognition and organizational affiliation.

These are not trivial mentions they provide direct quotes, organizational context (Cinder), and secondary verification (e.g., TechCrunch on PayPal). This shows repeated, substantive coverage across multiple outlets, which meets the standard for significant coverage under WP:BIO. AxiomGaming (talk) 09:28, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Correction: In my earlier comment I mistakenly presented the Yahoo News wording as a direct quote. To clarify, the article paraphrases that "Eric Taylor and Blake Welsh" found the vulnerabilities. AxiomGaming (talk) 09:53, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sarah Walker (music broadcaster)

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

Notability not established despite a notability tag having been put in place three months ago. Jw93d59 (talk) 15:00, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Women, Music, Radio, and United Kingdom. jolielover♥talk 15:04, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This article was almost deleted through PROD. Why did you remove the tag at the last minute and bring it to WP:AFD? It's just unusual behavior. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 17:03, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 23:20, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep difficult to find independent sources as very common name and works for the BBC, but I think she has received enough third party coverage for her work to pass WP:GNG [3][4]

Sunny Kumar Singh

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

Subject does not appear to meet WP:GNG, with a lack of significant coverage in independent sources. Cordless Larry (talk) 07:53, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Cordless Larry (talk) 07:53, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Sunny Kumar Singh is a senior IAS officer, currently serving as District Magistrate of New Delhi, a very important administrative post in India’s capital. He has also served as Delhi’s Excise Commissioner during a period of high public and political scrutiny. His receipt of the Prime Minister’s Award for Excellence in Public Administration (2023) and the Arunachal Pradesh State Gold Medal (2022) further demonstrates national recognition of his work. Coverage in multiple reliable and independent sources such as The Hindu, New Indian Express, and Times of India provides the required significant discussion required under the General Notability Guidelines. This combination of high-profile roles, national awards, and sufficient press coverage makes him clearly notable as a public official. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yennavo (talk • contribs) 09:10, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Which of those sources discusses Singh in any depth? Cordless Larry (talk) 13:23, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Also, I checked the sources for the awards, and they weren't awarded to him personally but to the district of Changlang. Cordless Larry (talk) 13:40, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
While the Prime Minister’s Award for Excellence in Public Administration is technically given in the name of a district, it is awarded at the same time to the District Magistrate or Deputy Commissioner, who is in charge of the administration. This is why the Government of India records it on the officer’s official record sheet, rather than just at the district level. The Arunachal Pradesh State Gold Medal works similarly, acknowledging both the district administration and the officer leading it. Therefore, the awards go to Mr. Singh as the head of the district administration. Multiple reliable sources have reported this information. I can provide government references and archived copies of the award citations, if needed, to explain the nature of the conferment. Archivelens (talk) 14:37, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Wikipedia user @Yennavo’s view that Mr. Singh’s role as District Magistrate of New Delhi is important due to the administrative and political weight of this position. His time as Excise Commissioner occurred during a time of intense public attention and received coverage from several national media outlets.

As mentioned earlier, the awards are formally given to the district, but they are also logged in the officer’s service profile by the Government of India. This shows that they acknowledge the officer’s leadership as well as the district’s administration.

These key roles, national and state level awards, and ongoing coverage in trustworthy independent sources meet the criteria under WP:GNG for significant coverage and under WP:NPOL for public officials. Archivelens (talk) 14:41, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'll ask you the same question as I asked Yennavo: which of the sources provides substantial coverage about Singh (as opposed to just mentioning him or quoting him)? Cordless Larry (talk) 16:15, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Law, and Delhi. jolielover♥talk 09:50, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: I've just realised that this article was likely written by ChatGPT (see the tracking code at the end of the URL in reference 7 here). Cordless Larry (talk) 14:19, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Debabrata Sen

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

All I can find are fabricated sources from a WP:BEFORE search. The five sources in the article are unavailable with no wayback archives. Fails WP:GNG Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 09:42, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 09:42, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Medicine, India, and West Bengal. jolielover♥talk 09:52, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep – The subject has significant coverage in reliable, independent sources such as Outlook India, Free Press Journal, The Hindu, and Times of India. Dead links do not mean sources are fabricated (see WP:DEADREF). He has received notable awards and recognition, meeting WP:GNG.Sweetabena (talk) 10:51, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sweetabena, please link those articles here. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 11:15, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Here are some sources I could find. I don't really like this page and I'm not sure I want it here, nonetheless:

1. https://www.outlookindia.com/healthcare-spotlight/dr-debabrata-sen-a-visionary-leader-revolutionizing-ayurveda-with-generational-wisdom-and-modern-innovation

2. https://www.msn.com/en-in/health/health-news/dr-debabrata-sen-a-visionary-blending-ayurveda-with-modern-science-for-a-healthier-india/ar-AA1K5HUw

3. https://www.republicbiz.com/initiatives/dr-debabrata-sen-a-visionary-blending-ayurveda-with-modern-science-for-a-healthier-india

4. https://www.indiablooms.com/health/parampara-ayurveda-founder-dr-debabrata-sen-shares-wellness-strategies-for-desk-bound-professionals/details

Kvinnen (talk) 11:02, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

All of the above sources are either sponsored or unbylined, as disclosed in the sources themselves. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 11:07, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a problem with unbylined sources? I understand why sponsored sources might raise problems. Thanks! Kvinnen (talk) 11:19, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unbylined sources usually aren’t that reliable since a lot of them turn out to be press releases or sponsored pieces. You don’t really know who wrote them or if they even went through proper editorial checks. With bylined articles, at least you can look up the author’s past work and get a sense of their credibility. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 12:01, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Response – While I agree that sponsored content is not independent and should be discounted, not all unbylined articles are automatically unreliable. Major Indian outlets like Outlook and MSN India frequently run unbylined staff pieces, especially in their health or features sections, and these still go through editorial review. Per WP:RS, reliability depends on the reputation of the publication, not whether an individual journalist’s name is attached.

That said, I agree we should prioritize clearly independent coverage. The Hindu and Times of India pieces cited are standard news reporting (not sponsored), and they provide exactly the kind of significant coverage required under WP:GNG. Even one or two such articles, combined with his awards and professional recognition, are usually sufficient for notability.

In short: let’s remove or de-emphasize any PR-like sources, but the existence of mainstream coverage in The Hindu and TOI still supports keeping this article.Sweetabena (talk) 13:20, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Cut the AI crap and link those articles. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 13:49, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Number 2 is just a link to number 3. Jahaza (talk) 19:49, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete no apparently reliable sources. Some sources appear to be fake. Indian Journal of Traditional Knowledge source appears to be fake/hallucinated. Jahaza (talk) 19:52, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - This Ayurvedic physician is not notable. It seems there is a western physician with the same name, therefore one has to be careful when searching for sources, because they are different people. I could not find anything in an online BEFORE search to substantiate this Debabrata Sen's notability. The current sources in the article are either dead links or poor quality or as mentioned above, fake. The sources brought to the table by Swetabena are sponsored content or PR puff-pieces not journalism, for example wording like: "Dr. Sen has redefined the landscape"..."he has created new paradigms"..."His brainchild, (is his) brand"..."through his pioneering work"..."Beyond clinical excellence...a beacon of selfless service"..."His life’s work is a shining example..."his extraordinary contributions"...etc. etc. is pure unadulterated promo that can't be taken as serious news reporting, especially not for an encyclopedia. Fails WP:GNG, WP:NACADEMIC and WP:NBUSINESSPERSON. Netherzone (talk) 03:59, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Per statements above. Svartner (talk) 05:11, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
KEEP I wrote the article, and all dead/expired links are now live. Hummer9713 (talk) 08:32, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - a single bylined source isn't significant coverage; it's original research. The other sources are unreliable as discussed above. I'm sorry, but unless it's hard news, we must be suspicious of certain media outlets. In ordinary times, we could tolerate a poorly sourced BLP, but in 2025, we must be cautious. The proponents of this BLP have failed in their burden of proof. I'm sorry, but this is a terrible time to treat us like we're LinkedIn. Don't take it personally, but it's for our continued existence. Maybe you can try again in 2029. Bearian (talk) 15:40, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Muhammad Muslehuddin Siddiqui

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

I did a simple Google search on this person and only found a few fan-promoted websites. The article cites nine references: sources 1 and 7 are unreliable, user-generated fandom sites; 8 and 9 are death notices about someone else, with no direct relevance; and 5 and 6 are not references at all. The only primary source (Ahmad Noori) is used twice, but it is also unverifiable. No secondary sources are present to demonstrate the significance of this person as a religious figure per Wikipedia guidelines. Fails WP:GNG and WP:BIO. Delete.–𝐎𝐰𝐚𝐢𝐬 𝐀𝐥 𝐐𝐚𝐫𝐧𝐢 ʕʘ̅͜ʘ̅ʔ 08:17, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Pakistan. –𝐎𝐰𝐚𝐢𝐬 𝐀𝐥 𝐐𝐚𝐫𝐧𝐢 ʕʘ̅͜ʘ̅ʔ 08:17, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Islam, India, and Maharashtra. jolielover♥talk 09:45, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: The nomination's rationale is flawed. A simple Google search does not determine notability, especially for a historically significant figure like Muhammad Muslehuddin Siddiqui, a prominent Barelvi scholar and Sufi in India and Pakistan.

Multiple reliable secondary sources, including scholarly Islamic websites and books, document his influence as a qari, preacher, and founder of Madrasa Anwar-ul-Islam. His authored works, like Samajiyaat, further establish notability under WP:AUTHOR.

Sources 1 and 7 are not user-generated but reputable Islamic platforms; 8 and 9 are mischaracterized, as they provide context on his Barelvi contributions. Siddiqui’s cultural and religious impact in Sufism meets WP:GNG and WP:BIO. Zuck28 (talk) 14:07, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Zuck28: Do you have any idea what secondary sources are? If you do, please share at least one. The number 1 source is https://www.thesunniway.com and number 7 is https://alahazrat.net . How did you reach the conclusion that these are reputable historical websites? What is their editorial methodology? Their very names suggest that they are fandom-style blogs run by specific groups. According to WP:SELFSOURCE and WP:USERGENERATED, such fansites are generally not acceptable as sources. The only unverifiable primary source is (Ahmad Noori). According to WP:PSTS, Secondary or tertiary sources are needed to establish the topic's notability and avoid novel interpretations of primary sources. All analyses and interpretive or synthetic claims about primary sources must be referenced to a secondary or tertiary source and must not be an original analysis of the primary-source material by Wikipedia editors. So, in that case, we have no secondary scholarly sources to verify the topic's notability.–𝐎𝐰𝐚𝐢𝐬 𝐀𝐥 𝐐𝐚𝐫𝐧𝐢 ʕʘ̅͜ʘ̅ʔ 17:23, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tanzeem Ul Firdous

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

Despite being tagged for notability and COI since 2022, the current version of this article still provides no justification for its inclusion in Wikipedia. The references are primarily user-generated or self-published promotional websites. There is not a single reliable secondary or academic source demonstrating why the subject is notable as a researcher, professor, or author. The article fails to meet WP:GNG and WP:PROF. Deletion preferred.–𝐎𝐰𝐚𝐢𝐬 𝐀𝐥 𝐐𝐚𝐫𝐧𝐢 ʕʘ̅͜ʘ̅ʔ 07:55, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Pakistan. –𝐎𝐰𝐚𝐢𝐬 𝐀𝐥 𝐐𝐚𝐫𝐧𝐢 ʕʘ̅͜ʘ̅ʔ 07:55, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators and Language. jolielover♥talk 09:46, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

State of Bengal

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

no significant coverage in independent reliable source. Rht bd (talk) 20:55, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Bands and musicians, Bangladesh, and United Kingdom. Rht bd (talk) 20:55, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The 1,500+ word entry about him in the Oxford Dictionary of National Biography (ODNB) is a clear pass of WP:ANYBIO.[5] --Worldbruce (talk) 21:36, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Pakistan, Jordan, Turkey, and England. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 23:16, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Worldbruce. Mccapra (talk) 02:23, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Guard the artist seems to be notable enough in accordance with Wikipedia:Notability. Worldbruce's comment on the artist being in the Oxford Dictionary of National Biography is also a strong argument. MelikaShokoufandeh (talk) 07:41, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per point 3 of WP:ANYBIO. – Ike Lek (talk) 02:36, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - the ODNB entry by itself would be enough to establish notability, and his obituary in The Independent (ref [2],[6]) qualifies as significant coverage. Epsilon.Prota ^talk 17:54, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Deeder Zaman

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

no significant coverage in independent reliable source. Sources used are closely associated and some are trivial mentions. Rht bd (talk) 20:53, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Bands and musicians, Bangladesh, and United Kingdom. Rht bd (talk) 20:53, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 23:16, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep – Fairly notable for his work with the Asian Dub Foundation and political activism [6]. Svartner (talk) 23:55, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Amina Khayyam

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

no significant coverage in independent reliable source. Rht bd (talk) 20:47, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Dance, Bangladesh, and United Kingdom. Rht bd (talk) 20:47, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Naila Nayem

AfDs for this article:

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

No notable works to be mentioned in significant independent reliable source. Rht bd (talk) 20:36, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Bangladesh. Rht bd (talk) 20:36, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Women, Television, Fashion, and Medicine. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 23:19, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ben Higgins

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

Doubtful that finishing as second runner-up in The Bachelorette (American TV series) season 11 and then becoming the main character of The Bachelor (American TV series) season 20 would suffice. Indeed, WP:BIOSPECIAL and WP:NBASIC still apply, regardless of WP:NACTOR... or WP:ANYBIO. Even reappearing in and then becoming eliminated from The Bachelor Winter Games may still not suffice. Per WP:BIO1E if not WP:BLP1E, should be redirected to The Bachelor (American TV series) season 20 since he was the main character there. George Ho (talk) 17:24, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Businesspeople, Television, and Indiana. George Ho (talk) 17:24, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Chipokota Mwanawasa

AfDs for this article:

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

This article was previously nominated for deletion in 2021. During that discussion, an editor noted:

"Apart from being daughter to Zambian third President, I don’t see any sign of notability per WP:GNG to warrant a standalone article." — Megan B...., 24 November 2021, AfD discussion

Since that nomination, there has been no substantial new independent coverage of the subject. The majority of available sources remain self-published, blogs, or minor mentions, and WP:GNG concerns remain unresolved.

For full context and discussion from the 2021 nomination, see: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chipokota Mwanawasa. THE ONE PEOPLE (talk) 13:41, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Women, and Law. THE ONE PEOPLE (talk) 13:41, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Africa-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 23:34, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Gary Geidel

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

A firefighter who was killed during the collapse of the World Trade Center in 2001. Fails WP:NBIO. I was unable to find any sources that significantly coveraged the individual. Redirecting to List of victims of the September 11 attacks (A–G) is also an option. Alvaldi (talk) 12:35, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and United States of America. Alvaldi (talk) 12:35, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 23:36, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Benjamin Heywood (entrepreneur)

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

Lacking sufficient coverage to establish notability. Fails WP:GNG and WP:NBIO - The9Man ^Talk 10:10, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. - The9Man ^Talk 10:10, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Health and fitness, Technology, Internet, and Massachusetts. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:57, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral comment There is an article at Benjamin Heywood about an older and notable subject and there is no concern I see regarding article title evasion or hijacking, and this is properly disambiguated. Nathannah • 📮 15:22, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I haven't seen any concerns raised about that. What made you think there might be an issue? - The9Man ^Talk 07:28, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It's very common for promotional editors who want to brute force their articles here to use different titles with parentheticals to do so (especially after being salted); just commenting that this is not the case here for those on AfD so they know in advance and this is just a regular BLP. Nathannah • 📮 19:44, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Grant Ellis

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

Probably fails WP:NBASKETBALL and WP:SPORTSBASIC. Not just that, even after appearing in The Bachelorette (American TV series) season 21 and then becoming the main character of The Bachelor (American TV series) season 29, still fails WP:BIOSPECIAL and WP:NBASIC. If he fails NBASIC and SPORTSBASIC, then he also fails WP:GNG. Thus, per WP:BIO1E if WP:BLP1E doesn't apply, should be redirected to The Bachelor (American TV series) season 29. George Ho (talk) 06:54, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Television, Basketball, Dominican Republic, and New Jersey. George Ho (talk) 06:54, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Let'srun (talk) 16:52, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

George Ghanem

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

Community consensus has shown that ambassadors are not inherently notable and do not get a free pass to notability. Searching in google news ["George Ghanem" lebanon] yields nothing. Source 1 is not SIGCOV. Source 2 is primary. Source 3 doesn't appear to cover this person. source 4 appears to be about Qatari ambassador. LibStar (talk) 23:40, 19 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Bilateral relations, and Lebanon. LibStar (talk) 23:40, 19 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Source 3 appears to be mis-linked. Have you actually gained access to source 4, or are you just assuming it does not have SIGCOV? Ike Lek (talk) 00:08, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have access on source 4? I am going on the article title. Open to it being possible SIGCOV. LibStar (talk) 00:10, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I don't have access yet. I'm not claiming it is SIGCOV, just asking a clarifying question before I go through to trouble of trying to get access. Ike Lek (talk) 00:15, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Law and Malaysia. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:15, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, a search brought up various press releases by the Government of Malaysia regarding aid programs and such, but no secondary sources. Devonian Wombat (talk) 02:58, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Unable to find independent secondary coverage of subject, and per nom ambassadors are not inherently notable. Epsilon.Prota ^talk 17:03, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ghassan El Khatib

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

As community consensus has shown, ambassadors are not inherently notable. The first source is a directory listing, the other 2 are dead. The 2 google news hits are small mentions. Fails WP:BIO. LibStar (talk) 22:52, 19 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Bilateral relations, and Lebanon. LibStar (talk) 22:52, 19 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep – While ambassadors may not be inherently notable, they are presumed to be notable under WP:NPOL. If you wish to contest this, either explain why it would not apply to ambassadors, or make an RfC to seek community consensus to have it changed. Most definitions of what a politician is would apply to ambassadors, who hold a national position. Additionally, the dead link indicates coverage. – Ike Lek (talk) 23:22, 19 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Consensus is very clear, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Humaira Hasan, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Salem Yahya Alkharejah. But you keep insisting there is inherent notability when no one agrees with you. Where is your consensus? LibStar (talk) 23:27, 19 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
My consensus is WP:NPOL, specifically this revision [7], which is a higher level of consensus than AfD. Bringing up previous AfDs is a very "other stuff doesn't exist" argument.

Also, I very clearly specified that I was not claiming inherent notability, so I would appreciate if you struck that. Ike Lek (talk) 23:46, 19 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
inherent, presumed notability...same thing. LibStar (talk) 23:49, 19 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
No. Very much not the same thing. Ike Lek (talk) 23:50, 19 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Previous AfDs (especially recent ones) are highly relevant as they show community consensus. You even said consensus can change, yes it can, but not evidenced in recent AfDs. You even tried an unsuccessful deletion review to desperately salvage your viewpoint on inherent/presumed notability. LibStar (talk) 23:52, 19 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I advice you to read WP:CONLEVEL. If you believe there is consensus against the current wording of policy, then RfC is the way to address that. Ike Lek (talk) 23:58, 19 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
As stated here "If you want to debate notability standards, I advise you to bring it to a policy talk page where other editors who are interested in the subject matter can weigh in. Editors interested in developing policies and guidelines are unlikely to see an AFD discussion." LibStar (talk) 00:00, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'm referencing a policy. You are referencing one editor's statement. Ike Lek (talk) 00:06, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Also, that supports my claim anyway. If you want to change policy, you should take it to RfC or the talk page. You are the one proposing a change and claiming that AfDs establish consensus for developing policies. I don't know why you would quote that, as it supports the notion that your previous AfDs do not impact consensus on policy. Ike Lek (talk) 00:13, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There is no presumed notability for ambassadors, no matter how hard you try to wpin it or use deletion reviews to overturn delete decisions determined through consensus. LibStar (talk) 09:24, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete ambassadors do not have presumed notability and the subject fails GNG. Ckfasdf (talk) 08:12, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Fails WP:BIO. Note that ambassadors are not presumed to be notable under WP:NPOL - I question the attempt to sneak in a novel policy interpretation, and don't even understand the reasoning. Here is NPOL bit by bit:

Politicians and judges Ambassadors are neither politicians nor judges as such. Some are, many are not.

who have held international, national, or (for countries with federal or similar systems of government) state/province–wide office Ambassadorship is not a political office.

or have been members of legislative bodies at those levels. Of course, they have not done ethis either.

This also applies to people who have been elected to such offices but have not yet assumed them. They are not elected to offices.

Major local political figures They are not local political figures.

who have received significant press coverage. Some have, many have not.

Geschichte (talk) 14:19, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I don't get how you claim ambassadors don't hold a political office. Ambassadors are absolutely politicians by nature of holding a political office. Can you cite a definition of politician that would exclude ambassadors? Ike Lek (talk) 16:24, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I agree with Geschichte's analysis of ambassador notability, and am slightly confused as to why @Ike Lek is citing a specific revision of WP:NPOL from 2015 containing since-removed ambassador specific material to support their assertion of consensus, while also referencing current wording of policy when discussing WP:CONLEVEL. Epsilon.Prota ^talk 17:43, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Balvinder Singh Sahni

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

The article fails to meet the general notability guideline. Furthermore, it relies solely on coverage from third-party news sources about a single event, which does not constitute the significant, in-depth, and independent coverage required under event notability and significant coverage guidelines. LKO2DL (talk) 17:16, 19 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Businesspeople, and India. LKO2DL (talk) 17:16, 19 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Arab Emirates-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:22, 19 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Kuwait and Punjab. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:09, 19 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep He has coverage from before his arrest, from major publications in the country. Khaleej Times, 2023, The National, 2023, Hotel & Gathering, 2020, Hindustan Times, 2016, Khaleej Times, 2023, Khaleej Times, 2020, Mews, 2023, Khaleej Times, 2016, AlArabiya, 2016, AlArabiya, 2018, Arabian Business, 2018, CNN, 2016. Although some of these are interviews, they're mostly not and show he meets WP:GNG and has significant and sustained coverage from before his arrests. jolielover♥talk 02:58, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Abdul Karim Ahmad

AfDs for this article:

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

This is a recreation of a deleted article that was previously removed through the AfD process. I initially tried G4, but another editor blocked its use. The creator of this article is currently under SPI, and if confirmed, the article can be speedily deleted under G5. The subject itself fails GNG and WP:NPOL. Ckfasdf (talk) 15:54, 19 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Politicians, Islam, and Indonesia. jolielover♥talk 16:35, 19 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: The article claims he was a member of the national House of Representatives, but the associated news article suggests instead he was a member of the Regional People's Representative Council. As Indonesia was no longer a federal state in the period he served, holding the equivalent of a provincial councillor position would not seem to meet WP:NPOL. Curbon7 (talk) 03:59, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Curbon7: Yes, and that was also one of the reasons cited for deletion in the previous AfD. Ckfasdf (talk) 05:25, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom, fails SIGCOV and not every members of Indonesian National House of Representatives are met GNG. 🅷🅴🅽🆁🅸 ^{(Let's talk)} ✉ 07:30, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Eran Thomson

AfDs for this article:

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

Does not meet WP:GNG/WP:BIO. Article relies mainly on primary/self-published sources and promotional content. LvivLark (talk) 15:24, 19 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Businesspeople, and Business. LvivLark (talk) 15:24, 19 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Australia and United States of America. jolielover♥talk 15:27, 19 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete non-notable and promotional. Local Variable (talk) 16:13, 19 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I fail to find sources establishing notability. LightlySeared (talk) 19:27, 19 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep – Subject meets WP:GNG through significant independent coverage. Thomson has been covered by independent media in both Australia and the US. Notability is further supported by his role as founder of PowerProv, which has worked with companies such as Google, Canva, Cisco, Toyota, and SXSW. Additional independent sources are being added to the article to better reflect coverage. - TG (talk) 21:41, 19 August 2025 (UTC)TatianagGoldflower[reply]
Fails the GNG because there is no significant coverage in independent, reliable secondary sources. Only podcast episode pages on Spotify, YouTube, Apple Podcasts, and the subject’s own sites, which cannot establish WP:GNG and does not satisfy WP:SIGCOV/INDEPENDENT/RS.

The 2015 AfD on this subject closed delete, and you doesnt provide something better than earlier version.

Claims “worked with Google/Canva/Cisco/Toyota/SXSW” appear only in selfposted sources but even if true that wouldnt confitm notability per WP:NOTINHERITED/NBIO.

Presence on Spotify/YouTube are primary sources, and the official YouTube is just a tiny channel with only a few dozen subscribers and viewers.LvivLark (talk) 15:45, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Clearly WP:PROMO. Svartner (talk) 04:16, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sayali Sanjeev

AfDs for this article:

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

While this looks to be an open and shut case of biographical notability, I am bringing this here for discussion due to the extensive sockpuppetry, COI and promotion throughout the history both live and deleted. This is the fourth AfD, with the 3rd a trainwreck at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sayali Chandsarkar.

My primary concerns are NEWSORGINDIA and whether the awards Sanjeev won or was nominated for are enough for ANYBIO. Thoughts? Star Mississippi 02:29, 19 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, Women, and India. Star Mississippi 02:29, 19 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Maharashtra-related deletion discussions. jolielover♥talk 04:16, 19 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Wow... Yikes... that last AFD sure was something. Shoulda got my popcorn ready first. That aside I think she now passes WP:NENT with major roles in Goshta Eka Paithanichi and Har Har Mahadev. National Film Awards are basically the Oscars of India so the first movie is definitely notable and she is billed first and I saw the second movie when it was released internationally and she plays a decently large supporting part so I feel comfortable voting keep on just that. Moritoriko (talk) 06:48, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Is this the 3d or 4th AfD? - E. Ux 14:10, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Fourth @Eva UX. The ones in the infobox, which includes this open one and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sayali Chandsarkar. Star Mississippi 14:13, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It's off by one because the one article that was named differently. Moritoriko (talk) 16:07, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: I agree she meets WP:NACTOR with the roles mentioned above and various other roles that are significant and in notable productions; see reviews of various films linked in her filmography, please. - E. Ux 14:09, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Abhey Singh IIT Baba

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

The individual got some coverage during February - March 2025, now there is no coverage anymore about the subject. Fails to meet WP:GNG at this stage. Capitals00 (talk) 01:20, 19 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Hinduism, Spirituality, India, and Haryana. jolielover♥talk 01:42, 19 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Temporary media coverage around Mahakumbh 2025 Prayag Maha Kumbh Mela and social media virality does not meet the standards of sustained, in-depth, and independent coverage required by WP:GNG. Sources are mostly event-based and lack long-term encyclopedic value. Notability is not established. Setwardo (talk) 15:55, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ludo Campbell-Reid

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

There seems enough questioning of his notability here, vs. BIO puffery, to at least justify opening the discussion through AfD. Andy Dingley (talk) 00:06, 19 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"sheer wankery of the details"

Oh, antipodeans, we poms do love you. Andy Dingley (talk) 00:07, 19 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Sportspeople, England, and New Zealand. jolielover♥talk 01:33, 19 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Fails WP:PROMO. Remove the puffery and there's negligible remaining encyclopedic content. DerbyCountyinNZ ^{(Talk Contribs)} 02:14, 19 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Vanity puff piece. Anxioustoavoid (talk) 17:55, 19 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: He's had significant coverage from both of Stuff and the NZ Herald, which are NZ's two main news publications. Voting keep as he appears to just pass GNG. I've added refs and removed some of the puffery/promo, but probably could do with some further edits. Nil🥝 02:51, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, concur that the coverage in major NZ publications over a period of many years is sufficient for this guy to meet GNG, if there are concerns about the article being promotional etc they can be pretty easily handled without recourse to deletion. Devonian Wombat (talk) 12:42, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Dan Lindfield

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

Fails WP:BASIC. Only here for WP:PROMOTION with WP:REPCITE Agent 007 (talk) 17:45, 18 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and United Kingdom. Agent 007 (talk) 17:45, 18 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I nominated the first instance of this article for speedy deletion as WP:A7. It was deleted, but then promptly re-created by the editor who created the first one. This iteration is no better - fails WP:BIO. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 17:59, 18 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I’m open to improving the article and would appreciate guidance on addressing the concerns raised by other editors. If the current sources do not meet WP:BIO or WP:GNG, I’d appreciate clarification on what type of independent coverage would be considered sufficient. I am willing to search for and add additional reliable sources to improve the article. Jack E Mason (talk) 18:22, 18 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, The Optegra source is non-independent; the Ophthalmologist profile seems to be written by a close colleague, but is still not enough alone; he others ones are passing mentions. No substantial independent coverage online. – Aza24 (talk) 18:12, 18 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I’m open to improving the article and would appreciate guidance on addressing the concerns raised by other editors. If the current sources do not meet WP:BIO or WP:GNG, I’d appreciate clarification on what type of independent coverage would be considered sufficient. I am willing to search for and add additional reliable sources to improve the article. Jack E Mason (talk) 18:22, 18 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Jack E Mason, you are looking for sources with three things:
reliability (reputably published)

independent (not written/published by a source with a close association to the subject)

substantial (not a passing-mention, i.e. the source is primarily about the subject)
The Ophthalmologist profile seems comparatively independent, but given that Lindfield works at Optegra, an employer cannot be considered "independent" of the subject. Does this make sense? Aza24 (talk) 19:13, 18 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, thanks for clarifying, I wasn’t aware that he worked at Optegra. I’ll focus on independent coverage and would appreciate any guidance on sources or ways to document his professional achievements and impact. Jack E Mason (talk) 19:35, 18 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete This reads like an advertisement (as do the sources). I don't see how this can be brought to standards. Driftingdrifting (talk) 23:51, 19 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Gene Hoffman (technology executive)

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

Pure promotional puff piece, likely generated by AI. The only good source here is an interview, which does not contribute to notability. Unfortunately, we have no room for any more brochures. MediaKyle (talk) 10:17, 18 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Businesspeople, and United States of America. MediaKyle (talk) 10:17, 18 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. The subject meets WP:GNG/WP:BIO with substantial independent coverage over decades, not just interviews: Wired (Feb 1997) on PrivNet/PGP; Forbes (July 1999) “The E-Gang”; Los Angeles Times (Apr 10, 2001) and Adweek (Apr 9, 2001) on eMusic’s sale to UMG (~$23–25m); Reuters (Sept 14, 2016) and Light Reading (Sept 14, 2016) on Amdocs’ acquisition of Vindicia. That is secondary, non-promotional sourcing across multiple career phases (so not WP:BIO1E). Any puffery is a cleanup Qrivas (talk) 10:33, 18 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Technology, Computing, Internet, and North Carolina. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:53, 18 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: This is likely related to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Vindicia. -- MediaKyle (talk) 01:04, 19 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oluwafemi Wale Ogunniyi

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

Fails WP:ANYBIO and WP:GNG. I find out article out there (from the Tribune Online) and that is questionably independent and possibly paid media. CNMall41 (talk) 03:06, 18 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Nigeria. CNMall41 (talk) 03:07, 18 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Disclosure: I am the subject of the article and have a conflict of interest (WP:COI). I will not edit the article directly.

Regarding WP:GNG / WP:ANYBIO: there is multiple, independent coverage with significant depth. Examples:

Olayinka, Adeola (15 July 2020). "Official Launch of FinxHost: Powering Africa's Digital Future, One Website at a Time". Daily Independent. Retrieved 18 August 2025. – Staff-written feature in a national newspaper describing the company’s origins, goals, and Ogunniyi’s role.

"Oluwafemi Wale Ogunniyi certified as the 224th Global Tech Hero". Nigerian Tribune. 9 April 2025. Retrieved 18 August 2025. – Independent reporting in a national outlet covering his recognition as a Global Tech Hero.

Editorial Team (2024). "Enabling Online Businesses: A Conversation with Oluwafemi Ogunniyi, Founder of FinxHost". Business Africa Online. Retrieved 18 August 2025. – Third-party article including substantive discussion of career and entrepreneurial impact.

These are secondary sources, independent of the subject, and provide non-trivial coverage beyond routine announcements. On that basis, I believe the article satisfies WP:GNG.

If consensus still finds gaps, I am open to draftification instead of deletion so that sources can be integrated carefully. Walex827 (talk) 04:11, 18 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Um, except you did edit the page directly. You actually moved it to mainspace after it was twice declined at AfC. That aside, the sources you provide are 1) a routine announcement about the company, not in-depth about the subject of the page, 2) a promotional article that is likely paid media, not independent, and 3) an interview. None of these can be used to show notability. --CNMall41 (talk) 04:16, 18 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

And despite your promise above, you went ahead and edited the page directly yet again. --CNMall41 (talk) 04:45, 18 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Internet, and Software. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:03, 18 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, non-notable individual. Sources are all PR puffery, and nothing comes close to being an independent publication. What we have in those sources are exaggerated marketing. Patre23 (talk) 07:25, 18 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Dietmar Kuttelwascher

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

Fails WP:Athlete LegalSmeagolian (talk) 00:40, 18 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Sportspeople. LegalSmeagolian (talk) 00:40, 18 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Olympics and Austria. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:17, 18 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep WP:GNG [8][9][10] – Ike Lek (talk) 04:30, 19 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The first source looks good to me, while second source is from the club Kuttelwascher competed for and as such isn't independent. I cannot view the third source so I have no opinion on it. Let'srun (talk) 15:43, 19 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The sources provided by Ike Lek are sufficient to keep the article for an Olympic athlete. I would believe there are additional sources in Austrian news archives. --Enos733 (talk) 16:06, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep – Per Ike Lek sources. Svartner (talk) 04:46, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Katrien de Craemer

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

Long since retired tennis player who made one WTA appearance in doubles which she lost. Never even won an ITF tournament and had career best rankings of 561 in singles and 377 in doubles. Clearly fails GNG. I can't find any SIGCOV about her and there has been a "This biography of a living person needs additional citations for verification" marker on the page since June 2021 with nothing added. Anxioustoavoid (talk) 19:37, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Sportspeople, Women, Tennis, Europe, and Belgium. Anxioustoavoid (talk) 19:37, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Fails in WP:GNG. Svartner (talk) 14:10, 18 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thomas Steensma

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

I'm nominating a set of recently created articles on WP:GNG / WP:OR grounds.

@Tiny Particle: created this article (Thomas Steensma), Peggy Cohen-Kettenis, Henriette Delemarre-van de Waal, and Annelou de Vries recently.

For context, they previously translated the article Dutch Protocol from dutch wiki, which was originally written by a now globally blocked PROFRINGE user and contains numerous sourcing/POV issues. It was taken to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dutch Protocol, where it's heading towards a clear delete and many editors note the sourcing issues.

During the AFD, they created the articles with content lifted from that. There is little to no independent coverage of the article subjects, with the bulk of the article being WP:OR / a blow by blow of primary research done by the subjects. With edit summaries like You are actively trying to salt the Dutch Protocol, so the depth is needed here[11][12][13], it seems the articles are just an attempt to skirt the original AFD. Your Friendly Neighborhood Sociologist ⚧ Ⓐ (talk) 16:47, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Your Friendly Neighborhood Sociologist ⚧ Ⓐ (talk) 16:47, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Sexuality and gender, and Netherlands. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:05, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Mass creation of poorly sourced BLPs (especially of note is the URL "https://profs.library.uu.nl/hoogleraar/cohen-kettenis-p-t/?utm_source=chatgpt.com" on Cohen-Kettenis) during a larger spree of strange behaviour from this user. Flounder fillet (talk) 00:38, 18 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete this articles and others recently created by Tiny Particle. These articles have little to say about the subjects and seem to focus more on the Dutch Protocol. It is unlikely these subjects have sufficient notability and secondary source coverage to warrant Wikipedia articles. Almost all of the existing sourcing is to either primary sources or non-independent sources (institutions where they work). Nosferattus (talk) 02:55, 18 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete all, the articles are primarily about the Dutch Protocol, from my searches, I haven't seen anything that amounts to actual coverage of the subjects. Also, as pointed out by Flounder fillet, it's likely these were AI-generated with little care. ULPS ^{(talk • contribs)} 02:58, 18 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete None of these individuals appear to pass WP:ACADEMIC or even WP:GNG requirements. All of these appear to have been made solely to prop up the Dutch protocol article, which makes it clear that this is just POV-pushing from their existence itself. Silver seren^C 03:32, 18 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all - this and the other poorly sourced BLPs recently created by Tiny Particle as attempts to circumvent the Dutch Protocol AfD; the edit comment "You are actively trying to salt the Dutch Protocol, so the depth is needed here" is telling. The chatgpt-sourced citation link makes me wonder just how much of this is actually human-written. I'd also note the conversation currently going on at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement#Tiny_Particle. — The Anome (talk) 09:19, 18 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all Frankly, the reliance on the slop machine would be reason enough. Stepwise Continuous Dysfunction (talk) 18:03, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Fairooj Labiba

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

No significant coverage in multiple reliable independent source. Gained coverage for being champion of a non notable reality show. NWP:1ERht bd (talk) 15:41, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Bands and musicians, and Bangladesh. Rht bd (talk) 15:41, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women and Internet. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:02, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Fails in WP:NARTIST and WP:ONEEVENT. Svartner (talk) 23:52, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Shusmita Anis

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

No significant coverage in reliable independent source. Rht bd (talk) 15:35, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Music, and Bangladesh. Rht bd (talk) 15:35, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:01, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Srabonti Narmeen Ali

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

No significant coverage in reliable independent source. Rht bd (talk) 15:32, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Bands and musicians, and Bangladesh. Rht bd (talk) 15:32, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:59, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Fairooj Maliha

AfDs for this article:

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

No significant work other than being champion of a reality show. Got coverage for only one event. WP:1E. Rht bd (talk) 15:28, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Bands and musicians, and Bangladesh. Rht bd (talk) 15:28, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:00, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ajaya Babu Shiwakoti

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

Not notable, not at significant position in politics, he is only member of Nepali Congress party. Dirty Dolphish (talk) 15:02, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Politicians, Bibliographies, News media, Asia, and Nepal. Dirty Dolphish (talk) 15:02, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: creator of this article is blocked indefinitely for UPE. Rahmatula786 (talk) 15:51, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sompura Brahmin

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

Not notable, unsourced, stands on single source which is unreliable. Dirty Dolphish (talk) 14:50, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Ethnic groups, Religion, Hinduism, Asia, India, Gujarat, and Rajasthan. Dirty Dolphish (talk) 14:50, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
On what basis is the source unreliable? Jahaza (talk) 22:22, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
You can see Caste Sources, thank you. Dirty Dolphish (talk) 23:01, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: On looking at the condition of the article which is irreparable. Chronos.Zx (talk) 05:29, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Gawaria

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

Not notable, unsourced, Fails GNG. Dirty Dolphish (talk) 14:46, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Ethnic groups, History, Asia, India, Delhi, Haryana, Himachal Pradesh, Jammu and Kashmir, Ladakh, Punjab, Rajasthan, Uttarakhand, and Uttar Pradesh. Dirty Dolphish (talk) 14:46, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect- to Banjara found this to support the strong association/relevance between the two terms. If more sources like this can be found, please do add here to help strengthen this vote.Lorraine Crane (talk) 04:17, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Dhawad

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

Not notable, unsourced, stands on single source which is unreliable. Dirty Dolphish (talk) 14:41, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Ethnic groups, History, Islam, Hinduism, Asia, India, Karnataka, Maharashtra, Rajasthan, and Telangana. Dirty Dolphish (talk) 14:41, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Madval

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

Not notable, not in coverage, stands on unreliable single source. Dirty Dolphish (talk) 14:36, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Ethnic groups, History, Hinduism, Asia, India, Goa, and Maharashtra. Dirty Dolphish (talk) 14:36, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect- to Dhobi seems a possible ATD if more sources can associate these two terms more definitely, though hits are scarce specifically about the subject asides from repeat like articles quoting Wikipedia, my searches so far seems to turn up more for the Dhobi s , found this to support the association/relevance between the two terms. If more sources like this can be found, please do add here to help strengthen this vote.Lorraine Crane (talk) 04:30, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Guru (community)

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

Not notable, stands on unreliable sources, Fails GNG, First source does not about Guru community. Dirty Dolphish (talk) 14:19, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Ethnic groups, History, Religion, Asia, India, Gujarat, and Rajasthan. Dirty Dolphish (talk) 14:19, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
On what basis is the source unreliable? Jahaza (talk) 22:22, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
You can see CasteSources, thank you Dirty Dolphish (talk) 23:00, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Per nom. Svartner (talk) 14:15, 18 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:BLUDGEON; Please do not !vote multiple times.

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

This is a very useful article and must retain as it is an inspiration for many Pranav.S.Bayari must retain — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shashibhushan12 (talk • contribs) 03:02, 18 August 2025 (UTC) This subject meets Wikipedia’s notability guidelines for authors. He has been covered in multiple reliable, independent sources, including The Hindu, ETV Bharat, Vijaya Vani, and Belgaum.pro. These are not trivial mentions, but full articles about his work, thus establishing notability. Therefore, this article should be kept. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Savithribhushan (talk • contribs) 04:41, 18 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

- keep** This article is completely accurate and does not violate any rule and it is clearly not an self promoting article. It has been written by someone else but not pranav himself so this must stay. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2409:40F2:217B:B9BE:D561:CA57:1EAF:7EC0 (talk) 07:46, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Pranav S. Bayari

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

WP:BEFORE does not yield any information demonstrating the topic's notability. Unable to locate any substantial coverage to satisfy GNG. CresiaBilli (talk) 11:45, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Authors, India, and Karnataka. CresiaBilli (talk) 11:45, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep – Pranav S. Bayari meets the general notability guideline (WP:GNG) for authors.

1. Significant independent coverage:

The Hindu – Beyond Bengaluru: Belagavi’s new wave of writers (national newspaper).

ETV Bharat – Young Belagavi author pens 460-page mystery novel.

NewsKarnataka – Belagavi’s literary spirit thrives across generations.

Belgaum.pro – 15-year-old author from Belagavi pens 460-page novel, wins global praise.

Vijaya Vani (July 2025 issue) – Kannada daily with wide circulation.

2. These are reliable, independent, non-trivial sources. They provide more than passing mentions and establish that Bayari’s debut novel has received significant coverage in both national (The Hindu) and regional (ETV Bharat, Vijaya Vani, NewsKarnataka, Belgaum.pro) outlets.

3. Per WP:AUTHOR and WP:NBOOK, the subject qualifies as notable:

Published author with wide distribution (The Rusted Riddle available via Pothi, Scribd, Everand, B&N, etc.).

Multiple independent reviews/features in recognized media.

Therefore, the article satisfies notability guidelines, and deletion would not be appropriate. Savithribhushan (talk) 05:21, 18 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:BLUDGEON; Please do not !vote multiple times.

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

== Keep ==
Keep – Pranav S. Bayari meets the general notability guideline for authors.
1. Significant independent coverage:
- The Hindu – "Beyond Bengaluru: Belagavi’s new wave of writers" (national newspaper).
- ETV Bharat – "Young Belagavi author pens 460-page mystery novel".
- NewsKarnataka – "Belagavi’s literary spirit thrives across generations".
- Belgaum.pro – "15-year-old author from Belagavi pens 460-page novel, wins global praise".
- Vijaya Vani (July 2025 issue) – Kannada daily with wide circulation.
1. These are reliable, independent, non-trivial sources. They provide more than passing mentions and establish that Bayari’s debut novel has received significant coverage in both national (The Hindu) and regional (ETV Bharat, Vijaya Vani, NewsKarnataka, Belgaum.pro) outlets.
2. Per WP:AUTHOR and WP:NBOOK, the subject qualifies as notable:
- Published author with wide distribution (The Rusted Riddle available via Pothi, Scribd, Everand, Barnes & Noble, etc.).
- Multiple independent reviews/features in recognized media.
Therefore, the article satisfies notability guidelines, and deletion would not be appropriate. Savithribhushan (talk) 05:33, 18 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

All the content stated in the article is true. He will be inspiring to millions of students across the world. This article needs to be kept. Raghu Honawad (talk) 08:33, 18 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This is likely an WP:SPA —Matrix _{ping me}^{when u reply} (t? - c) 17:32, 19 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: As per the nomination, this is another promotional article about a non-notable author created by a Wp:SPA. Completely fails ANYBIO, SIGCOV NAUTHOR and GNG. Zuck28 (talk) 13:20, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:BLUDGEON; Please do not !vote multiple times.

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

Keep – Pranav S. Bayari meets the general notability guideline (WP:GNG) for authors.

1. Significant independent coverage:

The Hindu – Beyond Bengaluru: Belagavi’s new wave of writers (national newspaper).

ETV Bharat – Young Belagavi author pens 460-page mystery novel.

NewsKarnataka – Belagavi’s literary spirit thrives across generations.

Belgaum.pro – 15-year-old author from Belagavi pens 460-page novel, wins global praise.

Vijaya Vani (July 2025 issue) – Kannada daily with wide circulation.

2. These are reliable, independent, non-trivial sources. They provide more than passing mentions and establish that Bayari’s debut novel has received significant coverage in both national (The Hindu) and regional (ETV Bharat, Vijaya Vani, NewsKarnataka, Belgaum.pro) outlets.

3. Per WP:AUTHOR and WP:NBOOK, the subject qualifies as notable:

Published author with wide distribution (The Rusted Riddle available via Pothi, Scribd, Everand, B&N, etc.).

Multiple independent reviews/features in recognized media.

Therefore, the article satisfies notability guidelines, and deletion would not be appropriate.

Savithribhushan (talk) 05:22, 18 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It is not promotional rather inspirational. His story inspires millions of students across the world. It should be kept. Raghu Honawad (talk) 08:34, 18 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Agree with nom and Zuck28. Fails NAUTHOR, SIGCOV, GNG, and ANYBIO. ---Steve Quinn (talk) 01:06, 18 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:BLUDGEON; Please do not !vote multiple times

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

Keep – Pranav S. Bayari meets the general notability guideline (WP:GNG) for authors.

1. Significant independent coverage:

The Hindu – Beyond Bengaluru: Belagavi’s new wave of writers (national newspaper).

ETV Bharat – Young Belagavi author pens 460-page mystery novel.

NewsKarnataka – Belagavi’s literary spirit thrives across generations.

Belgaum.pro – 15-year-old author from Belagavi pens 460-page novel, wins global praise.

Vijaya Vani (July 2025 issue) – Kannada daily with wide circulation.

2. These are reliable, independent, non-trivial sources. They provide more than passing mentions and establish that Bayari’s debut novel has received significant coverage in both national (The Hindu) and regional (ETV Bharat, Vijaya Vani, NewsKarnataka, Belgaum.pro) outlets.

3. Per WP:AUTHOR and WP:NBOOK, the subject qualifies as notable:

Published author with wide distribution (The Rusted Riddle available via Pothi, Scribd, Everand, B&N, etc.).

Multiple independent reviews/features in recognized media.

Therefore, the article satisfies notability guidelines, and deletion would not be appropriate. Savithribhushan (talk) 05:22, 18 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I've cleaned this page up a bit. It's clear there's a lot of single-purpose accounts so I've opened an WP:SPI. —Matrix _{ping me}^{when u reply} (t? - c) 10:05, 18 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete – Per WP:PROMO. Svartner (talk) 14:25, 18 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Clearly promotional. Fails to meet WP:NAUTHOR. RangersRus (talk) 19:42, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ben Laude

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

It is not passed in WP:GNG, WP:BLP. The references given in the article are questionable and there is no verification source. ROY is WAR Talk! 10:02, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Bands and musicians, Internet, and United States of America. ROY is WAR Talk! 10:02, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Texas-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 13:00, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - He has three very brief mentions in New York Times: [14], [15], [16], but they merely mention his presence (with a few minor compliments) at the events that were the true topics of the articles. Otherwise he has a lot of professional credits and appears to be well-respected in his field, but I can find no reliable and significant coverage of his career in its own right, with little that can support a full biographical article here. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 17:44, 18 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
delete I had similar thoughts as of Doomsdayer520 when I added notability tag to the article. Also, most of their coverage comes by association, and notability is not inherited. Thus failing general notability criteria due to the lack of their own significant coverage. —usernamekiran (talk) 15:37, 19 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

LaSheena Weekly

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

The mother of FBG Duck and FBG Brick who died in shootings. Unexpectedly she spoke out against gun violence after that. The article claims however that she "has become a prominent voice calling for peace in Chicago and has organized community initiatives". This article is one that is used but as far as I can tell, Octavia Mitchell is the organizer of the group, not her. I would not be opposed to a redirect to her son's page as an AFD. Moritoriko (talk) 08:09, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Women, Music, and United States of America. Moritoriko (talk) 08:09, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per the nominator, and it fails WP:GNG. Lack of significant coverage. CresiaBilli (talk) 11:43, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

* Keep, The nomination is based on a misunderstanding of notability and a detailed look at the sources. The subject has received years of significant, sustained, and in-depth coverage from a wide variety of reliable, independent news outlets, making this one of the clearer examples of WP:GNG being met from 2020 to present. This article goes  past any concerns of being a temporary story (WP:NOTNEWS) or a person notable for only one event (WP:BLP1E). The evidence shows a clear way from being the mother of a victim to becoming a notable public figure in her own right.

For years, LaSheena Weekly has been a central voice in Chicago's conversation about gun violence. This isn't just a single quote in one article; it is a consistent pattern of media seeking her out as a subject.
* The Trace: Published an entire investigative feature centered on her story and her fight for accountability. * Chicago Tribune: Has covered her extensively, from her initial pleas for peace to her involvement with the "Warrior Moms" activist group and their community events.
Her calls for peace were major stories on their own, covered by NBC Chicago and Fox 32 Chicago. Outlets like Revolt.tv, HotNewHipHop, and XXL Mag also report on her activism, such as her public request to meet with Lil Durk. This alone is sufficient for notability. She is the lead plaintiff in a massive, widely-publicized wrongful death lawsuit against some of the biggest names and corporations in the music industry. Covered by WBEZ (NPR), ABC7, and the Chicago Sun-Times. A major story in TMZ. And also reported by XXL Mag and multiple articles in HotNewHipHop. Reliable sources report on her personal life and choices, proving she is a newsworthy individual beyond her activism or the lawsuit. Her own actions generate headlines. XXL Mag reported on a domestic incident that resulted in her being struck by a car. This story is entirely about her personal life. HotNewHipHop covered her decision to start an OnlyFans account, treating it as a newsworthy event in the hip-hop world.
She has generated her own headlines for calling out other artists, as documented by HotNewHipHop. The widespread interest is further evidenced by long-form interviews on major platforms like VladTV and No Jumper.

She is a well-documented public advocate, the central figure in a major national lawsuit, and a personality whose own life is considered newsworthy. The notability criteria are met. MeVonFans (talk) 11:57, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The sources linked by User:MeVonFans shows that there is WP:GNG and WP:SUSTAINED.

Chicago Tribune, a few paragraphs dedicated to her, definitely significant coverage

The Trace, significant coverage

HNHH, about her

XXL Mag, about her

Revolt, about her

HNHH about her

And essentially all the sources linked by MeVonFans, except the VladTV playlist since that's an interview. These sources definitely show significant and sustained coverage, and that she has become a significant anti-gun violence advocate. Quick note: "FBG Mama" or other similar terms finds more results, which may be why a WP:BEFORE lacked on it. And if anyone thinks it may be a case of WP:INHERITED or WP:BLP1E, I disagree. She became notable following his death for her anti-gun violence awareness and advocacy, and has sustained coverage from 2020 until now. jolielover♥talk 15:54, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Important note: contentious topics procedure applies to the article. jolielover♥talk 16:34, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think a large amount of this coverage is really coverage of FBG Duck and thus does not contribute to her own notability per WP:NOTINHERITED. This is further proved by all of the articles needing to define her and her actions in relation to FBG Duck. I will say that the second HNHH source about her onlyfans is temporally removed from Duck's death but it still refers to her as his mother, but regardless I don't think that is significant coverage!! Moritoriko (talk) 00:37, 18 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Illinois-related deletion discussions. jolielover♥talk 16:02, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Geoff Collyer

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

Fails WP:NBIO, there is no significant coverage of this person, only brief mentions that he designed some software (e.g. [17]). Getting an asteroid named after him does not count towards notability. There are two articles about software that he designed (NOV (computers) and C News), so a redirect might not be desirable. Helpful Raccoon (talk) 04:49, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Computing, Software, and Canada. Helpful Raccoon (talk) 04:49, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep - It seems like he barely passes the knife's edge of a notable person/scholar. While there isn't significant coverage, we see some scholarly coverage as it relates to academic papers that are sourced, a handful of interviews, and major contributor/leader on several projects suchas Plan 9, as welll as the NOM mentioned NOV (computers) and C News. These are all non-trivial systems -- and NOV is still utalized today over 30 years later. I would agree the star naming is mostly trivia generally speaking, OTOH, since it was named in his honor by a university in another country, it is clear he has some degree of notability in academic circles. The artcile itself has plenty of room for copy-editing and some improvement, but I don't think this is one that we should delete. TiggerJay (talk) 06:21, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This argument is mainly relevant to WP:NACADEMIC#1, The person's research has had a significant impact in their scholarly discipline, but he doesn't meet that bar. NOV is not notable in an academic context. C News is mentioned in some academic papers, but not to the point where it's a significant new concept, technique or idea as described in WP:NACADEMIC note 1b. Note 1h states Having an object (asteroid, process, manuscript, etc.) named after the subject is not in itself indicative of satisfying Criterion 1. Helpful Raccoon (talk) 08:19, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as per below, there is something, but clearly not enough. TiggerJay (talk) 04:29, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Soft delete/redirect based on Helpful Raccoon's analysis of WP:NACADEMIC above (failing another reason to satisfy WP:NBIO). Note that there is an open deletion discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/NOV (computers) for NOV. Caleb Stanford (talk) 19:17, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. In agreement with Helpful Raccoon he does not qualify under WP:NPROF#C1. An h-factor of 3 and 321 total citations is about a factor of 15 less that what is normally considered as a pass in his area. If you look at people cited in his area they are way higher -- it is a high citation field of research. Beyond that I see nothing for WP:NBIO, as the nom says.Ldm1954 (talk) 17:05, 18 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

John Greenewald Jr.

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

This article is entirely duplicative of content present at The Black Vault and should be deleted under WP:BLP1E; they are known only for establishing and running the website The Black Vault.
There is no point in merging as there is no mergeable content; the only content present here that is not present at The Black Vault is the BLP's date of birth, which would not be preservable in a merge scenario. Chetsford (talk) 15:42, 16 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The Black Vault article was created by the nominator earlier this year. I don't see the point of a separate article for the Black Vault if all the material is already found at the biographic article. Greenewald has written three books and is the subject of extensive press. He appears to be the primary notable entity. Thriley (talk) 16:00, 16 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

All the press is about The Black Vault and mentions Greenewald's name only in the context of being the owner. In point of evidence, none of the sources provide even the most rudimentary biographical information customary of a BLP: place of birth, education, family, professional occupation/vocation (he's said this is an unpaid side project), etc. We essentially have no information on Greenewalde other than he started this website. Chetsford (talk) 16:35, 16 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Paranormal. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 16:52, 16 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Some additional sources I found that aren't currently in use in the article.

Just call him Mulder Jr. by Fred Shuster (1999)

Book Follows Feds' Eye on UFOs (2002)

Personally, I think it makes more sense to merge the Black Vault here as a sub-section, particularly since there isn't that much info there anyways beyond a paragraph or so. Silver seren^C 17:01, 16 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Since the only non-The Black Vault information we have on Greenewalde is his (approximate) age and what high school he attended, that's going to be a long sub-section. Chetsford (talk) 18:40, 16 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Shuster article I linked above has some good details and it mentions a Baltimore newspaper article that first brought him attention, so we might want to track that down. Silver seren^C 18:50, 16 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"The Shuster article I linked above has some good details " This is the non-TBV stuff I got from it:

He attended Alemanny High School
In 1999 he was thinking of attending Cal State Northridge
He has an unnamed sister

Not sure if I missed anything.

Chetsford (talk) 18:59, 16 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:17, 16 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to The Black Vault using the WP:B&R method (not a delete) until such time that needed referencing for a stand-alone bio occurs, per WP:TOOSOON. 5Q5|^✉ 13:26, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Dian Rana

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

Fails WP:GNG and WP:ENT, also borderline self promotion or COI. Ckfasdf (talk) 15:13, 16 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note that the article on the same subject was speedy-deleted on id.wiki under A7 and salted due to multiple recreation. Ckfasdf (talk) 21:57, 16 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Internet, and Indonesia. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 16:48, 16 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The subject meets the general notability guideline (WP:GNG) through multiple reliable, independent sources with significant coverage, including Liputan6, Tempo, Merdeka, TVOne, and international publication Rest of World. These are not trivial mentions but substantial profiles covering the subject's public engagement and role in documenting the development of Indonesia's new capital.

While the article may have been initially drafted with assistance, it has since been entirely rewritten and supported with verifiable sources. It is not promotional in tone and has been reviewed carefully for neutrality.

Therefore, the article meets Wikipedia's inclusion criteria and should be kept. Nusantarakita (talk) 16:12, 16 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom, COI, multiple deletion on idwiki. Contributor(s) also suspected abusing multiple accounts. 🅷🅴🅽🆁🅸 ^{(Let's talk)} ✉ 09:54, 18 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Schlep (YouTuber)

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

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

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

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

Clearly a WP:1EVENT type of article. Only notable in relation to ordeal with Roblox, so this should be merged into Roblox or Roblox Corporation, similar to Ruben Sim. Based5290 :3 (talk) 12:50, 16 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Based5290 :3 (talk) 12:50, 16 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed, there is not a lot of things about Schlep mentioned in the articles and it is mostly about the lawsuit which is already written on the Roblox Corp page. If someone wants to make a separate article it should be about the lawsuit, not Schlep. LazarEpic (talk) 13:34, 16 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Agree Jesuliz (talk) 14:44, 16 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree, as he is a youtuber as well as a roblox 14.199.181.80 (talk) 14:51, 16 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete or Redirect to Roblox Corporation. Look, I think this situation should be covered somewhere on Wikipedia, as I think it's too much to ignore, but this is textbook WP:1EVENT. Schlep does not warrant his own article at this time. Furthermore, the actual coverage about his career and personal life is not enough to meet WP:GNG pr WP:NPERSON as is. I'm still trying to find a way to appropriately cover the situation between Schlep and Roblox as it is right now on Wikipedia, whether that's an article about the lawsuit or the whole controversy. But on an article about Schlep himself, is not it. λ NegativeMP1 14:50, 16 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I don't have time to vote right now, but I'd like to note that I previously created a Schlep redirect to the Roblox Corporation article that was G6'ed to make way for the article. Mikeycdiamond (talk) 18:28, 16 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. λ NegativeMP1 14:53, 16 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Do not delete Schlep’s page. There is literally a HUGE lawsuit going on bigger than Ruben Sim’s. Frankus Bobus (talk) 16:02, 16 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Besides, even the GOVERNMENT is involved. Frankus Bobus (talk) 16:02, 16 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, then make an article about the lawsuit and/or the ensuing controversy. That's notable. But Schlep himself is not. λ NegativeMP1 19:54, 16 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I think it is too soon for any article on the controversy. The coverage has only been over the last 4 days. If we violate Wikipedia:PERSISTENCE, we'll be back here in a few days. Wait two or three weeks. Mikeycdiamond (talk) 20:35, 16 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Well, where else would it be covered? I mean, this is very clearly something that warrants coverage on Wikipedia, news or not. Documenting it in the main Roblox article wouldn't be due weight, and there's more to cover about it than would be appropriate in Roblox Corporation. λ NegativeMP1 21:50, 16 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
We don't need to rush into an article. Wikipedia isn't a newspaper, so we don't need to cover the latest story immediately. Give the topic time to become notable, and until it does, let it sit on the Roblox Corporation's page. Mikeycdiamond (talk) 22:06, 16 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Don't delete until all (reasonable that is) the information has been compiled. I realise there is a lot of 'hearsay' at this point but I feel there is enough to justify holding off until we know more. LeglessGoat (talk) 07:44, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Per WP:1EVENT. It seems he is notable solely for the single controversy in which Roblox sent him a cease-and-desist letter. An article on the controversy itself, if merited, would be the better way to go. I do think the article suffers from NPOV as well, as one sentence states that people viewed it as a "necessary form of community policing", while Roblox statements that "the vigilantes we’ve banned have taken actions that are both unacceptable and create an unsafe environment for users" were not mentioned. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 17:07, 16 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:1EVENT. As NegativeMP1 noted, the current level of coverage on his channel or himself does not pass WP:GNG or WP:NPERSON, ignoring the coverage related to the event. I think the event could be its own article, in which case I would support a redirect from this article to the event. 45dogs (they/them) (talk page) 18:07, 16 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Draftify I believe this might be a case of WP:TOOSOON. Depending on the outcome of the event & the upcoming collaboration with Chris Hansen to produce a documentary about the ordeal, he could theoretically become notable enough in the future. Plus, his work helping arrest predator could be counted as a separate event. I'd recommend moving this into the draft-space and marking it as a promising draft, if sources become sufficient in the future, this could be moved back into the mainspace. — Preceding unsigned comment added by A.Classical-Futurist (talk • contribs) 18:47, 16 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Internet and United States of America. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:19, 16 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, this page should be kept as it as a very notable lawsuit. Gilimaster28 (talk) 19:45, 16 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

...? The article isn't about the lawsuit, it is about Schlep himself, who is not notable on his own per WP:1EVENT and WP:NPERSON. The lawsuit and ensuing events, however, are notable. There should be an article covering those things. But Schlep himself is not notable enough for a standalone article. λ NegativeMP1 19:53, 16 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per nom. Inpops (talk) 22:21, 16 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to ~~Roblox Corporation~~ per nom. XtraJovial (talk • contribs) 22:49, 16 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Roblox Schlep ban controversy seems like a better target for merging now that it exists. XtraJovial (talk • contribs) 17:22, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to the Roblox Corporation article per nom Sirtoppamhat (talk) 23:22, 16 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Not seeing anything worth merging into Roblox Corporation outside of information from the lawsuit and maybe a single sentence about him. ^EF⁵ 00:38, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Roblox Corporation#Schlep controversy and lawsuit. The Schlep article is a clear violation of WP:1EVENT. Mikeycdiamond (talk) 02:31, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Roblox Corporation#Schlep controversy and lawsuit. WP:1EVENT. Augmented Seventh 🎱 03:49, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Roblox Corporation#Schlep controversy and lawsuit. WP:1EVENT does not mean imminent notability. Go D. Usopp (talk) 08:17, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Texas-related deletion discussions. jolielover♥talk 09:13, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to ~~Roblox Corporation#Schlep controversy and lawsuit~~ per WP:1EVENT/WP:BLP1E jolielover♥talk 09:15, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Seeing as Roblox Schlep ban controversy now exists, should be redirected there instead. jolielover♥talk 12:16, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Roblox Corporation#Schlep controversy and lawsuit per WP:1EVENT/WP:BLP1E. I will admit that I am biased for the view point of Schlep and others involved - but the aforementioned policies still apply. The keywords "Schlep", "Schlep Roblox", "Schlep YouTube" literally did not appear in any news sources prior to August 1st (through really simple Google, feel free to comment if needed), which is way after Schlep started his predator catching series, and his actions are (to my knowledge) mostly confined in the Roblox domain. Agreeing with the decision to move some of this and redirect to the "Roblox Corporation" page. ProjectHSI (talk) 10:58, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Draftify per the unsigned comment

1timeuse75 (talk) 12:10, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Roblox Corporation#Schlep controversy and lawsuit per nom. Very clearly WP:1E. Can't find anything notable about this guy before the recent events, and most sources currently explicitly concern the lawsuit TheAlienAdventures (talk) 16:45, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Roblox Schlep ban controversy, per WP:NOTNEWS, WP:1EVENT, and reasoning similar to Ruben Sim's redirect. I'm not seeing media coverage for this individual prior to the cease and desist letter controversy. ★ The Green Star Collector ★ (talk) 17:06, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Roblox Schlep ban controversy per WP:1E and WP:NPERSON.

G0KU⬃⬃⬃ 19:51, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Roblox Schlep ban controversy per others. The biography section of that article is where this article should ideally merge to. TansoShoshen (talk) 03:56, 18 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge with Roblox Schlep ban controversy: Only notable for one event. Tarlby ^{(t) (c)} 19:40, 18 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge/Redirect with the target article being Roblox Schlep ban controversy, could also merge parts into Child safety on Roblox as needed. Fairly open and shut case of 1E. Vanilla Wizard 💙 00:08, 19 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge into Roblox Schlep ban controversy per others (1E); if there are persistence problems we should probably handle them on that article at this point. (am I doing this right?) penguinencounter2@enwiki:~/talk/contrib$ 06:23, 19 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge into Roblox Schlep ban controversy, seems like a BLP1E situation. ArtemisiaGentileschiFan (talk) 15:57, 19 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge or Redirect to Roblox Schlep ban controversy#Background. As with with everyone else, I feel this is an instance of WP:1E, however what content could be merged into that page appears to be very unsubstantial to merge if at all on the basis that the controversy page covers almost all of this already. UppercutPawnch (talk) 18:11, 19 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge with Roblox Schlep ban controversy. Schlep on his own doesn't have enough popularity to have a Wikipedia article.

CostalCal (talk) 23:48, 19 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Roblox Schlep ban controversy. Wackistan (talk) 05:38, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge and don't delete Schlep even best known in Roblox Community, not now to create he's article now. Vitorperrut555 (talk) 14:16, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Roblox Schlep ban controversy. That article covers the "1 event" that editors above say is the source of all the coverage on Schlep. This will also leave the current article available in the page history if the individual meets Wikipedia's threshold for notability further down the line. Rjjⁱⁱⁱ (talk) 15:42, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge, and add a infobox about schlep at page As per majority consensus it seems to merge and redirect, we should also add a infobox or a section about schlep. shane (talk) 16:15, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge or Redirect to Roblox Schlep ban controversy per WP:ONEEVENT. 85.186.62.79 (talk) 07:18, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Roblox Schlep ban controversy per nomination. Unilandofma^Talk 12:46, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Roblox Schlep ban controversy TheSwagger13 (talk) 16:22, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Roblox Schlep ban controversy because there is really nothing to merge, all the information about Schlep's life is already covered in this article. G13 vs G14 (talk) 17:41, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Draftify per User:Zxcvbnm. StormHunterBryante5467⛈️ 21:13, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Roblox Schlep ban controversy, per WP:ONEEVENT. Hurricane Wind and Fire (talk) 21:49, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Roblox Schlep ban controversy per WP:ONEEVENT. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 18:47, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Roblox Schlep ban controversy, per WP:ONEEVENT.4meter4 (talk) 19:05, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sarang Khan Gakhar

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

Fail in significant coverage. Only one reference exists in which just a casual mention was found. Dolphish (talk) 11:20, 16 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, History, Asia, Pakistan, India, and Punjab. Dolphish (talk) 11:20, 16 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: If a Wikipedia article contains just a single source, or in certain instances is entirely without sources, it does not necessarily imply that the subject lacks notability (particularly when it is not a BLP situation). Prior to proposing the article for AFD, we ought to investigate coverage regarding the subject ourselves, further details can be found at WP:BEFORE. Regarding this specific subject, it is highly notable. Significant references can even be located with a straightforward search on Google Books. Regards! Baqi:) (talk) 13:16, 19 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The sources you’ve provided are from 100 plus years ago. Per WP:RAJ we cannot use such sources for this topic. There are no modern academic sources which seem to discuss this individual in detail hence the article likely fails notability. Ixudi (talk) 13:26, 19 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @Ixudi, If you have carefully read Sitush’s essay, you will find that all these points have been written specifically in relation to the caste system in India. They do not concern other matters. This means that the references I have presented are considered unreliable only with regard to the caste system in India (according to Sitush's essay). For other subjects, they remain reliable. Best Baqi:) (talk) 11:34, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
A 100 plus year old text written by a non-historian will NEVER be reliable for the purposes of editing an history-related article. Lepel Griffin, the author of the text you cited, was NOT a historian or a trained academic but an administrator. Please refer to Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources (history).

Kind regards Ixudi (talk) 15:15, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: the subject of the article lacks significant coverage in modern academic sources. Unable to establish notability. Ixudi (talk) 13:27, 19 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. There seems to be a lot of histories, even contemporary ones by historians, covering him in google books. Note that he is the Gakhar chief "Sarang Khan" and many more references come up under the name Sarang Khan without the Gakhar at the end. Just take a look at first seven pages of hits searching "Sarang Khan" Gakhar. Best.4meter4 (talk) 18:44, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Not enough coverage for meeting GNG. Zakaria ښه راغلاست (talk) 19:56, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thomas Puschmann

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

Lack of notability. Sabirkir (talk) 07:53, 16 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Academics and educators, Authors, Finance, Science, Economics, Germany, and Switzerland. Sabirkir (talk) 07:53, 16 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: As per nom. Despite having a decent amount of citations as per Google Scholar, (asaik) he has not made any foundational or major pedagocial publications. Neither does he hold any elevated academic positions which would make hime notable under the SNG ACADEMIC. There is also no secondary coverage of his person from outside of academia, so general noatbility is not cleared either. Pragmatic Puffin (talk) 12:25, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak-keep. He is the top editor of a significant book series in his field published by Springer Publishing. While it doesn't exactly fit criteria 8 of WP:NACADEMIC; I do think the series is equivalent to editing a top journal in his field. Under the spirit of criteria 8 I would say he does meet NACADEMIC. Best.4meter4 (talk) 16:27, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Noah Smith (writer)

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

I believe this writer fails notability checks. Many references are his own published writings, and other references seem minor and incidental (ie, blog posts that briefly link to a post from Smith). In a brief search, I can't find substantial references to Smith that would clear him as a notable writer, academic, etc. In my opinion, this page fails to clear basic notability guidelines as outlined in Wikipedia:Notability_(people). I would also say this article currently runs afoul of bad practices such as WP:RESUME that cannot be satisfactorily resolved given the lack of notability in the first place.

Thanks to any other editor who chimes in in! Geethree (talk) 16:05, 14 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Procedural note, this AfD was not listed on any page. I listed it on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2025 August 16 as that is when I came across it, but if it needs to be moved please let me know. This likely should not be closed until 7 days after August 16. Casablanca 🪨^(T) 00:52, 16 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Academics and educators, Journalism, Politics, Internet, California, Michigan, and New York. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:04, 16 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. The National Review seems to view his writing as worthy of discussion [18][19][20]. I don't think this is a notability pass on its own, but it is a start. Russ Woodroofe (talk) 10:15, 16 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. The number of self-citations here is astounding. In my reading, columnists responding to Smith's work are not sufficient to establish notability. I especially don't feel good about basing a BLP on sources this tenuous. He might as well have written the article himself. —Rutebega (talk) 20:01, 16 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete There's absolutely no secondary coverage of him currently in the article, which is a huge BLP concern. SportingFlyer T·C 11:10, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. I believe that this is a typical case of paid or bad faith editing editing involving serious COI. The account which created this page has 57 edits and most focus on this article. It's also very unusual and rare for a new account to start creating economists' pages as soon as they create a new account.

[User contributions for Kennethshoe] @Kennethshoe Theofunny (talk) 01:39, 18 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Weak delete I took the liberty of nuking the primaries so we can get a better look at it. I am leaning delete, but he has been mentioned a few times by other people including Krugman. Im not persuaded this is a shill job. The creator seems to be into economics. However, COI cant be ruled out.Metallurgist (talk) 05:56, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Has written for some big publications but not a notable writer. Agletarang (talk) 16:11, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Fails WP:NAUTHOR and WP:GNG.4meter4 (talk) 15:45, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Rarin

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

Fails WP:NMUSIC. No significant coverage of this musician in reliable sources. Fancy Refrigerator ^(talk) 02:06, 16 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Bands and musicians, United States of America, and Florida. Fancy Refrigerator ^(talk) 02:06, 16 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Per lack of independent coverage. Svartner (talk) 03:40, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:TOOSOON. He really was mentioned several times in a Rolling Stone article: [21], and that helps get him fairly close to notability. But that is the only reliable source I can find, and otherwise his material is only found in the standard self-upload sites. He hasn't yet turned that one magazine piece into the wider coverage that is necessary here. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 17:39, 18 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Fails WP:MUSICBIO and WP:BASIC.4meter4 (talk) 15:56, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yangwei Linghua

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

This article doesn's have enough significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources which is needed to show notability under WP:GNG and WP:SIGCOV. 🌟 𝒯𝐻𝐸 𝐵𝒪𝒮𝒮! 21:34, 15 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Bands and musicians, Women, Music, Entertainment, Asia, and China. 🌟 𝒯𝐻𝐸 𝐵𝒪𝒮𝒮! 21:34, 15 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, nearly all coverage of the subject is in Chinese. She's the lead singer for Phoenix Legend, which is a very popular musical duo in China and has been for over twenty years now. You can read an interview here that talks about them and their career, and there's a few articles on Sina that talks about them as well. As for Linghua herself, searching her name in Chinese pulls up hundreds of articles

I will also try to do some work on the article when I get the chance. Microplastic Consumer (talk) 22:58, 15 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Adding on to this, Linghua was a main competitor on Riding the Wind 2025 [zh] (the sixth season of a popular music competition show on Mango TV) And while not the most reliable source, Baidu Baike has a nice list of every single released by Linghua as a solo artist, which you can find sources for their existance elsewhere. Microplastic Consumer (talk) 03:41, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources. The subject passes Wikipedia:Notability (people)#Basic criteria, which says:
People are presumed notable if they have received significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject.
- If the depth of coverage in any given source is not substantial, then multiple independent sources may be combined to demonstrate notability; trivial coverage of a subject by secondary sources is not usually sufficient to establish notability.
Sources
1. The sources found by Microplastic Consumer (talk · contribs). Thank you!
2. Fan, Wenting 范文婷 (2015-11-14). "玲花新歌太洗脑！1岁女儿都会唱了" [Linghua's new song is so catchy! Even her 1-year-old daughter can sing it] (in Chinese). Phoenix Television. Archived from the original on 2025-08-17. Retrieved 2025-08-17.
  The article notes: "凤凰传奇组合的杨魏玲花和曾毅，两人“分道扬镳”各寻搭档，并同时出了新歌。尤其，玲花的新歌《出去玩》由张惠妹的御用创作人阿怪监制，与歌手曹格、新秀SNH48李艺彤合作，歌曲十分洗脑，玲花称连她一岁四个月的女儿都会唱了！ ... 没了曾毅的伴唱，玲花选择强强联合，与创作型歌手曹格结成新搭档，并与新秀SNH48李艺彤一起。在侗寨采风过程中，收获快乐和笑声，甚至产生再来旅行玩耍的想法，于是创作新歌《出去玩》，该歌旋律明快，歌词简单明了直中人心，"
  From Google Translate: "Phoenix Legend's Yang Wei Linghua and Zeng Yi have parted ways, each pursuing their own partners and releasing new music. Linghua's new song, "Go Out and Play," is especially catchy, produced by A-Mei's regular songwriter, Aguai, and features singer Gary Chaw and rising star Li Yitong from SNH48. Linghua claims even her one-year-four-month-old daughter can sing it! ... Without Zeng Yi's backing vocals, Linghua chose to join forces, forming a new partnership with singer-songwriter Gary Cao and rising star Li Yitong from SNH48. The field trip to the Dong village brought joy and laughter, and even inspired her to travel and play again. This led to the creation of a new song, "Go Out and Play." The song boasts a bright melody and simple, clear lyrics that hit home."
3. Li, Hsin-tung 李鋅銅 (2014-06-25). "力挺陸大媽鳳凰傳奇嗆美媒廣場舞被批喧鬧玲花指惹火大媽後果嚴重" [Standing up for Chinese 'dama': Phoenix Legend fires back at U.S. media. Square dancing criticized as noisy, Linghua warns that angering the 'dama' has serious consequences]. China Times (in Chinese). Archived from the original on 2025-08-17. Retrieved 2025-08-17.
  The article notes: "「鳳凰傳奇」主唱玲花覺得自己是「躺著也中槍」，超級不爽，於是在22日發布的微博中調侃《華爾街日報》，並力挺中國大媽。... 她還追溯八國聯軍的歷史，說美國大兵曾經在中國北京搶東西，到現在東西還沒還呢，這不僅僅是擾民行為， ... 「鳳凰傳奇」是大陸知名的男女二人音樂組合，成員包括女聲主唱楊魏玲花和男聲和聲、說唱曾毅。被認為是2005年後大陸較具影響力的歌手組合之一，出道以來共發行5張原創專輯。"
  From Google Translate: "Phoenix Legend lead singer Ling Hua felt incredibly upset, feeling like she was being "shot in the face even when lying down." She mocked the Wall Street Journal in a Weibo post on the 22nd and offered her support for the Chinese dama. ... She also traced the history of the Eight-Nation Alliance, saying that American soldiers once looted items in Beijing, China, and still haven't returned them. This isn't just a nuisance. ... Phoenix Legend is a well-known mainland Chinese duo, consisting of lead vocalist Yang Wei Linghua and backing vocalist and rapper Zeng Yi. Considered one of the most influential singing groups in mainland China since 2005, they have released five original albums since their debut."
4. Peng, Lizhao 彭立昭 (2012-04-29). "杨魏玲花"凤凰传奇"的爱情传奇" [The Romantic Story of Yangwei Linghua from Phoenix Legend]. People [zh] (in Chinese). Archived from the original on 2025-08-17. Retrieved 2025-08-17.
  The article notes: "杨魏玲花是著名歌唱组合“凤凰传奇”的主唱，来自大草原的她声音高亢激昂，穿透力极强，在内地歌坛掀起了一轮又一轮的狂潮。玲花的丈夫徐明朝是音乐主编、著名乐评家和词曲作家，两人从相识的第一天起，就结下了不解之缘，2011年3月，他们携手走入婚姻殿堂。他们的爱情就像玲花在歌里唱的那样：... 就在玲花对进军春晚充满了希望时，一件意想不到的事情发生了：有人爆料《月亮之上》涉嫌抄袭英国歌曲《All Rise》……玲花觉得很委屈，她知道这是一首明明白白的原创歌曲，怎么就成了抄袭作品呢？为了弄清楚事情真相，春晚专家组对《月亮之上》与《AllRise》进行了全方位的鉴定，最终认为并不构成抄袭。"
  From Google Translate: "Yang Wei Linghua is the lead singer of the renowned singing group "Phoenix Legend." Hailing from the prairie, her voice is soaring, passionate, and penetrating, creating waves of sensations on the mainland music scene. Linghua's husband, Xu Mingchao, is a music editor, renowned critic, and songwriter. From the first day they met, they bonded, marrying in March 2011. Their love is just like what Linghua sings about in her song: ... Just when Linghua was full of hope for a spot on the Spring Festival Gala, something unexpected happened: someone reported that "Above the Moon" was suspected of plagiarizing the British song "All Rise." Linghua felt deeply wronged. She knew it was a clearly original song, so how could it be considered a copy? To clarify the matter, the Spring Festival Gala expert panel conducted a comprehensive evaluation of both "Above the Moon" and "All Rise" and ultimately determined that they did not constitute plagiarism."
There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow Yangwei Linghua (simplified Chinese: 杨魏玲花; traditional Chinese: 楊魏玲花; pinyin: Yángwèi Línghuā; Mongolian: Үүлэнхуар Üülenkhuar) to pass Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline, which requires "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject".
Cunard (talk) 11:25, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Phoenix Legend. The voters above have uncovered sources that are reliable but most are actually about Phoenix Legend, indicating that Yangwei Linghua has achieved little independently outside the group, with the exeption of one solo song after they split in 2017. I can find nothing about any further solo activities, but I am probably restrained by language issues so that's why I recommend redirecting as an alternative to deletion. Anything known about her biography, including her solo work, can be added to the group's article, which by the way is badly out-of-date. This same argument could possibly apply to her groupmate Zeng Yi (singer) if anyone wants to inspect his article for notability. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 18:18, 18 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
After looking through some sources, Zheng Yi had some business ventures in China and has been attracting controversy lately (alongside a larger solo career), if anything, I would say he is likely the more notable of the two. Microplastic Consumer (talk) 03:15, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Phoenix Legend per WP:ATD. Not independently notable from the band. The sources are not about her predominantly but about that group.4meter4 (talk) 14:26, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Islah Abdur-Rahman

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

Very poor non-independent sources failing to establish notability. Rht bd (talk) 20:19, 12 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers and United Kingdom. Shellwood (talk) 20:29, 12 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:16, 13 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Bangladesh. Rht bd (talk) 03:56, 15 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I am looking for sources, and will add them as I find them. I note that he won the Best Video Channel award at the 2019 Asian Media Awards for the Corner Shop Show. RebeccaGreen (talk) 14:51, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete $Destinyokhiria 💬$ 21:02, 19 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: There is no substance to this Delete vote so I'm relisting this discussion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:25, 19 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, it's very much borderline, as the subject appears to have received a decent amount of coverage after being arrested on Hajj in Saudi Arabia for saying a pro-Palestine prayer, see here, but it appears to be a case of WP:BLP1E failure as that's all I could find in reliable sources. His acting and such appears to have only been covered in extremely local blogs/papers without evidence of strong editorial standards such as this, alongside a couple of primary-source interviews already in the article. On the whole I'd say he fails GNG by a whisker. Devonian Wombat (talk) 03:17, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Shameem Akhtar

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

Poor and unreliable sources which fail to demonstrate notability of this filmmaker making two non notable movies. Rht bd (talk) 17:03, 14 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, and Bangladesh. Rht bd (talk) 17:03, 14 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Fails sigcov. Agnieszka653 (talk) 13:04, 15 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Would you consider a merge of Rina Brown into this? It would not be unprecedented. Bearian (talk) 01:35, 18 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep As I noted in the AfD for Rina Brown, there certainly are sources. As well as the sources I listed there, other books and articles describe and analyse Akhtar's other films. See eg [22], [23], [24]. Akhtar also received the Shilpakala Padak award in 2020 [25] - she is listed in that WP article, but her article does not yet include this information. I will try to add these sources and additional information to both articles. At the very least, WP should have one article about the film maker and her films. RebeccaGreen (talk) 13:59, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 16:33, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Mohammad Rafique (musician)

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

No reliable source except the paid reviews and news of his debute albums. Rht bd (talk) 16:44, 14 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Bands and musicians, and Bangladesh. Rht bd (talk) 16:44, 14 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete was declined three times before finally accepted. Even then, Tavantius retired from Wikipedia. Idk this seems kind of strange to me. I tried finding some links, but they all repeat PR BS--Burroughs'10 (talk) 17:02, 14 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep – The article now cites multiple independent, reliable sources that provide significant, non-trivial coverage of the subject:** Dhaka Tribune – 26 June 2025 feature (“Mohammad Rafique brings Bengali romance to life through soulful new duets”)** Dhaka Tribune – 27 July 2024 profile (“The rising star: Mohammad Rafique”)** Jugantor – 7 July 2025 feature (“মোহাম্মদ রফিক ও ন্যান্সির কণ্ঠে প্রেমের আবেগ”)** Samakal – 28 August 2024 interview/feature (“আন্তর্জাতিক শ্রোতাদের কাছেও ‘সংগীতের জাদু’ পৌঁছাতে চান রফিক”)

These are major Bangladeshi newspapers providing repeated, in-depth coverage over multiple years. This satisfies both the general notability guideline (WP:GNG) and the specific notability criteria for musicians (WP:MUSICBIO). The current version is neutral, fully cited, and policy-compliant. SM (talk) 03:19, 15 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

SM, formally Lazybones2016, formerly Islamrafique360, is a single purpose account dedicated to creating pages about Mohammad Rafique across multiple language versions of Wikipedia. --Worldbruce (talk) 16:56, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

While most of my edits have been related to this topic (including creating versions in different languages), this reflects my editing interest rather than any external involvement. I understand that my contributions outside this topic are limited, but my work here is based solely on reliable sourcing and Wikipedia’s content policies, not on any relationship with the subject. SM (talk) 17:09, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete A Wikipedia biography is the result of gaining significant attention by the world at large, not the other way around. Publishers Dhaka Tribune, Jugantor, and Samakal are reliable for news coverage. They are naive about things outside of their area of competence, such as Tulsa, Oklahoma, musicians. Their pieces about him are not independent, they are press releases. Telltale signs are the lack of bylines combined with WP:PUFFERY that neither imparts nor plainly summarizes verifiable information: "building a loyal following among listeners who crave sincerity in sound", "solidifying his place as a visionary in the world of music", "incorporates his life experiences and cultural heritage, which leaves a mark on the hearts of the listeners", etc. For what it's worth, the topic has already been deleted on the Bengali Wikipedia and Simple Wikipedia for being non-notable. --Worldbruce (talk) 16:57, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for reviewing this.I’ll respect whatever outcome the community decides. SM (talk) 17:39, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Svartner (talk) 22:03, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Phil Morris (health activist)

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

I have carried out WP:BEFORE for this BLP of a health activist, and added a reference to some local news coverage. I cannot find significant coverage, however, and don't think he meets WP:GNG or WP:ANYBIO. Tacyarg (talk) 09:16, 14 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Health and fitness, United Kingdom, and England. Tacyarg (talk) 09:16, 14 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep -- According to WP:ANYBIO, an Order of the British Empire should be enough to establish notability. There is a reliable source indicating that he is indeed and MBE -- this article is poorly written, and stinks of Wikipedia:SELFPROMOTION, but it satisfies the notability guideline at this point. Slightly off topic but there needs to be dialogue on the notability of MBE's as there are a ton of them. AnonymousScholar49 (talk) 16:56, 15 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I understood it was CBE or KBE upwards that would be likely to confer automatic notability. Found a couple of relevant discussions: 2018; 2016; 2017. Tacyarg (talk) 18:53, 15 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 14:07, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tom Brand

AfDs for this article:

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

Fails WP:NBIO. Lacking significant coverage of this executive. Does not seem to be notable as an author either. Fancy Refrigerator ^(talk) 21:21, 13 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Authors, Businesspeople, United States of America, and Missouri. Fancy Refrigerator ^(talk) 21:21, 13 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep – Disclosure: I am the subject of this article. My comments are based on independent, reliable sources that provide significant coverage of my career and published works.

Tom Brand’s career spans decades in agricultural broadcasting, including roles at KMA and KFEQ, and 12 years as Executive Director of the National Association of Farm Broadcasting (NAFB). This leadership has been covered in national trade publications such as Radio World, Agri Marketing, and Inside Radio.

He has received multiple nationally recognized honors — including the NAFB Horizon Award, the Honorary American FFA Degree, and induction into the St. Joseph Ag Hall of Fame — each documented in independent sources.

In 2025, Brand published two books, Welts on Your Butt a Calf Could Suck and I Never Heard of Johnny Fry, both covered in News-Press Now, The Bedford Times-Press, and American Ag Network.

Examples of independent coverage:

– Radio World – Tom Brand Is Named to Head NAFB

– Inside Radio – NAFB's Tom Brand: Positive Feedback From Lawmakers on AM Radio Issue

– The Bedford Times-Press – A Familiar Voice Finds a New Page

The article contains over a dozen independent, reliable citations, meeting WP:GNG and WP:NBROADCAST for notability in broadcasting. ~~~~ HeartlandStoryteller (talk) 21:48, 13 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Source assessment table
Source	Independent?	Significant coverage?	Count source toward GNG?
https://www.newspressnow.com/news/social-services/2024/07/08/community-alliance-hires-new-director/		~ Some details	? Unknown
https://www.radioworld.com/news-and-business/tom-brand-is-named-to-head-nafb			✘ No
https://www.bedfordtimes-press.com/2025/06/10/a-familiar-voice-finds-a-new-page-former-kma-broadcaster-publishes-debut-book/		Dead link	? Unknown
https://www.legacy.newspressnow.com/veteran-farm-voice-leaving-kfeq-radio/article_e943b2aa-d855-5253-a749-e72f202b8572.html		~ Some details	? Unknown
https://nafb.com/node/100064	Primary		✘ No
https://www.agrimarketing.com/show_story.php?id=16688			? Unknown
https://www.insideradio.com/free/nafb-s-tom-brand-positive-feedback-from-lawmakers-on-am-radio-issue/article_0a3891d0-1641-11ee-b135-eff4460bf618.html		~ Some details	? Unknown
https://nafb.com/blogs/nafb-journalists-and-friends-tour-china	Primary		✘ No
https://radioink.com/2025/04/22/asu-study-shows-farm-radios-adjustments-to-digital-era/			✘ No
https://www.rrfn.com/2024/07/09/brand-to-advocate-for-st-joe/			✘ No
https://www.americanagnetwork.com/2025/05/19/veteran-farm-broadcaster-tom-brand-shares-heartfelt-humor-and-rural-roots-in-new-book/	Press release	~ Some details	✘ No
https://sheridanexpress.blogspot.com/2025/06/hopkins-native-tom-brand-publishes-new.html			✘ No
https://archives.indianapolis.iu.edu/server/api/core/bitstreams/07437591-c15b-46e3-b972-f59b00d086d8/content			✘ No
https://nafb.com/blogs/hall-fame-award-presented-tom-brand	Primary		✘ No
https://sites.google.com/masc1.org/mascstuco/recognition			✘ No
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{source assess table}}.

I've assessed the sources in the article. I was unable to determine the reliability of most of them due to their being trade publications (see WP:TRADES) or being of poor quality (e.g. this blogspot). I'm not seeing significant coverage of the subject. Fancy Refrigerator ^(talk) 22:37, 13 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete and salt for four years, after the current effort to take away Wikimedia Foundation's nonprofit status has dissipated. The richest man in the World wants to destroy us, as does his frenemy, and they could succeed, in part because of poorly-sourced autobiographies like this one, which create a conflict of interest in violation of IRC § 501. I've written about this concern at several times and places, in the past few months, and need not repeat myself. If there's a concept that is the antonym of kairos, HeartlandStoryteller is experiencing it right now: Tom Bland could not have picked the worst time in the world to do this. Bearian (talk) 19:16, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

~~Keep~~ – Disclosure: I am the subject. Independent coverage exists:

– News-Press NOW: Former NAFB head chosen to lead St. Joseph Community Alliance (2024)

– News-Press NOW: Veteran farm voice leaving KFEQ Radio (2011)

– News-Press NOW: Familiar local voice has book published (2025)

– Radio World: Tom Brand Named NAFB Executive Director (2011)

– Radio World: NAFB Executive Director Tom Brand Steps Down (2023)

– University of Illinois ACDC: New Books (2025)

These show coverage across independent local media, reliable industry press, and academic listings. —HeartlandStoryteller (talk) 21:49, 18 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, HeartlandStoryteller, editors can only cast one bolded "vote" and you have already done so at the beginning of this discussion so I have struck this second vote. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:44, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. We need more participants to weigh in here and a review of these newly added sources if they are not already included in the source assessment table.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:46, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Giampaolo Pasquile

AfDs for this article:

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

None of the sources are significant coverage in reliable secondary sources independent of the subject. This person thus fails WP:NBIO. Both of the "delete" arguments from the previous AfD were made by blocked sockpuppets. GTrang (talk) 20:13, 13 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Italy. GTrang (talk) 20:13, 13 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:21, 14 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 20:36, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Lev Kalika

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

Fails WP:NBIO. No significant coverage of this chiropractor in reliable sources. Does not appear to be notable as an academic either. Fancy Refrigerator ^(talk) 17:13, 12 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Health and fitness, United States of America, and New York. Fancy Refrigerator ^(talk) 17:13, 12 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Medicine and Sports. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:03, 12 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Per WP:NOTCV. Svartner (talk) 14:38, 18 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Article is not written like a CV/resume; it's written in an encyclopedic way, stating factual information. WP:NOTCV does not apply. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Orangutan Enjoyer (talk • contribs) 21:54, 18 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 18:44, 19 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Don Bleu

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

Local radio host - Google search and news search yield no significant non-local coverage, and awards not significant enough to meet WP:GNG and WP:ANYBIO. Current references almost exclusively non-independent local radio news sources. Epsilon.Prota ^talk 16:27, 12 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Radio, and Minnesota. Shellwood (talk) 16:31, 12 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep, seems to have been been the subject of a couple moderate-length newspaper profiles about his personal life,^[1]^[2] and the loss of his job in 1989 was covered by multiple large newspapers, who both called him a "fixture".^[3]^[4] From across the country, a New York Daily News reporter called him "popular" in 1988^[5] and his 1998 visit to his North Dakota hometown was front page local news.^[6] As recently as 2011, an article in the San Francisco Chronicle called him a "major name".^[7] Most recently interviewed by the California Historical Radio Society who seem to treat him as a figure of some prominence, although I can't tell how important this organization is.^[8] I'm still calling my !vote here "weak" because I'm not sure how much of this coverage is routine for 1980s radio and television performers, so other editors contextualizing these articles would be helpful. Dan Leonard (talk • contribs) 19:03, 12 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, California, and North Dakota. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:06, 12 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ "Don Bleu 'suffers' through L.A. winter". Minneapolis Tribune. 1979-09-28. p. 3C. Archived from the original on 2025-08-12 – via Newspapers.com.
^ Malaspina, Rick (1981-08-30). "Don Bleu and his lawn wait to grow up". Oakland Tribune. p. I-26. Archived from the original on 2025-08-12 – via Newspapers.com.
^ Mann, Bill (1989-07-27). "Fired, but not Bleu". Oakland Tribune. p. C-6. Archived from the original on 2025-08-12 – via Newspapers.com.
^ Fong-Torres, Ben (1989-07-24). "'X-100' puts DJ Don Bleu out of work". San Francisco Chronicle. p. F1. Archived from the original on 2025-08-12 – via Newspapers.com.
^ Mirabella, Alan (1988-09-12). "Institutionalized comedy". New York Daily News. p. 31. Archived from the original on 2025-08-12 – via Newspapers.com.
^ Cory, Matt (1998-01-29). "This guy's voice really carries". Grand Forks Herald. p. 1. Archived from the original on 2025-08-12 – via Newspapers.com.
^ Fong-Torres, Ben (2011-12-11). "Big changes for Don Bleu, 'Green,' KNEW". San Francisco Chronicle. Archived from the original on 2012-07-19.
^ Bleu, Don (2025-02-14). "The Don Bleu Interview" (Interview). Interviewed by Bennett, Michael. California Historical Radio Society. Archived from the original on 2025-03-24.

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 16:57, 19 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Dimitar Ganchev

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

This article has existed more or less unchanged as a stub since it was created in 2009. Most of the article does not have citations and the two cited sources are dead links to nationalist websites. Having tried to look for more sources on Ganchev, I have been entirely unable to find any significant coverage. The closest I've found is a couple passing mentions, but nothing close to anything that could flesh out a whole biography.

If no significant coverage of Ganchev in reliable sources can be turned up, then I would recommend the article for deletion. Grnrchst (talk) 14:23, 12 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Military, Bulgaria, and North Macedonia. Grnrchst (talk) 14:23, 12 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:26, 19 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep and add the references in the corresponding Bulgarian article at bg:Димитър Ганчев (революционер) and the corresponding Macedonian article at mk:Димитар Ганчев Eastmain (talk • contribs) 09:00, 19 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per above proposal. Jingiby (talk) 18:19, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I was unable to verify some of the article's contents within the cited sources, as I can't access one of them. I wouldn't call any of the currently cited sources significant coverage, but I also can't say right now if Peltekov 2014 contains significant coverage of Ganchev. --Grnrchst (talk) 19:11, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Мико: Courtesy ping to main author of the Bulgarian Wikipedia article. Can you say which parts of the article are verified in Peltekov? How much of Peltekov discusses Ganchev (sentences, paragraphs, pages, etc.)? --Grnrchst (talk) 19:15, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I don't have access to Peltekov's book - I have Nikolov's only. Now the Bulgarian article is really well referenced. Мико (talk) 19:29, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Ok, judging by the Bulgarian sources, this is as good as we're going to get for a biography on Ganchev, unless there's other sources about him out there. --Grnrchst (talk) 19:41, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep – The sources already present in the article shows enough notability. Svartner (talk) 04:47, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep — Sources show clear notability. DaniloDaysOfOurLives (talk) 12:26, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Close Let's not draw this out. The article has significantly changed since I nominated. I'm still not convinced on its notability, but at least the article itself is in a better state now. --Grnrchst (talk) 12:31, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ivanna Yastremska

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

Fails GNG. Tennis player who has no professional career to speak of and who also seems to have been inactive since 2022. All the coverage I can find about her is associated with her far more well-known sister Dayana Yastremska whose article I suggest a redirect to as an ATD if people prefer rather than to a straight deletion. Anxioustoavoid (talk) 11:05, 12 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Sportspeople, Women, Tennis, Europe, and Ukraine. Anxioustoavoid (talk) 11:05, 12 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Google search and news yield no significant coverage outside of her association with Dayana Yastremska. Her sister's article mentions her only once, so I don't think a redirect is strictly necessary. Epsilon.Prota ^talk 13:01, 12 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
[26], [27], [28], [29], [30], [31] - She has coverage in Ukrainian. News articles stated that she is focusing on her singing and acting career and not tennis. Ceriy (talk) 14:30, 13 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
That still doesn't make her notable. You would not start a Wikipedia article on her based on her "focusing on her singing and acting career" neither of which has amounted to anything significant. She still doesn't pass GNG. Anxioustoavoid (talk) 15:49, 13 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:14, 19 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep – WP:GNG isn't determined based on our subjective evaluation of the subject's significance or accomplishments, but the amount of independent reliable SIGCOV. – Ike Lek (talk) 18:58, 19 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
What about WP:Not Inherited? If this person's sister were not famous then there would be zero coverage of her. All the coverage that there is mentions her sister. I swear Wikipedia is mad. You want an article about a wannabe actor/singer with a famous sister who gets media coverage entirely because of said famous sister, but you want to delete Olympic finalists and even medalists because they come from a pre-internet age so proving they had coverage (although it is commonsense that they did) is impossible. By the way I'm using "you" collectively not personally. Anyway I'm saying no more on this. Keep it. Maybe she'll win an Oscar or a Grammy lol. Anxioustoavoid (talk) 19:26, 19 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Aquiles Córdova Morán

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

No notability demonstrated. Only one reference and it's a primary source. The Spanish article is about to get deleted too (deletion discussion ongoing, with most votes for deletion). JohnMizuki (talk) 22:55, 11 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. JohnMizuki (talk) 22:55, 11 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians and Mexico. Shellwood (talk) 23:05, 11 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge into National Torch Movement. I see no harm in a brief discussion and the photo being added. Bearian (talk) 03:19, 14 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep - I expanded the article, and there are a couple of sources which could go towards establishing notability. Plus, the coverage is split between the end of 20th century and contemporary times. Subject is notable, in my opinion, barely so though.Aeon Sentinel (talk) 22:03, 14 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, could editors evaluate the expansion of this article that has occurred since its nomination?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:25, 18 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

After the changes, it's a keep for me. There seems to be enough media coverage to demonstrate notability. JohnMizuki (talk) 23:32, 18 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per WP:HEY, but I would take out the "Investigations and controversies" unless more than one Investigation and one controversy exists, and there are better citations. Bearian (talk) 16:48, 19 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Robert Evans (photographer)

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

Lacks SIGCOV in independent sources. cbsnews is a semi-interview article that does add something to notability (in my books), but I found nothing useful beyond it. There is aan interview and a brief mention ([32], [33]). —LastJabberwocky (Rrarr) 18:50, 11 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Photography and California. —LastJabberwocky (Rrarr) 18:50, 11 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 18:54, 11 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Ineligible for soft deletion due to past PROD being declined.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 18:03, 18 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Seems like an established industry professional, but there is insufficient coverage to justify WP:GNG nor significant artistic contribution to pass WP:PHOTOGRAPHER. -- BriefEdits (talk) 01:20, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Asim Bhaumik

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

Fails WP:GNG & Wp:nprof Sabirkir (talk) 13:30, 11 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Academics and educators, and India. Sabirkir (talk) 13:30, 11 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. His h-index of 93 should be enough to pass WP:NPROF#C1, even in a relatively high-citation field. I don't see a pass of any other NPROF criteria though (noting that his fellowship of the Royal Society of Chemistry would not pass NPROF#C3). MCE89 (talk) 14:18, 11 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Japan, Maharashtra, and West Bengal. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:13, 11 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep. The nom appears not to understand WP:NPROF. With an h-factor of 93 and 29K total citations he flies through WP:NPROF#C1. Note that most of the papers on his GS page have only a few authors, so we do not have the problem of big team efforts. Yes, it is a high citation field, but not comparable to HEP and 93 is a very healthy number. (N.B., tracking from his GS to his homepage he has a couple of MRSI awards that should be added to the page, the others look a little minor.) Ldm1954 (talk) 16:45, 13 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Question Anybody know what the "possible AI-generated citations" and "use of predatory open access journal" [34] tagged in the first edit are? Stepwise Continuous Dysfunction (talk) 02:59, 14 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I would ignore that. According to Sapling.ai there was no use of AI in that version. It was rough, but we are not judging that version.

N.B., I think your removal of the statement about his citations was inappropriate. Ldm1954 (talk) 07:49, 14 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You removed a paragraph of article regarding his research area! I would like to clarify that the text in question was not copied. I rewrote it myself in English, using my own wording and sentence structure. However, certain terms in the text are scientific and domain-specific, and therefore cannot be replaced without altering their precise meaning. Such terms: for example, “novel organic, inorganic, and organic–inorganic hybrid porous materials” or “CO₂ fixation”. The similarity you may have detected is due to these technical terms being essential to accurately describe the subject matter, not due to direct copying. Pilasin (talk) 08:23, 14 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The wording and sentence structure were only lightly modified from the original. The blogs.rsc.org page says, "His research interests are: exploring novel organic, inorganic and organic-inorganic hybrid porous materials for the energy and environmental applications, developing heterogeneous catalysts for CO2 fixation reactions into fuels and fine chemicals, and green hydrogen." The article here currently says, "His research focuses on developing novel organic, inorganic, and organic–inorganic hybrid porous materials for energy and environmental applications, creating heterogeneous catalysts for CO₂ fixation into fuels and fine chemicals, and advancing green hydrogen technologies." This is excessively close copying, down to word order, which is not necessary in order to preserve the technical meaning.
It would be better to describe his research by summarizing two or more sources, which would likely avoid the risk of echoing one source too closely. Stepwise Continuous Dysfunction (talk) 21:40, 14 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Stepwise Continuous Dysfunction: The initial draft of this article by Pilasin includes clear markers for having been generated at least in part by ChatGPT, as tagged by User:Headbomb/unreliable; Pilasin's disavowels are not credible. The same script also tags Bhaumik's 2010 nano-particles paper as being in a predatory journal. —David Eppstein (talk) 06:23, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Just to clarify about sources, publications and predatory journals herein, aside from the 2010 nanoparticle paper (which IMO is very weak), most of his papers are in top journals, e.g. JACS, Chem Comm, ACS Catal, J Catal, Nature etc. You can check their rankings at Scimago or PJIP Ldm1954 (talk) 09:16, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Chemistry and Science. Ldm1954 (talk) 09:30, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Svartner (talk) 14:18, 18 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Dolo Tonight

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

Fails WP:NMUSIC. No significant coverage of this musician in reliable sources. Fancy Refrigerator ^(talk) 16:58, 10 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Bands and musicians, United States of America, and New Jersey. Fancy Refrigerator ^(talk) 16:58, 10 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: I added a new independent, reliable source to the article: https://thesource.com/2020/05/28/dolo-tonight-releases-new-single-zoom/ 369katy (talk) 21:37, 12 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, T. Canens (talk) 17:48, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete- lacks SIGCOV in most of the citations in the article, the same with Google News in the ones I've checked so far, not opposed to draftify if any can actually be found.Lorraine Crane (talk) 02:48, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Dhor (Caste)

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

Unsourced, article creator is blocked, stands on single source, Caste POV, Fails GNG. Dolphish (talk) 08:14, 10 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Ethnic groups, History, Hinduism, Asia, India, Karnataka, and Maharashtra. Dolphish (talk) 08:14, 10 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as per nomination, single source article. Lack of indepth coverage. Behappyyar (talk) 10:29, 10 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Please note that Behappyyar was blocked for undisclosed paid editing and likely sockpuppetry. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 14:43, 15 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Several sources as a references were provided but someone deleted all references. Wikiravidas (talk) 23:27, 10 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
— Duplicate !vote: Wikiravidas has already cast a !vote below. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 14:54, 11 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Its not duplicate vote , I just clarified about the references. Wikiravidas (talk) 01:08, 13 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Can you give us a list of three sources you think are in reliable and independent publications, and that have signficant coverage of the topic, as described in WP:THREE? If there are actually three such sources that would mean the topic is notable by WP:GNG. Thanks!! Lijil (talk) 19:05, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Per above, and the issue that many of the sources don't give significant coverage to the caste. 45dogs (they/them) (talk page) 17:22, 11 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - I found several references on Google Scholar that I think are about this caste. @Wikiravidas, could you check these sources? 1) Most of a page in 'The Tribes and Castes of Bombay' (1990) [35]. 2) A very racist but multi-page discussion of the Dhor in The Castes and Tribes of H.E.H. the Nizam's Dominions (pp 171-176)[36] 3) A chapter in [37] 4) Another glossary entry from a 1922 book [38] Lijil (talk) 19:21, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You first source is about Dhor Mangs, second is about Dhor Tanners, third source is about Dhor Kolis and forth is asme as second source. So there are several castes having Dhor as their division but article is about Chamars. Thank you Dirty Dolphish (talk) 23:08, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Then the article should be revised to explain this, not deleted. Lijil (talk) 02:38, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - It's one of the four most populated castes in the state of Maharashtra. The former Chief Minister of Maharashtra, Mr. Sushilkumar Shinde, also belongs to this caste. References were given about this caste as well.

https://www.academia.edu/12317994/Documenting_Lives_of_Women_in_the_Dhor_Community_A_Male_Perspective — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikiravidas (talk • contribs) 23:23, 10 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Svartner (talk) 14:17, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Deidre Willmott

AfDs for this article:

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

Not notable as bussiness person or politician. Prod was placed by someone else and removed for procedural reason. Previous afd in 2011 closed as no consensus. Rolluik (talk) 20:56, 9 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Businesspeople, Politicians, Women, and Australia. Rolluik (talk) 20:56, 9 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 20:37, 16 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Agree, not notable. Teraplane (talk) 01:49, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. The subject is undoubtedly notable, although the article doesn't clearly explain why. The subject was a senior figure in WA business and the public sector who was preselected by the Liberal Party for one of its safest seats in the WA Parliament. Due to a change in the political landscape, she then stood aside as Liberal candidate, in favour of the hitherto retiring incumbent member, a former Treasurer and Leader of the Opposition. He resumed the latter position, and, soon afterwards, at the election, became Premier for two full terms. As a mere business and public sector figure, the subject might not have been notable. It is the decisive role she played in bringing about the election of one of WA's longest serving Premiers that tips the balance in favour of notability. Also, even if standing aside as a candidate had been the only significant thing she'd ever done, then she'd still have been notable, as "[a]n event that is a precedent or catalyst for something else of lasting significance is likely to be notable" (see WP:LASTING). Bahnfrend (talk) 03:23, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Citing WP:BIO it only applies to elected politicians. A withdrawn canditature doesn't appear to ascribe notability. Teraplane (talk) 01:17, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not suggesting that it does. My post is more specific than that, and relies upon WP:LASTING, which doesn't apply to most withdrawn candidatures. I suggest you read my post again. Bahnfrend (talk) 03:05, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I would also be fine with a redirect to Colin Barnett#WA Government or Electoral district of Cottesloe#History. Rolluik (talk) 10:45, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Anindita Mukherjee

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

Not notable, not enough coverage in g-search, I don't think this article is worth keeping because she just became the mayor and nothing else. Dolphish (talk) 03:22, 7 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Politicians, Women, Asia, India, and West Bengal. Dolphish (talk) 03:22, 7 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Durgapur is a big city, with a population of 581,000 according to Durgapur Municipal Corporation and of 726,000 (city); 1,209,372 (metropolitan area) according to Durgapur. She is also the first woman to be elected mayor of Durgapur. This reference may be helpful. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 04:56, 7 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

*Keep as per Eastmain's comment. Notable as first women mayor of Durgapur (a large metropolitan area). Behappyyar (talk) 07:51, 7 August 2025 (UTC)Blocked Sock[reply]

Delete— There is a consensus that mayors don't automatically meet WP:NPOL. They need significant coverage in independent sources, which is missing in this article so notability is not established. EmilyR34 (talk) 08:02, 7 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Coverage is not enough for WP:NPOL#2. It should either be from before or after she took charge as mayor, but I see only one interview shared by Eastmain, which isn’t enough. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 08:22, 7 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Fails in WP:NPOL. Svartner (talk) 16:57, 7 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Mayors of Cities are not inherently notable. Fails GNG. Best, Reading Beans, Duke of Rivia 07:14, 10 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete This is a rather difficult one as she was mayor of a large area, and the sources here are national. I'm currently a weak delete, however, because I cannot see any significant coverage of her outside of the fact that she was elected, albeit only in English - if there's any other significant coverage of her I'd be a keep. It's pretty close. SportingFlyer T·C 13:10, 12 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:51, 14 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Keep - subject meets WP:GNG. According to the RS Noticeboard, the Telegraph is reputable. Times of India should be used with caution, especially for entertainment news. However, this is non-trivial coverage of a politician, so I think it can pass. In addition, Durgapur is one of West Bengal's largest cities, so she qualifies as a major local political figure WP:NPOL.--DesiMoore (talk) 16:08, 14 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Being the mayor of a huge city would suggest notability. I searched her name in google news, and there is plenty of media coverage to also suggest notability. Additionally, she is the first female mayor of Durgapur, which is another reason why she is notable. IJA (talk) 16:22, 15 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep for the reasons stated by DesiMoore. As I've noted elsewhere on AfD, the Indian media is, similarly to the New York Post, not reliable for films, sports, and similar pop culture content (pay to play is rampant), but ironically can be used for "hard news" like government, crimes, and social issues. Bearian (talk) 02:01, 18 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Keep !votes has not provided any sources to prove GNG. Best, Reading Beans, Duke of Rivia 05:10, 18 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I was able to find a couple articles written on her from when she was first elected mayor, but no sustained coverage. Considering this is a BLP that's close to a BLP1E from a coverage point of view, hence my cautious delete !vote. If we can find other significant coverage on her this would be easy, but no one has identified those sources yet. SportingFlyer T·C 09:40, 18 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Delete. Only thing I get is that she is the first woman mayor from coverage. Missing significant coverage to pass notability for a politician. RangersRus (talk) 20:03, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment somewhat concerned no effort made to examine Bangla sourcing for this person. I'm willing to do so, but will require another day to do so, relisting requested. Regards, --Goldsztajn (talk) 09:18, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Can't say about others but I used translation tool for Bangla sources that showed all coverage on one event about the subject taking oath, elected, how the subject was elected, who were present during the oath and comments from subject about what things she would like to do after being elected. All sources are about just one event. RangersRus (talk) 12:17, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge and redirect to either Durgapur Municipal Corporation (slight preference for this one) or Durgapur if no significant coverage is found. Rolluik (talk) 11:04, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Clearly fails WP:NPOL. The sourcing doesn't appear to be in-depth enough to meet WP:SIGCOV, and in many cases lacks independence. The sourcing isn't there.4meter4 (talk) 13:20, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – there is no inherent notability with mayors. The sourcing is very weak, even the Telegraph coverage is just a few sentences. Hardly substantial or wide spread, and certainly some independence questions. If there was really "plenty of media coverage to also suggest notability" (which I'm not seeing), as suggested above, then we wouldn't be having this conversation. – Aza24 (talk) 18:11, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Aristide Sartor

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

Subject fails to meet the WP:GNG because of a lack of WP:SIGCOV. The only reference is a database and all I could find in a BEFORE were some mentions and hits on unrelated people. A redirect to France at the 1948 Summer Olympics may be a suitable WP:ATD. Let'srun (talk) 15:40, 5 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Sportspeople, Olympics, and France. Let'srun (talk) 15:40, 5 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment there is a small amount of coverage in Richard D. Burnell's Henley Regatta: A History (1957), but I can only see it in snippet view on Google books. Jahaza (talk) 16:32, 5 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 15:16, 12 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to his brother's article Ampelio Sartor as I have found an article with coverage of the brother and another elder brother when they raced together in 1939[39]. This can fill in some of the backstory on them. Jahaza (talk) 16:10, 12 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. There is a consensus to Redirect but two separate target articles that have been suggested. We need to find agreement on one.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:32, 19 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to France at the 1948 Summer Olympics#Rowing – As WP:ATD. Svartner (talk) 04:25, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Chidananda S Naik

AfDs for this article:

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

While this is not a G4, it does not appear that factors have changed sufficiently since the first AfD. Bringing it here for further discussion. Star Mississippi 13:54, 3 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, and India. Star Mississippi 13:54, 3 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Subject received the Best Script award in the Non-Feature Film competition at the 71st National Film Awards recently, which clearly meets WP:ANYBIO #1 and WP:FILMMAKER#4(c). In the previous AfD, the main rationale against retention was that the La Cinéf award was technically awarded to the film and not the director. That concern no longer applies, as the National Film Award for Best Script was awarded directly to Chidananda.

We now also have significant coverage from sources published across different points in time, not just immediately following Cannes -[40], [41], [42] and [43]. IMO, subject now meets both GNG and ANYBIO. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 14:36, 3 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Karnataka-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 14:51, 3 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

*Keep - subject receive an award in Nation Film Awards and clearly pass WP:ANYBIO. Behappyyar (talk) 15:59, 5 August 2025 (UTC)Blocked SOCK[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Svartner (talk) 18:47, 10 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete All the areferences mentioned above ([44], [45], [46], [47]) are from the interview of the subject, and these are about the screening of the subject's one and only non-feature film (short film). References do not meet WP:SIGCOV; hence, the subject fails WP:GNG and WP:NFILMMAKER. CresiaBilli (talk) 11:42, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Almost all the sources are solely about him and his achievements, so I would like you to explain your interpretation of WP:SIGCOV. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 17:39, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 18:21, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Srini Kumar

AfDs for this article:

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

No longer meets WP:GNG with no viable long-lasting coverage. Article was previously deleted and then recreated but has never grown beyond a stub, and sources are non-reliable and long outdated. 💥Casualty ^{• Hop along. •} 03:46, 3 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. 💥Casualty ^{• Hop along. •} 03:46, 3 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Reject nomination This is an invalid AfD reason. Notability is not a temporal property. If something was once notable, then it continues to be notable. The alternative would be for Wikipedia to only contain topics of things that have been discussed within the past 10 years and constantly deleting anything older than that. That would then eliminate the whole purpose and value of Wikipedia. Further, it was established in the previous AfD for this article, that dead links do not somehow convert an article from encyclopedic to unencylcopedic, which makes this a redundant AfD, trying to re-vote something that has already reached consensus. - Keith D. Tyler ¶ 06:22, 3 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment KeithTyler is the article creator. ~~And the consensus in the first AfD was to delete.~~ 💥Casualty ^{• Hop along. •} 08:44, 3 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Businesspeople, Internet, and California. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:58, 3 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: The article was not recreated, as it turns out. While the first nomination nominally ended as "delete", this was contested at deletion review and overturned to "no consensus". The current article is more-or-less the same article as last time, and there have been few changes in the interim (not even to add any of the sources brought up in the first nomination). I have no opinion, though. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:06, 3 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

- It would seem the appropriate action at this point is to follow Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion#Procedure_for_non-administrator_close_(nominator_withdrawal) as the deletion argument has been obviated. - Keith D. Tyler ¶ 19:49, 11 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 04:13, 10 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. I don't see that the nominator has withdrawn their nomination statement.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:45, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sulara Nanayakkara

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

Unclear notability. No significant coverage of this musician in reliable sources. I also question this article's claims of significance, including the claim that this person has been featured in two Grammy-nominated recordings. The source that supports that claim ([48]) does not even mention this person. Fancy Refrigerator ^(talk) 13:19, 2 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Bands and musicians, and Sri Lanka. Fancy Refrigerator ^(talk) 13:19, 2 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi,

I have moved this article to the main space because Sulara Nanayakkara is a prominent violinist and music educator in Sri Lanka. I have added more newspaper articles as citations to support the claims made in the article, specially the grammy nomination. Please let me know if more citations are required. Thanks Withanakasun (talk) 13:34, 2 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Unable to find any significant coverage that supports this musician's notability. "Notably, he is the only Sri Lankan violinist to have been associated with Grammy-nominated recordings"—I question the validity of this claim, as there is no evidence to support it.Raj Shri21 (talk) 13:43, 2 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I have removed the claim "he is the only Sri Lankan violinist to have been associated with grammy-nominated recordings" as there isn't adequate evidence for it, and I have cited newspaper articles as evidence for the grammy nomination Withanakasun (talk) 13:58, 2 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

Further, I would be grateful if you could let me know what other edits can be made to improve the article

Thanks Withanakasun (talk) 15:26, 2 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The article has now been revised for improved accuracy and sourcing. Multiple independent and reliable sources such as The Sunday Times (Sri Lanka) and Daily Mirror (Sri Lanka) confirm that Sulara Nanayakkara was a violinist in the Temple University Orchestra during the recording of Vince Mendoza's 'Constant Renaissance' which was nominated for two Grammy Awards (Best Instrumental Composition and Best Arrangement, Instrumental or A Capella) in 2012. While the Grammy nomination applies to the composition and ensemble and not to Nanayakkara personally, his participation is explicitly mentioned by these publications. The article now avoids unverified claims, claims that may sound promotional and adheres to a neutral point of view. References are cited to support statements about the subject's performances, qualifications and teaching. Given the presence of significant coverage in independent sources, albeit local, and the subject’s contributions to internationally recognized recordings and performances, the subject in my opinion meets the notability criteria under WP:MUSICBIO and WP:GNG. I welcome further improvements and collaboration from other editors. Withanakasun (talk) 18:17, 2 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Draftify. The article was clearly not ready for publication when it first appeared in main space, and isn't ready now. The creator is a new editor who apparently wasn't aware of the process for getting drafts written by newbies approved for publication. Let's draftify this, which would give the creator ample time to improve the draft without having to worry about deletion. ~Anachronist (talk) 23:12, 2 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Anachronist. Already draftified once. But the author moved the page back to mainspace. Fancy Refrigerator ^(talk) 23:42, 2 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. Im sorry earlier I was unaware you had moved it to draft space. When I was about to publish an edit it was missing in the main space. I thought it was accidentally moved by a glitch so I moved it to main space again. Then I saw your comment regarding moving it to draft space and immediately tried to fix the issues as much as possible. I would appreciate it if you could point out the issues in the article and let me edit it in draft space. Again, I'm really sorry, I'm new to this and didn't know how this process worked. Withanakasun (talk) 23:58, 2 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Fancy Refrigerator - the creator is willing to draftify it again. I recommend closing this discussion and moving forward with that. ~Anachronist (talk) 06:41, 3 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Anachronist. I object to draftification. I could not find sources in my WP:BEFORE that would make that a better alternative over deletion. Fancy Refrigerator ^(talk) 12:32, 3 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The subject is featured in numerous articles in newspapers such as The Sunday Times (Sri Lanka), The Daily Mirror (Sri Lanka), and Sunday Observer (Sri Lanka) which i have cited in the Wikipedia article. I include some of them below.

http://www.sundaytimes.lk/210228/magazine/sulara-classical-violin-teacher-who-dreams-to-create-a-world-class-next-generation-433546.html

http://www.sundaytimes.lk/201122/magazine/master-violinist-dreaming-to-share-the-love-for-music-422981.html

https://www.life.lk/article/latest_stories/A-Holiday-Serenade/1/20766

https://www.sundaytimes.lk/240811/sunday-times-2/violin-piano-duo-recital-for-prithipura-home-567218.html

https://archives.sundayobserver.lk/2015/06/21/spe-the-07.asp

http://www.sundaytimes.lk/130331/magazine/living-and-loving-the-violin-38758.html

https://www.dailymirror.lk/news-features/Violin-Piano-Duo-Recital-for-a-worthy-cause-Sulara-Johann-join-to-perform-rare-classical-recitals/131-289380

All the above newspapers are major English newspapers in Sri Lanka, and these are articles by journalists under the employment of these newspapers, not interviews or promotional material. Nor are these passing mentions of the subject because these articles are about the subject's career and performances. Therefore I find these sources adequate for notability under WP:MUSICBIO. I would be grateful if you could let me know the reasons you find these sources inadequate Withanakasun (talk) 14:29, 3 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sorry but those are low quality articles, which do little to show notability. These ([49][50][51]) were written by the same person, who, in the third listed article, writes With his rare talent, Sulara, from his younger age started winning awards for his performance, just one of many questionably written sentences. There is no integrity in these sources. The life.lk article ([52]) even shows signs of being generated by large language models. And the remaining sources ([53][54]) have no author that I could see. Fancy Refrigerator ^(talk) 15:16, 3 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Fancy Refrigerator "There is no integrity in these sources", "The life.lk article ([5]) even shows signs of being generated by large language models". Can you please explain how you arrived at these 2 conclusions? Withanakasun (talk) 15:40, 3 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There is no integrity in those sources because they are promotional by nature (see the forementioned sentence for reference) and/or contain factual error and information that cannot be verified. Most obvious of factual errors, all three of those articles by the same person write that Sulara Nanayakkara is a Grammy-nominated artiste.

As for life.lk article, it is evident based on how it is written (e.g. The concert promises to immerse the audience in the warmth and joy of the season, through the transcendent power of music [...] The evening will conclude with the vibrant and dynamic 10th String Symphony of Mendelssohn, rounding out a programme that blends tradition and innovation.) that it contains material generated by LLMs. ZeroGPT and GPTZero each confirms that the article was written in part, at the least, by chatbot. Fancy Refrigerator ^(talk) 16:28, 3 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I have corrected the Grammy nomination claim to reflect that the newspapers mention he was part of the ensemble of a Grammy nominated recording, which may be what the author of the newspaper articles also intended to convey. Apart from that, I believe the sources are generally reliable as they are major newspapers in Sri Lanka and have been used as sources in other Wikipedia articles for notable Sri Lankan persons. (as mentioned in my other reply).

As for the life.lk article, Grammarly AI detector reports 0% AI written text and quillbot reports only 18% of the text is likely AI Withanakasun (talk) 16:56, 3 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
My point is that those factual errors compromise the reliability of those sources in whole. [55] misleadingly calls the subject Sri Lanka’s first youngest violinist to become Grammy Nominated Recording Artiste and [56], too, misleadingly writes [...] he has received international fame reaching world standards as a Grammy nominated recording artiste. Fancy Refrigerator ^(talk) 17:24, 3 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Fancy Refrigerator also, all these articles are under the domains of the aforementioned newspapers, which means they were published by these newspapers either on paper or online. And these are well established newspapers in Sri Lanka. Some other Wikipedia pages of notable Sri Lankan persons cite only such newspaper articles. See Lakshman Joseph de Saram Withanakasun (talk) 15:44, 3 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 14:59, 9 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 06:20, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Bhambi

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

Hoax article, not notable, unsourced from long time. Dolphish (talk) 11:24, 1 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Ethnic groups, History, Hinduism, Asia, India, Maharashtra, and Punjab. Dolphish (talk) 11:24, 1 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment:. Clearly not a hoax article. A simple Google search shows multiple mentions of the caste. For example, the caste is mentioned in the constitution of India (THE CONSTITUTION (SCHEDULED CASTES) ORDER, 19501 (C.O.19)) — ERcheck (talk) 04:47, 2 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Fade258 (talk) 11:29, 8 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to List of Scheduled Castes or Delete. RangersRus (talk) 15:35, 14 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:54, 15 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge with Bhambi Sindhi Mochi, Bhambi Rohit and Bhambi Khalpa or just close as No Consensus. The nomination seems to be based on incorrect assumptions (the group is clearly not a hoax and does exist) so it's worth keeping; just because an article is unsourced doesn't mean that it's not notable.

Microplastic Consumer (talk) 22:35, 15 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

just because an article is unsourced doesn't mean that it's not notable. No that is not how it works. All content must be verifiable. The burden to demonstrate verifiability is satisfied by providing reliable sources with significant coverage that directly supports the contribution. The pages you voted to be merged to are all very poor articles that can be nominated for AFD as well. RangersRus (talk) 18:06, 18 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

As mentioned earlier, the group is mentioned in the Constitution of India and is clearly not a "hoax". While I agree with your point, an article being unsourced and it's notability are not the same thing, as is the case with many older articles. Rather than deleting these stubby articles, merging them would probably be the best course of action.

Some sources to improve the article can be found in some decent academic books. I am sure many more can be found with a deeper search, these are just from the first page of google books

- The Castes of Marwar, Being Census Report of 1891, Hardyal Singh, 1990

- Caste and Ritual in a Malwa Village, Kripa Shankar Mathur, 1964

- India’s Forgotten Country: A View from the Margins, Bela Bhatia, 2024 (Penguin)

Please let me know if you have any other concerns! But the article should not be deleted, partially because the nominator does little to establish how the group is not notable besides making a false claim and mentioning that the article is uncited. Microplastic Consumer (talk) 02:57, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Problem is not that such caste does not exist, problem is significant or indepth coverage on the caste that is not available in multiple reliable sources. Entries and snippets are not sufficient. Page has been created since 2010 and now we are in 2025 and still no scope for any improvement. RangersRus (talk) 19:29, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If you read the nomination, the nominator describes the caste as a "hoax article" and "not notable" without explaining why; even when many sources are out there and exist, not really a reason to delete the articles rather than merging them all together. Microplastic Consumer (talk) 22:28, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Forget the hoax as I already made that clear in my last comment. The not notable is because of no significant indepth coverage in the reliable sources. We can not just keep article assuming that many sources are out there. If sources are reliable and have significant coverage then they need to be added to the article and attributed to the sentences and paragraphs in the article. Other articles that you are asking to merge this article to are in same boat and tagged with Additional citation needed for verification and Rely largely on a single source. If sources are out there as you say, then they need to be presented. If you can show it here instead of snippets or entries, I would be willing to change by vote based on evidence that you present if the sources are found to be reliable (from academic scholar) with indepth coverage. RangersRus (talk) 22:57, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. The idea that a recognized people group mentioned in India's constitution could be "non-notable" or "not encyclopedic" is offensive and de-humanizing. There are sources identified by Microplastic Consumer. WP:NEXIST is satisfied.4meter4 (talk) 14:22, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
sources identified by Microplastic Consumer are only entries and snippets but no significant coverage to pass WP:GNG. RangersRus (talk) 15:53, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think you missed my point that even suggesting some topics lack significance is inherently immoral and offensive. This is one of those times.4meter4 (talk) 19:15, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Christoph Karl Franzen

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

Individual doesn't satisfy Wikipedia's WP:GNG criteria. Lacks Significant coverage in multiple reliable sources. CresiaBilli (talk) 09:28, 1 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Food and drink, and Switzerland. CresiaBilli (talk) 09:28, 1 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:GNG - I don't see any thing that he has done that is notable. Bearian (talk) 10:13, 1 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above, WP:GNG, WP:NBLP, etc. Ploni^💬 12:35, 1 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment – I have 352 results for "Chris Franzen" on Swissdox; very, very many passing mentions, making it hard to determine if there's any sigcov, but of the few dozen I've skimmed they all seem to be about this guy. I don't know if I'll have time to finish looking through these and !vote. If I don't, I suggest a redirect to Bürgenstock Resort as an ATD. Toadspike [Talk] 16:52, 5 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep When I searched on Google for the term "Christoph Karl 'Franzen,'" I found that the results in the 'News' section were insufficient. However, when I searched for "Chris K. Franzen" and "Chris Franzen," I discovered enough resources to demonstrate the subject's notability (GNG). There are significant references available in multiple reliable sources. Currently the article looks like promotional, and it needs improvement to adhare Wikipedia's standrads. To achieve this, it would be beneficial to focus on providing verifiable sources and a neutral tone. Additionally, incorporating more factual information and eliminating subjective language will help align the content with Wikipedia's guidelines. Sooterout (talk) 06:20, 6 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
We don't really need those catchall statements, we need to hear about speficic sources. Geschichte (talk) 07:48, 7 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There are references from reliable sources: [57] - Blick, a Swiss German-language daily newspaper. [58] - Bilanz, a biweekly business magazine published in Zürich, Switzerland. [59]- Schweizer Radio und Fernsehen, a radio company subsidiary of the Swiss Broadcasting Corporation. Jevry Paul (talk) 16:53, 7 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Analysis of references mentioned by Paul is needed.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Fade258 (talk) 11:25, 8 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment The source for Blick and Bilanz are identical, given that Blick simply republished the Bilanz interview. The interview itself is mostly trivia about his life and a primary source, so I would not count it for notability. The SRF documentary isn't just about him, in total about 13 to 15 minutes of the program are about him, but given that there are four episodes with him in it, that would add up to about an hour long portrait of his work. Again, not really substantial coverage, it just shows him at work a bit and bit about his family. LightlySeared (talk) 17:17, 8 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete After having had a bit of a think, I have to say I come down on the side of just barely not passing the notability guidelines, for reasons above. LightlySeared (talk) 11:13, 9 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  - Comment I have read the new sources added, I stand by my analysis. Yes, there are many passing mentions of him and his work, but the sources don't rise to the level of in-depth coverage about him to statisfy GNG or NBLP. As much as I admire the work of improving the article, I don't think the Heymann standard is met, yet. LightlySeared (talk) 11:49, 11 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep After improving the article with significant coverage on reliable sources and as per WP:HEY standards, the subject meets WP:GNG. Jevry Paul (talk) 06:05, 11 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Bushranger _{One ping only} 01:22, 16 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per WP:HEY. Seems to pass WP:SIGCOV now that the article has been heavily edited.4meter4 (talk) 15:53, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

People proposed deletions

Hume Peabody (via WP:PROD on 12 May 2025)

[Star_Tribune_1979-1] "Don Bleu 'suffers' through L.A. winter". Minneapolis Tribune. 1979-09-28. p. 3C. Archived from the original on 2025-08-12 – via Newspapers.com.

[Malaspina_1981-2] Malaspina, Rick (1981-08-30). "Don Bleu and his lawn wait to grow up". Oakland Tribune. p. I-26. Archived from the original on 2025-08-12 – via Newspapers.com.

[Mann_1989-3] Mann, Bill (1989-07-27). "Fired, but not Bleu". Oakland Tribune. p. C-6. Archived from the original on 2025-08-12 – via Newspapers.com.

[Fong-Torres_1989-4] Fong-Torres, Ben (1989-07-24). "'X-100' puts DJ Don Bleu out of work". San Francisco Chronicle. p. F1. Archived from the original on 2025-08-12 – via Newspapers.com.

[Mirabella_1988-5] Mirabella, Alan (1988-09-12). "Institutionalized comedy". New York Daily News. p. 31. Archived from the original on 2025-08-12 – via Newspapers.com.

[Cory_1998-6] Cory, Matt (1998-01-29). "This guy's voice really carries". Grand Forks Herald. p. 1. Archived from the original on 2025-08-12 – via Newspapers.com.

[Fong-Torres_2011-7] Fong-Torres, Ben (2011-12-11). "Big changes for Don Bleu, 'Green,' KNEW". San Francisco Chronicle. Archived from the original on 2012-07-19.

[Bennett_2025_interview-8] Bleu, Don (2025-02-14). "The Don Bleu Interview" (Interview). Interviewed by Bennett, Michael. California Historical Radio Society. Archived from the original on 2025-03-24.

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

[6]

[7]

[8]