Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/Today

Purge
Shortcut WP:AFD/T

22 January 2025

Read how to nominate an article for deletion.

Recent AfDs: Today Yesterday

Media Organisations Biography Society Web Games Science Arts Places Indiscern. Not-Sorted

< January 21	January 23 >

Guide to deletion

Purge server cache

Space Solar Power Exploratory Research and Technology program

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

This article lacks inline cites and the topic is already covered in Space-based_solar_power#Exploratory_Research_and_Technology_program No objection to merging if you think the refs at the end of this article are sufficient. Chidgk1 (talk) 07:15, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Engineering, Spaceflight, and United States of America. Chidgk1 (talk) 07:15, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:26, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Jim Wolf (musician)

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

I Believe this artcile should be deleted as the article is not notable and the writer of the article has a Conflict of interest. Jake Jakubowski ^Talk 20:13, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for pointing me towards the notability requirements of the platform. Several updates have been implemented over the past week that I believe meet the requested changes. 71.88.44.206 (talk) 17:03, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This IP address is Jim Wolf himself, Conflict of interest. If you check the history of this page he has done most of the edits he does himself. Jake Jakubowski ^Talk 23:50, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

User:Jake-jakubowski - this AFD was never transcluded to the log and was missing the templates. I have tried to fix it for you.Jay8g [V•T•E] 04:11, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Connecticut, and New York. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:27, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment There is an Allmusic staff biography which is sigcov sourcing per WP:RSMUSIC: [1]. This profile is sigcov: Korea Herald, which is 5 years after his music became popular so is evidence of WP:SUSTAINED. The New York Times also appears to substantiate the charting in Korea: [2]. Potential here for meeting WP:MUSICBIO. ResonantDis_tortion
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of South Korea-related deletion discussions. ResonantDis_tortion 23:32, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Korea-related deletion discussions. ResonantDis_tortion 23:32, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as per the reliable sources coverage identified in this discussion such as AllMusic and the Korea Herald which support the claim of a hit single on a national chart which therefore passes criteria 2 of WP:NMUSIC in my view, Atlantic306 (talk) 21:08, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep the page… Jim wolf is notable enough to have a page. His accomplishment show as such. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2603:8001:CE3F:A306:64A0:90CA:D5AD:881B (talk) 23:34, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting as the only well-articulated rationale here is the Keep argument. COI is not a reason to delete an article as it can be addressed through editing and there is no detailed deletion rationale presented. I think that we need to hear from more editors familiar with assessing articles in AFD discussions.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:18, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Métier

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

Fails to demonstrate notability under WP:NCORP. Available references mostly discuss product launches, no significant coverage of the company itself and the product themselves do not appear independently notable. Brandon (talk) 03:48, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Software, and California. Brandon (talk) 03:48, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Clear WP:NCORP failure; sources are either non-independent or they are WP:ORGTRIV. Dclemens1971 (talk) 17:22, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, article has been PROD'd so not eligible for Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:09, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:12, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Anne Pincus

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

I don't believe she meets WP:ARTIST. Could not find coverage in google news or books. The awards do not appear major (and not reported in press). She is not part of a permanent collection of notable galleries. LibStar (talk) 03:45, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Visual arts, and Australia. LibStar (talk) 03:45, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I am looking her up in Australian art sources to check notability. In the meantime, as most of her career has been in Germany and she has received more exposure there, is there any way to refer her article to German Wikipedia and see if the German editors can find her as a notable artist there? LPascal (talk) 00:04, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The German article is also poorly sourced. LibStar (talk) 00:09, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The article Anne Pincus does not have sources either (other Wikipedia sites have different criteria, and don't always require sources etc). Her own website, shown in the External links section, has a Press section which lists reviews of her exhibitions in publications like Süddeutsche Zeitung and Abendzeitung. Those articles have links to the newspapers' websites - I've just searched Süddeutsche Zeitung and found a 2021 review, but on first glance neither seems to go back far enough for reviews before that. I think as far as galleries are concerned, we'd also need to search in German galleries ... RebeccaGreen (talk) 03:00, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:08, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I have looked at her artist's file in an art library and found enough ephemera and clippings to confirm the accuracy of her CV under "Exhibitions" on her own website. There isn't a lot of information about her in english since she left Australia for Germany in the late 1990s. She has been interviewed by Australian press and looks like occasionally exhibits here but I haven't found any of her works in the collections of the major government galleries. As mentioned in previous comments she might meet German wikipedia's standards for notability. I don't make a keep or delete comment one way or another on principle because I disagree with wikipedia's biased notability criteria for Australian women artists.LPascal (talk) 07:53, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

LPascal, did you find any clippings of reviews? If so, could you perhaps include them as sources in the article? (Sorry, you probably would have if there were any - this is probably just wishful thinking!) RebeccaGreen (talk) 13:46, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I have added a few sources to the article, and a bit of info. I'm also finding some paywalled sources, such as this [3], and any articles in the Süddeutsche Zeitung beyond the one I have accessed (which is a review of an exhibition, but doesn't seem to be written by an art critic). RebeccaGreen (talk) 15:15, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:11, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Genlin

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

Highly promotional and of very questionable notability over a WP:SUSTAINED period. Amigao (talk) 03:22, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Artists, Businesspeople, Animal, China, Japan, and California. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:23, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Agree that the article as written seems quite promotional in tone, and it seems there might possible be conflict on interest concerns, but those are both things to be fixed through editing, not AfD nominations. If you want to go through and reword all the promotional parts, have at it. There seems to be more than enough coverage to establish notability though (some sources aren’t great, but there are enough that are to establish notability). As for WP:SUSTAINED arguments… I see sources from 2016 - 2024 so I can’t see how it applies here? Absurdum4242 (talk) 16:43, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed, definitely needs cleanup but WP:AFDISNOTCLEANUP. Keep but WP:STUBIFY is appropriate. DCsansei (talk) 11:59, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:48, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete The article seems to have a circular logic to it. Genlin is notable for funding World Dog Alliance, but I cannot find RS to show World Dog Alliance is notable. The whole table in the middle Contributions by Genlin/ World Dog Alliance conflates the two and can be considered original research. for example The joint efforts of Genlin and lobbyists succeeded in convincing Republic Congressman Jeff Denham to include a ban on dog meat consumption into the 2018 Farm Bill passed on 12 December 2018 in the House of Representatives. The bill obtained bipartisan support, notably from Democratic Congressman Alcee Hastings, who had earlier co-sponsored a separate bill to Congress (H.R. 1406 - To amend the Animal Welfare Act to prohibit the slaughter of dogs and cats for human consumption^[1]) to ban consumption of dog and cat meat but did not succeed in garnering enough support for a standalone bill on animal rights. The 2018 Farm Bill was successfully passed alongside with other agricultural and food policies. the footnote is to the actual bill which does not mention either Genlin or World Dog Alliance. Many other blocks of text in the table do the same thing, state that Genlin has affected some sort of change without proper citations. I cannot see how this article can be stubified. I am hampered by lack of Chinese. I realize that WP:AFDISNOTCLEANUP, but this falls under WP:TNT.--WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 01:32, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ "Text - H.R.1406 - 115th Congress (2017-2018): To amend the Animal Welfare Act to prohibit the slaughter of dogs and cats for human consumption". www.congress.gov. 23 March 2017. Retrieved 18 January 2025.

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: No consensus here yet.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:09, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Dien Sanh train crash

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

Fails WP:EVENT. No lasting impact or coverage. All the sources are from March 2015. Whilst number of deaths is not a criterion, we don't generally keep articles with such a low death and injury count. LibStar (talk) 03:35, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Transportation, and Vietnam. LibStar (talk) 03:35, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
redirect to List_of level crossing crashes#Vietnam where it is covered. This sort of accident is common and there's no need to go into detail. Mangoe (talk) 14:56, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This was a major incident in Viet Nam and appears to be a translation of the Vietnamese wiki article, so lacks a WP:LASTING source. I can't find that source since it'd be in Vietnamese, but if it exists this would be an easy keep. SportingFlyer T·C 01:37, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:08, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Rafz train crash

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

Fails WP:EVENT. Almost 10 years later, all the coverage is from 2015. No lasting coverage or WP:EFFECT. A zero fatality incident. LibStar (talk) 05:51, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Transportation, and Switzerland. LibStar (talk) 05:51, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

2015 Mount Carbon train derailment

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

Fails WP:EVENT. Almost 10 years later, all the coverage is from 2015. No lasting coverage or WP:EFFECT. LibStar (talk) 05:44, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Transportation, and West Virginia. LibStar (talk) 05:44, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Soprano clarinet

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

Completely duplicative of clarinet article. SarekOfVulcan (talk) 04:51, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. SarekOfVulcan (talk) 04:51, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Titus, Indiana

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

Not getting anything useful on this one; there was a chapel here but there's nothing now, and there never was much. Searching comes up with nothing. Mangoe (talk) 04:46, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Indiana. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:15, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Red T

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

A search for sources yielded nothing in depth to meet WP:ORG. The 2 sources provided are primary. LibStar (talk) 03:36, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and New York. LibStar (talk) 03:36, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:16, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Bohdan Lazarenko

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

I can't seem to find any WP:SIGCOV on this player in either English or Ukrainian. Fails WP:GNG, as a result. Anwegmann (talk) 03:22, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. Anwegmann (talk) 03:22, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ukraine-related deletion discussions. Idoghor Melody (talk) 04:23, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:16, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Mykola Zuyenko

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

I can't seem to find any WP:SIGCOV on this player. He seems to fail WP:GNG, as a result. Anwegmann (talk) 03:17, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. Anwegmann (talk) 03:17, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ukraine-related deletion discussions. Idoghor Melody (talk) 04:22, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:17, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Manop Leeprasansakul

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

Declined prod that was redirected. I contested the redirect Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2025_January_8#Manop_Leeprasansakul. Fails WP:SPORTSCRIT and WP:NOLY. LibStar (talk) 02:57, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Olympics, and Thailand. LibStar (talk) 02:57, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Googling his name in Thai turns up a few hits in relation to his work as a police officer (his 2004 Master's thesis, 2008 news mentioning a transfer to the Inspector General's office, 2016 contact directory giving the rank of Pol.Lt.Col.) in addition to passing mentions in articles about Thailand in international sporting events[4][5], but nothing that could be considered in-depth. The latter two links indicate he's a gold medallist at the 1981 and 1989 SEA Games though. --Paul_012 (talk) 07:23, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Already PROD'd so not eligible for Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:51, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sartaj Mera Tu Raaj Mera

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

Unless there are non-English sources that can be found, there is nothing I can find that amounts to significant coverage. A redirect to Hum TV would be a good WP:ATD but would not qualify as a standalone page. CNMall41 (talk) 02:00, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Pakistan. CNMall41 (talk) 02:01, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Hum_TV#Daily_series: , where it is listed. -Mushy Yank. 22:42, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting to see if there is more support for Redirection.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:45, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Robert Foster Cherry Award

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

Insufficient evidence can be found that this subject is independently notable - except for the sponsoring organization's own website and materials, the other reliable sources all appear to be passing mentions or entirely promotional in nature as they are announcements that someone has won the award and not substantively about this subject. ElKevbo (talk) 02:44, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Awards, Education, and Texas. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:17, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Cowie Island

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Islands-related deletion discussions. Masterhatch (talk) 15:39, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. Masterhatch (talk) 15:36, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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

Firstly, I want to say I don't do this very often so if I make a mistake or miss a step, please forgive me. I do not believe this island meets notability requirements. I can only find one source and there seems to be nothing special about this very small island. Masterhatch (talk) 15:18, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Cree Lake; see also WP:GEONATURAL. There's not much to be found online about this island apart from placename databases and weather websites. No hits on ProQuest, Google Scholar returns 1 citation (no preview), and Google Books returns a number of hits, but most are for the unrelated "Cowie's Island". Mind matrix 20:41, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting to see if there is more support for Redirection.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:41, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect (to Cree Lake) seems reasonable. I searched several reference databases through my library and nothing about this Cowie Island except name-only mentions in some old books. Similar results on Google/Scholar/Books today. This might just be a name on a map with nothing more ever written about it. --Here2rewrite (talk) 04:20, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

External Revenue Service

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

I don't believe this meets the notability criteria. The "proposed agency" was mentioned by Trump in a social media post, so it's not clear it will actually be created; no other politician or policymaker has seriously discussed the proposal, and no legislative action has been taken to create the agency. CatoTheWiseAss (talk) 20:27, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Draftify: Likely WP:TOOSOON for mainspace as a future planned US government department [sic], but Draft:External Revenue Service should be developed with relevant material in case this becomes a real plan. Novemberjazz 20:55, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There's no valuable content in the article. We don't have any details of this hypothetical agency, and the current piece reads like it was written by a pro-Trump LLM:

This initiative is part of Trump's broader trade policy, which includes imposing tariffs on imports from foreign countries to enforce an "America-first" approach.Trump announced this plan on his Truth Social network, emphasizing the need for foreign entities to pay their "fair share" from trade profits.The creation of this service reflects Trump's commitment to his campaign promises regarding trade levies.
CatoTheWiseAss (talk) 20:39, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2025 January 14. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 21:03, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Social media trends aren't reliable sources and this feels like a joke rejected by Merry Melodies c. 1939 that we've all made once and then said 'never using that joke' again. Nate • (chatter) 21:07, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - WP:SPECULATION - Please see History of taxation in the United States. I believe this would take an act of the US Congress to create - the very attempt of which would create a lot of ticked off constituents. Either way, this is not likely to bear fruition anytime soon. — Maile (talk) 00:47, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politics, Economics, and United States of America. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:23, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Based on https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/113827650534234057 but now Time https://time.com/7206986/trump-external-revenue-service-tariffs-taxes/ and UPI https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/trump-proposes-external-revenue-service-to-tax-foreign-sources/ar-AA1xcB5s?ocid=BingNewsSerp, Reuters, CBS, etc. are covering it. Arbeiten8 (talk) 03:58, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Reuters, CBS, et al. are covering Trump's social media post, not the actual agency. There's still zero indication that this agency will every be established, or that anyone will even try to establish it. It's total nonsense. CatoTheWiseAss (talk) 20:38, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom., WP:TOOSOON, and WP:CRYSTAL. Sal2100 (talk) 22:24, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. We do not have to cover everything Trump says. Esolo5002 (talk) 23:42, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. It's a serious plan by someone who is about to be president of the United States. It's being covered by media outlets and treated like a serious plan too. Of course, the idea is crazy, but we also have an article for a fictitious cabinet department named after an internet meme headed by Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy, so I don't think this is too far out there. We have even decided to keep articles for random Twitter shitposters, and this — a serious plan proposed by the president-elect — is certainly more notable than that. It should be noted that the article itself needs significant reworking regardless. Gore2000 (talk) 20:52, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It's not a serious proposal. DOGE has been pretty widely discussed by members of Congress and the media–there's even a caucus. Additionally, Trump can (and plans to) establish DOGE as an advisory committee by executive order. On the other hand, the "ERS" would require Congressional legislation, and it's not clear that he plans to introduce, or would be able to pass, such legislation.

Without follow-up by Trump, this is an article about a social media post. That's not notable. See WP:NOTNEWS, WP:TOOSOON and WP:CRYSTAL. CatoTheWiseAss (talk) 20:48, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Foreign policy of the second Donald Trump administration, in the tariffs section. That article will be merited in a couple of days. Alternately merge to Second presidential transition of Donald Trump. Buckshot06 (talk) 08:47, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The foreign policy article should cover actually policy, not random tweets. This proposal, unless someone takes steps to implement it, will be totally irrelevant in a few news cycles. It's too soon to have an article discuss it. CatoTheWiseAss (talk) 19:48, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Trump is right now promising to establish the External Revenue Service in his inauguration speech to perform many functions of the U.S. Customs and Border Protection. Arbeiten8 (talk) 17:30, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep He's just mentioned it in his inauguration speech and given the likes of the Associated Press and Time have mentioned it, means I don't think CRYSTAL/TOOSOON applies here since it seems more than likely it will happen in the coming days. The C of E God Save the King! (talk) 17:27, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
"it seems more than likely than" is the definition of WP:CRYSTAL/WP:TOOSOON. But, even if he does introduce legislation creating this agency soon, it's a long road to passage. Pending legislation doesn't meet the notability requirements. CatoTheWiseAss (talk) 01:24, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- CRYSTAL clearly says "All articles about anticipated events must be verifiable, and the subject matter must be of sufficiently wide interest that it would merit an article if the event had already occurred". Which clearly is the case here given the verified coverage before and after President Trump's inaguration speech. The C of E God Save the King! (talk) 08:15, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as above, like Department of Government Efficiency Splatterxl – talk 20:59, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
As I discussed above, there's a key difference between DOGE and ERS. DOGE can be created by executive order, but this agency would require Congressional legislation. Besides, DOGE already exists, but this is just an idea. An idea doesn't warrant an article. CatoTheWiseAss (talk) 01:25, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Due to the press coverage and the fact that it's been mentioned in the inauguration speech. Aŭstriano (talk) 21:10, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It still doesn't meet notability requirements. He mentioned it, but that doesn't mean he'll move forward with it or that the agency will end up being created. If a bill is introduced or actual action is taken, we should reassess, but for now this isn't notable. CatoTheWiseAss (talk) 01:26, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: for the reasons enumerated in my original post and subsequent discussion CatoTheWiseAss (talk) 21:46, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Economic policy of the second Donald Trump administration, and yes, I know that this page is currently a redirect to the main DJT article, but it's an article which will certainly have to be created soon. At this point the proposal is a notable part of his larger economic and fiscal policy agenda, and was mentioned in his inaugural address. But I do agree that it's not yet quite at the point of warranting an article of its own, in large part since there simply aren't yet many details known about this proposal. But if/when it's further developed, this could well change. -2003:CA:8723:6551:3D79:C1D4:E66F:E1D6 (talk) 23:53, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 02:40, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

delete per WP:CRYSTAL as we do not need a separate article on everything Trump throws out along the way. If anything ever comes of it, OK, but not now. Mangoe (talk) 04:51, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Eric R. Gilbertson

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

This is essentially a resume. The person doesn't appear to pass general notability guidelines. A re-direct to the school is possible, but I question if having a redirect to a small school for every one of their past president is necessary. Graywalls (talk) 14:32, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I am also nominating the following for the same reason:

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Academics and educators, Businesspeople, and Michigan. Graywalls (talk) 14:32, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I can only find articles about his retirement and public speaking events after that, nothing really showing notability. Primary sourcing is used in the article now, so that's not helping. Oaktree b (talk) 15:07, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep (of ERG article): It seems to me that the central question is whether C6 of WP:NPROF is met by ERG due to their having served as the president of Saginaw Valley State University and of Johnson State College (now part of Vermont State University). Since the former school offers a significant number of master's degrees and three doctorates (DNP; see https://www.svsu.edu/graduateprograms/), it seems to me that that the answer is yes. I qualify this as a weak keep because this is not an R1 university and does not appear to be historically significant. I do agree that WP:GNG is not met, and if the page is to remain it needs significant editing so as to not present as a resume. I see no way for this particular subject to satisfy the other criteria of WP:NPROF. The other page (about JMR) should be considered on its own merits; I am unsure whether we are supposed to be discussing both of them here. Qflib (talk) 19:36, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Qflib What academic accomplishments and citations does he have? that would qualify under NPROF? My position is that he doesn't qualify under "a significant accredited college or university, director of a highly regarded, notable academic independent research institute or center (which is not a part of a university), president of a notable national or international scholarly society, etc." I believe "significance" or "highly regarded" of this school is subjective and in mine, it's not. Graywalls (talk) 21:02, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Only one of the 6 criteria of NPROF need to be met in order to establish notability; please read it carefully. I specifically pointed out that I was referring only to C6 of NPROF, so academic citations are immaterial. I also specifically pointed out that "I see no way for this particular subject to satisfy the other criteria of WP:NPROF." I stand by my weak keep recommendation; if other senior editors come on here and convince me otherwise, I am open to input. Qflib (talk) 22:19, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep. I buy the WP:NPROF C6 rationale, as president of a mid-sized college/university. I additionally note that I found several local newspaper sources: [6][7][8]. He was involved in a minor scandal regarding a football hazing incident [9][10]. It's weak for a GNG case, but it helps support the NPROF case. Russ Woodroofe (talk) 21:21, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep of both. Even if not technically passing the PROF test, the presidents of medium size state colleges probably will get significant coverage in their state's media. Bearian (talk) 16:06, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Given the repeated use of the word weak, consensus looks like keep but also looks weak so far.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 19:59, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Still a !delete for me, not passing PROF, the rest doesn't help. Oaktree b (talk) 20:24, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Saginaw News has a good deal of coverage on him, e.g. this (p2). BeanieFan11 (talk) 00:49, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- The same for Ryder, e.g. this and this. BeanieFan11 (talk) 00:51, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. I'm not convinced at all of SVSU being a "major" institution; it has only ~1350 papers attached to it across all time periods and fields indexed by Scopus (even Saginaw Cooperative Hospitals, Inc. has 66 papers; compare also to R2 schools American University (~15000 papers) and Yeshiva University (~59000)). So I would not say he is a C6 pass. Newspaper coverage of him might support GNG, however I haven't analyzed those sources yet. JoelleJay (talk) 00:53, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 02:40, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Kaavya Sha

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

From a WP:BEFORE, I am unable to find any independent sources with significant coverage. The only sources I could find with SIGCOV are interviews /wedding announcements, which are ineligible towards GNG. NACTOR is also not met here, as none of these roles are significant enough to warrant a separate article. No plausible ATDR either. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 19:41, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, India, and Maharashtra. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 19:41, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep as per references from The New Indian Express, The News Minute, The Times of India [11], [12] and her work in many notable movies as mentioned in the article. Behappyyar (talk) 20:25, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I've added more references to it. And Despite this, it is incomprehensible to tag for AfD after a senior editor has already reviewed it. Behappyyar (talk) 06:40, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: There certainly seems to be more than just passing coverage in the Times of India sources.--Ipigott (talk) 08:15, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep According to WP:GNG, significant coverage from reliable for establishing the notability of a topic. 𝒮-𝒜𝓊𝓇𝒶 08:30, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Ipigott and S-Aura, would you mind mentioning the WP:THREE best sources or the sources you think help the subject pass GNG or NACTOR? It would be great to see a source analysis, as all I could find is routine coverage and nothing independent of the subject. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 09:46, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Loudspeaker (2018 film). Clearly the only named member of the cast and her only lead role [13]. DareshMohan (talk) 04:54, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect: To Loudspeaker (2018 film), the better option. Claims notability in someway but lacks sufficient reliable sources to fully support this claim.--— MimsMENTOR ^talk 08:10, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Meets WP:SIGCOV easily. Here are a few more mentions [14], [15], [16] Tau Corvi (talk) 20:38, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Tau Corvi, Indiaglitz is unreliable and the other two sources are not independent. There seems to be no coverage of the Paisa movie mentioned in the TOI source or about its director. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 21:09, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Jeraxmoira🐉, please explain why Indiatimes is not independent, I don't get it Tau Corvi (talk) 15:36, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Those are interviews and interviews are primary sources. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 16:10, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I wouldn't say that this can be classified as an interview [17]. And this is even more so [18]. Anyway, you call these sources not independent, and I still don't understand why. In my opinion, the links I provided demonstrate how a major Indian media covers the life of an actress (her wedding and debut in cinema) Tau Corvi (talk) 17:21, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
What makes you think they are independent sources? Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 19:03, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see any indication that IndiaTimes is affiliated with Kaavya Sha. If there is, please point it out. Tau Corvi (talk) 20:16, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
So by your understanding, IndiaTimes is not independent only if it is affiliated with Kaavya Sha? Please read and understand WP:PRIMARY, WP:SECONDARY, WP:INTERVIEWS and Indiscriminate sources before dropping your two cents in an AfD discussion. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 20:44, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, very informative. I just don't think that, for example, the announcement of a film with Sha, in which her commentary is given, can be considered an interview. In my understanding, this is first and foremost an article about her debut in cinema. Tau Corvi (talk) 22:06, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 02:39, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

YGL motif

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

Probably fails WP:GNG. It's mentioned in a few studies about motifs and the viruses that have it, but only seems to be a major part of one primary source (the one used in the article). When comparing this motif to others, most of the motifs in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Protein_structural_motifs are much broader in scope than the YGL motif and have been the subject of far more research than the YGL motif. Google search returns 15 (filtered) results, 3 of which (20%) are to Wikipedia. Google Scholar just ten results. Velayinosu (talk) 02:09, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Science and Biology. Velayinosu (talk) 02:09, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Preston Grubbs

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

Tagged for notability since 2021. Currently uses only government websites which are reliable but lack independence from the subject. Time to decide as a community whether or not this meets WP:GNG.4meter4 (talk) 01:52, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians, Law, New York, Pennsylvania, and Washington, D.C.. Skynxnex (talk) 02:24, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

1882 in Scandinavian music

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

We have articles for 1882 in Norwegian music (where this article was an unattributed copy from), 1880s in Danish music, 1882 in Finnish music and 1880s in Swedish music. Comparable to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2015 in Scandinavian music. Fram (talk) 15:33, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Also nominated for the same reasons:

Fram (talk) 17:03, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Music, Lists, Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway, and Sweden. Shellwood (talk) 15:35, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - This nomination appears to have been made because User:Fram failed to notice previously that the article existed and doesn't believe that Scandinavia is a clearly-defined region. This isn't a copy of 1882 in Norwegian music; in fact, content of that article has been copied from 1882 in Scandinavian music just to try to prove a point. Who is going to maintain all these "Music in" articles for separate countries? Will they even be completed? Deb (talk) 15:40, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
2017 version of 1882 in Norwegian music [19]: in your article 1882 in Scandinavian music you have the same three entries with the exact same reference (even down to the copied access-date). Please tell me how you achieved this without copying the older Norway article? Fram (talk) 15:59, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
They're not copies, they are used in a thoughtful way; the wording is not identical. Not that this has anything to do with the proposed deletion of the article. Deb (talk) 16:40, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I've added 1881 in Scandinavian music to this nomination, as the same reasons apply. Fram (talk) 17:03, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- in a previous version of this article, now at 1880s in Danish music, I had removed an entry where the sources indicate that the year is unknown (early 1880s), not certain to be 1881; another entry where the only link with 1881 is that the much earlier event is described in a letter from that year, hardly something important for 1881; and had corrected the title of a work. The claims of "Who is going to maintain all these "Music in" articles" when they are started as unattributed copies of someone else's work, and then expanded with such entries, ring rather hollow. Fram (talk) 17:06, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  Once again you are being careless with the truth. The only reason these single-country articles exist is that you have just created them in order to make a point. There is simply not enough material to build them. Deb (talk) 08:45, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  The Norway article existed long before you created the Scandinavia one. As you are well aware of course, since you started your creation by copying entries from that page with minor adjustments. And the suggestion below, which I already did in part, is to change them into decades-articles, because they will otherwise indeed be rather empty. Fram (talk) 09:23, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  See User talk:Knuand#2016 in Scandinavian music for a full explanation of why these articles exist. Deb (talk) 14:12, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:52, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I just don't see the justification for a page, or any compelling reason to intersect Scandinavia, music and an individual year. Moreover, Finland was a part of the Russian Empire at the time. Geschichte (talk) 22:56, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Strictly speaking, it was the Grand Duchy of Finland - that's why it's not appropriate to create year articles for Finland before this date, as Fram is attempting to do. Deb (talk) 08:46, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Category:Years of the 19th century in Finland. Fram (talk) 09:26, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I think that proves my point. Deb (talk) 14:10, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or merge If Scandinavian music is an entity itself, then the national articles should be merged to the regional ones. If the national identity is more important, then the regional article should be deleted. There's not a need for this sort of duplication. Either way, for this kind of narrow topic, I'd rather see them as 1880s in X music instead of individual years; when there's not enough info for standalone articles, presenting them with broader context is better. Reywas92^Talk 23:39, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
agreed, I started with individual years but have changed some into decade articles, will probably do the same for the other ones. Fram (talk) 08:42, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
So basically, your plan is to remove individual year articles and put the material I've already created into decade articles. And what are you going to do about the years between 1882 and 2009? I'm not going to do the work for you. Deb (talk) 08:48, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If you don't want to create the articles in the way consensus seems to be trending (not for Scandinavia as a whole, but by country), then you don't create these articles, simple. No idea why you only want to do this if it can happen as "year in Scandinavia" and not as "decade in Denmark" and so on (which will result in half the number of pages, should make life easier). Fram (talk) 09:23, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oh yes, great, let's just have an article for every ten years and leave out all the detail. But where does that leave your argument about "duplication"? Deb (talk) 14:09, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Deb. As far as I can tell from what I found in Google Books, "Scandinavian music" is a thing. You'll find books on "Scandinavian music" generally, and comments such as "Scandinavian music as a whole" [20] and "Scandinavian music . . . is distinctive" and is "a school": [21]. You will find, even in English, Billboard spotlight "review of the year" articles on Scandanavian music in 1971, 1972, 1973, 1979, 1981 and probably every other year, though I can't search the entire run. And Scandanavia has had music periodicals since at least the 18th century: [22]. And I think that indicates that most years in Scandanavian music are likely notable. James500 (talk) 22:19, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Barkeep49 (talk) 01:44, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Gharida Farooqi

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

Fails WP:GNG. Mainly covered in gossip media and controversy like "child abuse" is not enough to pass WP:SIGCOV. Gheus (talk) 19:38, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Journalism, and Pakistan. Shellwood (talk) 19:45, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:50, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I thought and remembered that I had edited this Wikipedia article in the past. So I used 'View history' TAB to look ... and found my edits from 2017. To my surprise, someone had vandalized and totally blanked all my newspaper references from 2017. Today, I have restored my relevant and reliable newspaper references plus added some new ones. The above Deletion nominator, Gheus, was right in nominating it for deletion because I saw that nothing but 'gossip media' references were left at this article. Now, I leave it to the Wikipedia community to decide whether to 'delete' or 'keep' this article...Ngrewal1 (talk) 01:46, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
KEEP This journalist has been active in TV journalism since 2004. My Google search on her turned up many newspaper and other reliable sources. To give a balanced view, I did not remove content from anybody else. In my view, this journalist is very notable and meets WP:GNG now...Ngrewal1 (talk) 19:14, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Barkeep49 (talk) 01:43, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

HD 222399

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

Does not pass WP:NASTRO? -- Beland (talk) 10:29, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Astronomy-related deletion discussions. Beland (talk) 10:29, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, has a HR number and hence meets criterion one of the guideline cited above. 21 Andromedae (talk) 22:39, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to List of stars in Andromeda, where it is already listed. The star lacks any significant coverage; it's just an ordinary, distant, subgiant star with no particularly interesting aspects yet identified. Praemonitus (talk) 07:14, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 19:56, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Barkeep49 (talk) 01:42, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to List of stars in Andromeda per above reasoning. Mangoe (talk) 04:52, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

HD 41162

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

Does not pass WP:NASTRO? -- Beland (talk) 10:30, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Astronomy-related deletion discussions. Beland (talk) 10:30, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, has a HR number and hence meets criterion one of the guideline cited above, but this article is really poorly-written and has to be fixed. 21 Andromedae (talk) 22:40, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to List of stars in Auriga, where it is already listed. The system lacks any significant coverage. Praemonitus (talk) 07:14, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 19:56, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Barkeep49 (talk) 01:42, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to List of stars in Auriga per above. Mangoe (talk) 04:53, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

HD 174569

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

Does not pass WP:NASTRO? -- Beland (talk) 10:30, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Astronomy-related deletion discussions. Beland (talk) 10:30, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to List of stars in Aquila, where it is already listed. The system lacks any significant coverage. Praemonitus (talk) 13:28, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 19:56, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, has a HR number and hence pass criterion one of WP:NASTCRIT. Has sufficient notability for a Wikipedia article. 21 Andromedae (talk) 20:56, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Barkeep49 (talk) 01:42, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to List of stars in Aquila per above. I don't agree that just having an entry in the YBS list is uncommon enough to be remarkable in itself. Mangoe (talk) 04:57, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nordea Bank Norge

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

I don't see how it passes WP:NCORP. The notability banner has remained unresolved for 12 years. Cinder painter (talk) 10:56, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Finance, Companies, and Norway. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:42, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Large bank in Norway, but redirect to Nordea for the time being. Geschichte (talk) 09:24, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 19:57, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Barkeep49 (talk) 01:42, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tomato Bank

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

I don't see how this defunct Chinese bank passes WP:NCORP. No reliable sources or significant coverage Cinder painter (talk) 11:00, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Finance, Companies, and California. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:41, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Royal Business Bank, at least partially. One of ~100 California chartered banks folding is not insignificant. Brandon (talk) 09:08, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources.
1. Daysog, Rick (2006-11-09). "Isle company weighs $31M bid". The Honolulu Advertiser. Archived from the original on 2025-01-13. Retrieved 2025-01-13.
  The article notes: "A California banking company on an expansion spree has made an unsolicited $31 million bid for a majority stake in the parent company of Honolulu-based Finance Factors. ... TFC is the parent of Alhambra, Calif.-based TomatoBank, which operates five branches in the Los Angeles area and has about $350 million in assets. The bank, known as InterBusiness Bank until it changed its name in August, was founded six years ago by Los Angeles physician Stephen Liu. The bank specializes in lending to Los Angeles' Asian-American and Hispanic communities. ... The bid for Finance Enterprises underscores TomatoBank's aggressive growth strategy."
2. Kuehner-Hebert, Katie (2006-08-14). "Fruit? Vegetable? Neither; CEO: New name appeals to target markets". American Banker. Vol. 171, no. 155. pp. 1–5. EBSCOhost 21948502. Factiva AMB0000020060814e28e00003. Archived from the original on 2025-01-13. Retrieved 2025-01-13.
  The article notes: "Dr. Stephen Liu likes to compare the bank he co-founded six years ago to a tomato. ... In fact, the medical doctor-turned-banker likes the comparison so much that last week the $350 million-asset InterBusiness Bank in Alhambra, Calif., officially changed its name to TomatoBank. Dr. Liu, its chairman and chief executive officer, said he had always thought the old name was too generic, and he has been trying to persuade the board to change it for years to give the bank more visibility in the ethnic communities it targets in and around Los Angeles. The new name is not a complete stretch. The bank has used a tomato as its logo since its inception, and its Web address has been www.tomatobank.com since 2001. Dr. Liu said the word "tomato" resonates with Asian-American customers, because banks in Asia are often named after fruit, vegetables, or flowers grown in their region, and Asian-Americans particularly love tomatoes. ... Richard A. Soukup, a partner with the Chicago office of the consulting firm, Plante & Moran PLLC, said that the TomatoBank name is "refreshingly innovative" and will definitely be a conversation starter. "But time will tell if it has legs and branding appeal." Ted Salame, the president of BrandEquity International in Newton, Mass., thinks it will. ... Dr. Liu's bank actually had done quite well under the InterBusiness name. Its assets have nearly doubled in the last two years. Last year its net income rose 83%, to $3.7 million. Its efficiency ratio, its return on assets, and its net interest margin are all above average for banks in its asset class, according to Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. data."
3. Allen, Mike (2007-10-01). "TomatoBank Targets Latino Customers, Opens Chula Vista Branch". San Diego Business Journal. Vol. 28, no. 40. p. 3. EBSCOhost 27088532. Factiva SDBJ000020071026e3a100006.
  The article notes: "In the world of bank names that are mundane and commonplace, Tomato-Bank, which recently opened an office in Chula Vista, stands out. The Alhambra-based commercial bank was formerly known as InterBusiness Bank until last year when it rebranded itself. ... The change appears to be working as Tomato's total assets sprouted up 26 percent over the year ended June 30 to $445 million, while its loans increased 36 percent over the same period to $341 million. ... Buoyed by the bank's growth, it decided to open a branch in the San Diego area, the first branch outside Los Angeles County. ... To attract its targeted customers, TomatoBank's first branch is housed inside an El Tigre Supermarket, a supermarket chain based in Escondido that caters to Latinos. ... Hans Ganz, chief executive of Chula Vista-based Pacific Trust Bank with some $770 million in assets, had not heard of TomatoBank, but said their strategy could be effective. Ganz said other banks have been successful at targeting specific minority groups, such as Nara Bank in Los Angeles, which targets Korean Americans."
4. Tanaka, Rodney (2007-02-25). "Banking with a personal touch". San Gabriel Valley Tribune. Factiva xKRTGB00020070227e32q00001. Archived from the original on 2025-01-13. Retrieved 2025-01-13.
  The article notes: "Step into TomatoBank in Alhambra and you may not realize you're in a bank, since you don't wait to interact with a teller standing behind Plexiglas. ... The company also focuses on community service. The bank's latest partnership is with the Urban Education Partnership, which focuses on helping high-poverty, multi-cultural Los Angeles County schools with academic achievement. ... The bank, which has 75 employees, has grown 40 percent to 50 percent each year, he said. The company has six offices and plans to open two more in Arcadia and San Diego."
5. Schachar, Natalie (2015-11-11). "In Merger, Interesting Name of TomatoBank to Disappear". Los Angeles Business Journal. Archived from the original on 2025-01-13. Retrieved 2025-01-13.
  The article notes: "The parent company of L.A.’s Royal Business Bank announced Tuesday that it has signed a definitive agreement to acquire the parent of TomatoBank. Assuming the transaction is completed as expected in the first quarter next year, what may be L.A.’s most interesting bank name will disappear thereafter. TomatoBank, which operates six full-service branches in Los Angeles and Orange County, primarily serves Asian-American communities, the same demographic focus of Royal Business Bank. TFC Holding Co., TomatoBank’s parent, reported assets of about $488 million, deposits of $421 million and shareholders’ equity of $60.5 million as of Sept. 30. All TomatoBank branches will eventually be converted to Royal Business Bank."
6. Tanaka, Rodney (2007-05-30). "Ripe investments". San Gabriel Valley Tribune. Factiva KRTGB00020070531e35v0002t. Archived from the original on 2025-01-13. Retrieved 2025-01-13.
  The article notes: "TomatoBank planted its latest seed, opening a new branch in Arcadia Saturday. TomatoBank has eight branches, including regional offices in Industry and Alhambra. ... Founded in 2000, has about $410 million in assets and is expected to approach $1 billion by the end of the decade, according to the bank. ... TomatoBank is also active in the community, providing summer internships through the Urban Education Partnership and sponsoring financial literacy programs for the American Junior Golf Association."
7. Daysog, Rick (2006-11-22). "Finance Factors' owner rejects TFC takeover bid". The Honolulu Advertiser. Archived from the original on 2025-01-13. Retrieved 2025-01-13.
  The article notes: "Finance Enterprises Ltd. said its 12-member board voted unanimously last week to turn down TFC Holdings Inc.'s $1,000-per-share offer for 31,000 shares, or 51 percent of the company's stock. ... TFC is the parent of Alhambra, Calif.-based TomatoBank, which has $350 million in assets and operates five branches in the Los Angeles area. TomatoBank, known as InterBusiness Bank until it changed its name in August, was founded six years ago by Los Angeles physician Stephen Liu. The bank specializes in lending to Los Angeles' Asian-American and Hispanic communities."
There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow Tomato Bank (traditional Chinese: 宏基銀行; simplified Chinese: 宏基银行) to pass Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies)#Primary criteria, which requires "significant coverage in multiple reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject".
Cunard (talk) 02:36, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of China-related deletion discussions. Cunard (talk) 02:36, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 19:58, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Barkeep49 (talk) 01:41, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Murder of Fanny Hardwick

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

Fails WP:NEVENT. All source is breaking news or trial stuff, no retrospection, after the execution it was seemingly never discussed again. Interestingly, not a case of recentism (all sourcing is from 1901). There is one very brief mention in an academic article from this year in an article about Australian executions, but otherwise nothing. If we had some article like "list of people executed by Australia" I would suggest a redirect to that, but we do not. PARAKANYAA (talk) 15:39, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Crime, Events, and Australia. PARAKANYAA (talk) 15:39, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to List of people legally executed in Queensland. There are a couple of sources from after 1901, but agree that it's not enough to meet WP:NEVENT. MCE89 (talk) 17:06, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@MCE89 For purposes of consensus building I agree with redirect (I would have suggested it if I knew that page existed...)

Out of curiosity what are the other post-1901 sources? Some stuff on Trove? PARAKANYAA (talk) 17:33, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah nothing much, just a couple of articles from 1902 [23] and 1904 [24] that strike me as basically that era's equivalent of sensationalised true crime stories. Nothing to suggest any real notability, and they're close enough to the murder that they don't really suggest any lasting coverage. MCE89 (talk) 18:00, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to the article mentioned above in addition the redirect. Or at least an inclusion of the references.Topic does not seem to have lasting importance. Royal Autumn Crest (talk) 18:02, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 20:01, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Barkeep49 (talk) 01:41, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Peter Chico

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

As a city councilman, fails WP:NPOL. The sourcing does not demonstrate WP:SIGCOV.4meter4 (talk) 20:52, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. 4meter4 (talk) 20:52, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Illinois-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 21:57, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Chicago city councilors are assumed notable under longstanding consensus. Chicago is literally the example of notable city councilors at WP:POLOUTCOMES. R. G. Checkers^talk 23:07, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Police-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:24, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per User:R. G. Checkers' point regarding WP:POLOUTCOMES. I do share some reservations about the article at present not including more third-party sourcing and content in general.--Mpen320 (talk) 22:20, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: POLOUTCOMES is not a community endorsed guideline or policy. It is instead a recording of what has happened. But when challenged an article should be shown to be notable and not by relying on the OUTCOMES page.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Barkeep49 (talk) 01:41, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

delete Mostly this is an argument that WP:POLOUTCOMES is, like many such notability tests, largely bad where it is invoked. There is no explicit claim of notability, and Mr. Chico is not claimed to have done anything that anyone outside of the city limits might care about; I have to suspect that even in Chicago he is a relatively anonymous figure to those who don't have to deal with him on a work basis. There are a very few cases where city councilmembers have come to notoriety, but considering for example Marion Barry, most of his infamy came about while he was mayor, and his second go-'round on the council was largely notable simply because he was elected at all after the drug bust. There is no claim that this person even vaguely approaches that. Mangoe (talk) 05:06, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Baltimore City Council District 1

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

Unclear what makes this special from the other districts or pass WP:GNG. Redirect to Baltimore City Council. charlotte ^👸♥ 01:13, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politics, Geography, and Maryland. Skynxnex (talk) 02:23, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Di Thorley

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

Simply being mayor does not guarantee notability. She does not meet WP:NPOL, a small amount of coverage eg her commenting on water issues but insufficient WP:SIGCOV. LibStar (talk) 01:01, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians, Women, and Australia. LibStar (talk) 01:01, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The nominator is correct that being mayor doesn't guarantee notability, but I think there's just about enough SIGCOV. She's continued to get quite a bit of coverage as a candidate and potential candidate [25] [26] [27] [28] and she is still regularly profiled in discussions about water in Australia [29] [30] [31]. There's also quite a bit of coverage of her as mayor from the early 2000s on Proquest, but I'm having trouble tracking down whether the Toowoomba Chronicle from that period has been digitised (I expect that it would contain unambiguous SIGCOV if anyone is able to access articles from that period). Overall I think it's enough to constitute the "significant press coverage" that WP:NPOL requires of local political figures. If others disagree, I'm undecided whether the best ATD would be a merge/redirect to 2016 Toowoomba South state by-election or to 2006 Toowoomba Water Futures referendum. MCE89 (talk) 01:24, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, has been the subject of significant coverage in reliable sources. Hack (talk) 03:13, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Simon M. Kirby

AfDs for this article:

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

Doesn’t seem to meet WP:ACADEMIC. _signed,SpringProof ^talk 00:17, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Academics and educators. _signed,SpringProof ^talk 00:17, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Evo-psych is a high-citation field but still I think his citation counts [32] are enough for WP:PROF#C1. He holds a personal chair at the University of Edinburgh, possibly enough for #C5. He is a Fellow of the British Academy [33], a clear pass of #C3. And multiple reviews of multiple books [34] [35] [36] [37] [38] [39] [40] give him another case for notability through WP:AUTHOR. I don't know what WP:BEFORE the nominator tried to produce this WP:VAGUEWAVE towards our notability guidelines but it wasn't enough. —David Eppstein (talk) 00:35, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as above. Nominator deserves a trout for this inept nomination. Xxanthippe (talk) 00:47, 22 January 2025 (UTC).[reply]
Keep: Meets WP:NACADEMIC and WP:AUTHOR per above. Helpful Raccoon (talk) 01:04, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Language, and Scotland. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:19, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Christina Kinström

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

Doesn’t seem to meet WP:BIO. _signed,SpringProof ^talk 00:13, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Businesspeople, Women, Music, and Sweden. _signed,SpringProof ^talk 00:13, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I can't access Svenskt Klavikordbygge 1720–1820, but the other two sources in the article just contain trivial mentions (the first source just cites the second and third sources). Can't find anything other than trivial mentions in my search, but historical bios are relatively likely to have hard-to-find sources. Helpful Raccoon (talk) 01:17, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: She doesn't have an entry on the Swedish Wikipedia, although her husband and brother (both also instrument makers) do. She's briefly mentioned here and here (under her maiden name) in entries on her husband, which just say that she continued operating his workshop after his death. She's also briefly mentioned here in an entry on her brother. Sadly it seems like she's basically been treated as a side note in sources about her male relatives. Hopefully someone else is able to find something more substantial, because from what I could find I'm not sure there's enough in the historical record to warrant an article about her. MCE89 (talk) 06:15, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

[www.congress.gov-1] "Text - H.R.1406 - 115th Congress (2017-2018): To amend the Animal Welfare Act to prohibit the slaughter of dogs and cats for human consumption". www.congress.gov. 23 March 2017. Retrieved 18 January 2025.

[1]