Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Asia

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

Adding a new AfD discussion

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

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

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

Removing a closed AfD discussion

Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.

Other types of discussions

You can also add and remove other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Asia. For the other XfD's, the process is the same as AfD (except {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName}} is used for MFD and {{transclude xfd}} for the rest). For PRODs, adding a link with {{prodded}} will suffice.

Further information

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

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

WikiProject Deletion sorting/Asia/archive

Purge page cache

watch

Purge page cache

This list also includes sublists of deletion debates involving articles related to specific Asian countries.

Asia

Mt. Nebo, Valencia

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

Does not satisfy WP:NPLACE only sources I found is WP:TRIVIALMENTION of the place Warm Regards, Miminity (talk) (contribs) 12:32, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Asia and Philippines. Warm Regards, Miminity (talk) (contribs) 12:32, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Valencia, Bukidnon as per WP:NPLACE "disputed regions". Don't see any point in merging due to the lack of information. Vorann Gencov (talk) 16:05, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rahil Abbas Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shrawan Ghimire (2nd nomination)

REDIRECT Target page name

Afghanistan

2019 CAFA U-16 Championship

AfDs for this article:

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

Fails WP:GNG, no significant coverage Mdann52 (talk) 08:40, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

1. the initial delete nomination (lack independent sourcing):

Link 1 by Khovar.tj National Information Agency of Tajikistan/ not related to CAFA

Link 2 Tasnim News Agency an Iranian new agency Independent from CAFA

Link 3 Turkmen news agency which is also Independent from CAFA

Link 4 Sport.kg an Information Agency; Sport.kg is the only specialized portal in Kyrgyzstan

and many more; that i will add to the article to enhance it sourcing

2. The tournament is organized by the Central Asian Football Association (CAFA), which oversees football in Central Asia. CAFA is a member of the AFC and, therefore, FIFA. As an international competition between member nations, the tournament holds significant notability. This is particularly relevant now, as some footballers who participated in the tournament are becoming prominent figures in Central Asian football and across Asia. The tournament shall be cited as the beginning of their international careers, further emphasizing its importance. Lunar Spectrum96 (talk) 09:31, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Football, and Central Asia. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 10:59, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Afghanistan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, and Iran. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 11:00, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 15:31, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I included more resources from other independent sources such as:
jomhornews.com, m.kun.uz, trt.net.tr, and sport.kg. Lunar Spectrum96 (talk) 10:54, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. GiantSnowman 11:00, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
GiantSnowman can you please specify what's make a tournament notable enough; so i can send the sources that adresse it ? Lunar Spectrum96 (talk) 12:34, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Significant coverage - the sources above are WP:ROUTINE. Giant Snowman 13:07, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Matchday 1:

Tajikistan v Uzbekistan at sports.uz

Kyrgyzstan v Afghansitan at sport.kg

Matchday 2:

Uzbekistan v Iran at Tasnimnews.com

Uzbekistan v Iran at Sports.uz

Tajikistan v Kyrgyzstan at avesta.tj

Matchday 3:

Iran v Afghanistan at Irannewsdaily.com

Iran v Afghanistan at farsi.alarabiya.net

Iran v Afghanistan at avapress.com

Kyrgyzstan v Uzbekistan at sport.kg

Matchday 4:

Turkmenistan v Kyrgyzstan at Turkmenportal.com

Turkmenistan v Kyrgyzstan at sport.kg

Turkmenistan v Kyrgyzstan at Kabar.kg

Afghanistan v Uzbekistan at sputnik.af

Afghanistan v Uzbekistan at dzen.ru

Matchday 5:

Kyrgyzstan v Iran at Tansimnews.com

Tajikistan v Afghanistan at sputnik.af

Iran

All matches reports at toopball.com

Kyrgyzstan

Kyrgystan at for.kg

Other tournament reports
Champion at rus.ozodi.org

Championship at nm.tj

Schedule at ilna.ir

Should I add more? The tournament's matches were covered by all the top news agencies in Central Asia.

Also Asian Football Confederation did post all these covering the tournament
Matchday 1

Matchday 2

Matchday 3

Matchday 4

Matchday 5

Lunar Spectrum96 (talk) 05:38, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment International level competition and there are sources, however they are very young. So I am not sure at what level wikipedia should be keeping these. Govvy (talk) 10:27, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep
let us remember that The Central Asian Football Association (CAFA) was only formed in 2015, and with the tournament being the 8th tournament organised, CAFA has shown significant progress in promoting and developing football in the region. Over the years, CAFA has developed its media coverage and reporting capabilities, making the tournaments more accessible and notable. While the first editions may have had limited coverage due to CAFA's emerging stage and limited experience, the organization's growth and increased attention highlight the importance of these early stages articles being there.

Furthermore, for Central Asia, where international sports events are relatively scarce, CAFA's tournaments hold notable significance. The early editions of the tournament are crucial for understanding the development of football in the region and providing a better statistical context. As CAFA continues to grow and attract more attention, the historical records of all editions, including the first ones, will be valuable for researchers, fans, and anyone interested in the football in Central Asia.

Therefore, despite its relatively young age, CAFA's tournaments are notable and deserving of coverage on Wikipedia, as they contribute to the broader narrative of international sports in Central Asia. Lunar Spectrum96 (talk) 19:21, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:08, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect must be redirect to the Central Asian Football Association.Parwiz ahmadi (talk) 21:18, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: We have arguments to Keep, Delete and Redirect right now. Let's get a few more sports fans in here.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:43, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Redirecting it would diminish the significance of the tournament compared to other international competitions. This is an Under-16 level event organized by all confederations; the article should remain. Similar to UEFA and AFC tournament editions before the 2000s, the early editions of the CAFA tournament need to be preserved.

Lunar Spectrum96 (talk) 23:50, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Lunar Spectrum96: you can only !vote once, I've removed the duplicate above. Mdann52 (talk) 07:31, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletions

187.245.67.52 (talk) 19:54, 16 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

New alerts are automatically placed here, this page is kept as a historic reference.

Articles for deletion

Azerbaijan

Bangladesh

Hasan Siraj Suja

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

Non-notable politician who hasn't held elected office. He ran for the Magura-1 seat of parliament in 2001, but finished a distant third. The cited sources are passing mentions, not significant coverage. Fails WP:GNG and WP:NPOL. Worldbruce (talk) 17:39, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians and Bangladesh. Worldbruce (talk) 17:39, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. No WP:SIGCOV at this time to establish notability for an encyclopedi entry. Prof.PMarini (talk) 21:58, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Brunei

Cambodia

China

2024 visits by Viktor Orbán to Russia and China

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

I believe the article needs to go for two reasons:

(1) The article's subject (i.e., ~~three~~ ~~four~~ two foreign trips), is not independently notable. Foreign trips are an absolutely routine matter for ministers, prime ministers, presidents and other heads of state. Since Orbán undertook those trips as the prime minister of Hungary, they can of course be mentioned in Fifth Orbán Government or similar.

(2) The article's topic is overly vague. Article was created four days ago under the undoubtedly POV title, "2024 peace missions by Viktor Orbán", focusing on Orbán's three foreign trips: to Ukraine, Russia, and China. Then yesterday, his fourth trip, to the US, was added.[1]. After the article, and in particular its title, was challenged via PROD,[2] the US and Ukraine trips were removed and article renamed to its current title. This even further reduced not just notability but even WP:SIGNIFICANCE of these WP:RECENT events.

Overall, I see no reason for Wikipedia to have a separate article on Orban's two foreigns trips, which will be all barely remembered in a year from now.

So, it'll be either a hard delete or a merge and redirect to an existing article about Orbán's government. — kashmīrī ^TALK 21:13, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians, Politics, and Hungary. — kashmīrī ^TALK 21:13, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: China and Russia. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 21:28, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: It's at least 20 sources, with an extensive analysis for each point made, I'm not sure what else you could want at this point. It meets GNG. Oaktree b (talk) 23:38, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
My reasoning was clear: it's not notable for a standalone article. See, for every news event, you'll have dozens of sources. For every speech of a US president, you'll have possibly hundreds of rolling news reports. But this doesn't mean that each speech should receive a standalone Wikipedia article. Same concern here: Wikipedia is WP:NOTNEWS. — kashmīrī ^TALK 00:21, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge and redirect to a broader article covering the Fifth Orbán Government or Viktor Orbán's diplomacy. The article covers the trips in some detail. Yet, they do not appear to meet the threshold for standalone notability due to their routine nature as part of a head of state's duties. Adding this info to a broader context will keep the relevant historical record. Yet, it will avoid giving too much weight to events that may not last. This approach will also streamline related content. It will strengthen the details of Viktor Orbán's political movements. It will also make the new article more complete.--AstridMitch (talk) 00:28, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:09, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or Merge Violation of WP:NOTNEWS, see also WP:RECENT. The topic is notable only as part of 2024 Hungarian Presidency of the Council of the European Union, Fifth Orbán Government, and / or similar. Rsk6400 (talk) 06:13, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, an international diplomatic conflict that has already generated so many sources and comments is always notable. --Norden1990 (talk) 11:16, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Just a polite observation that this is not an article about a diplomatic conflict, whatever that may mean. — kashmīrī ^TALK 23:04, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please save this cynical comment for others. It's just a polite note. --Norden1990 (talk) 18:53, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge Many of the sources in the article do treat the three visits as one cohesive topic, but for now, we have no knowledge of what lasting significance these visits may have. I cannot find any real effects that have come of these meetings except reactions from various countries, but that does not constitute stand alone notability in my mind. Instead, this can adaquetely be covered in an article like the Fifth Orbán Government. Gödel2200 (talk) 12:23, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge There's not a general subarticle for his prime ministership, but shouldn't his actions during this term be at Fifth Orbán Government? Reywas92^Talk 14:51, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge Fails WP:NEVENT. It's hard to think how a single state visit by a political leader could be notable given that anything of significance in a visit would be an event (or events) *during* the visit, not the visit per se. For the visit to be notable it would need to rise to the level of something like the 1972 visit by Richard Nixon to China. Regards, --Goldsztajn (talk) 06:00, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Indeed, these two visits were subjected to an almost unprecedented spotlight, especially his visit to Moscow, and recently even the European Parliament condemned it! It can be kept now and wait. EpicAdventurer (talk) 14:05, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What sources indicate the visits received "almost unprecedented" coverage? There needs to be sourcing that indicates why the trips in and of themselves are notable separate from the long-standing policies reaffirmed by Orbán on the trips. Regards, Goldsztajn (talk) 04:52, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:37, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - the visits were a subject to significant media coverage, enough to justify a standalone article. It also has 25 reliable and verifiable sources. Overall I fail to see how it would fail WP:NOTABILITY.

Brat Forelli🦊 07:24, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Heung Kong Group

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

Unremarkable company UKWikiGuy (talk) 15:38, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. UKWikiGuy (talk) 15:38, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of China-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 17:45, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Hong Kong-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:06, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as it fails WP:NCORP. - Amigao (talk) 22:50, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: I conducted a brief search and located numerous Chinese sources with SIGCOV, including but not limited to Securities Times[3], Xinhua News Agency [4], Wen Wei Po[5], Hong Kong Commercial Daily[6], Sing Tao Daily[7], HK01[8], and China National Radio [9]. Sufficient to fulfill GNG. @Amigao: Please take a look at the newly located sources. —Prince of Erebor（The Book of Mazarbul） 07:06, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources found by Prince of Erebor. There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow Heung Kong Group (traditional Chinese: 香江集團; simplified Chinese: 香江集团) 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) 06:01, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:08, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Georgia

Turkish-Georgian War (1921)

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

Looks made up, couldn't find any WP:RS on this supposed "war". Article was filled with non-WP:RS/WP:VER issues which I have now removed, so there isn't a single actual WP:RS in this article currently. This is not surprising, considering the WP:TENDENTIOUS track record of the creator of this article, see [10] [11] and Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/BaharatlıCheetos2.0. HistoryofIran (talk) 18:03, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Military, Georgia (country), and Turkey. Shellwood (talk) 18:19, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:50, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. I spent some time reviewing this new article and came to the conclusion it was probably nonsense. Mccapra (talk) 21:58, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Unable to find sources as well. Aintabli (talk) 06:58, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Not able to track down any supporting material of any merit. This reads like a nationalist screed.Insanityclown1 (talk) 08:30, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Poorly sourced; all sources seem to be Turkish articles and pages of questionable reliability; some of them are not even verifiable, as the links seem to not work at all. Piccco (talk) 13:15, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion

Hong Kong related deletions

Heung Kong Group

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

Unremarkable company UKWikiGuy (talk) 15:38, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. UKWikiGuy (talk) 15:38, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of China-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 17:45, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Hong Kong-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:06, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as it fails WP:NCORP. - Amigao (talk) 22:50, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: I conducted a brief search and located numerous Chinese sources with SIGCOV, including but not limited to Securities Times[12], Xinhua News Agency [13], Wen Wei Po[14], Hong Kong Commercial Daily[15], Sing Tao Daily[16], HK01[17], and China National Radio [18]. Sufficient to fulfill GNG. @Amigao: Please take a look at the newly located sources. —Prince of Erebor（The Book of Mazarbul） 07:06, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources found by Prince of Erebor. There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow Heung Kong Group (traditional Chinese: 香江集團; simplified Chinese: 香江集团) 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) 06:01, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:08, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

India

Please see: Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/India

Indonesia

Duri Kosambi, Cengkareng

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

No sources, 2-sentence stub. Shows no notability. GoldRomean (talk) 16:38, 28 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I would PROD this but it has been PRODed before, in 2012. GoldRomean (talk) 16:39, 28 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. GoldRomean (talk) 16:38, 28 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Indonesia-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 16:57, 28 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep a sub-district of a sub-district, but seems to pass GNG fairly easily if not GEOLAND: [19] [20] [21] Most of the best sources appear to be in Bahasa. SportingFlyer T·C 17:45, 28 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
At this point, delete. We're working from a decided lack of information here but GMaps shows this as, apparently, a neighborhood in Jakarta. Maybe it represents some level of administration, but it's patently not a village as the word is normally used in English, and the Indonesian term {Kelurahan} doesn't automatically correspond to a notable political/geographical unit. This comes across as part of yet another database dump except that we don't even know what database was used. Yes, we can verify that it's a "thing", but until we can say something about it in its own right, I have to go with deletion. Mangoe (talk) 21:12, 28 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note that a kelurahan is an official government designation in Indonesia - who knows who’d translated it to an "administrative village", but it's a real unit with a designated office where you go to handle papers and whatnot, listed in Indonesian ID cards as its own item. Juxlos (talk) 10:01, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 17:43, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Not going to vote because I'm not familiar with how region designations work in Indonesia, but if this were to be deleted, shouldn't Kedaung Kali Angke, Cengkareng Barat and Cengkareng Timur also be deleted because they are unsourced stubs about administrative villages? C F A 💬 00:08, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: No consensus right now.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:27, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 22:50, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Not sure SportingFlyer's sources meet GNG, although they're enough for a couple of sentences. If this does end up on the deletion side, it would be better to redirect to List of administrative villages of Jakarta, which could then be slightly expanded to say eg. "Duri Kosambi, named in reference to a Schleichera plantation which used to exist in the area." CMD (talk) 00:47, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep WP:GEOLAND, and the area has clear coverage from secondary sources in Indonesian. Not a self-governing part (mostly by virtue of being in Jakarta), but it's official and it's there. Juxlos (talk) 10:01, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Indonesia Proposed deletions

Wayang Kampung Sebelah (via WP:PROD on 29 January 2024)

Japan

W. David Marx

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

Poorly referenced article that's mostly based on the subject's Spotify account and fails notability and it's also promotional Blanes tree (talk) 12:01, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Firstly, If you were to look into the references, they are not his Spotify account. They are reputable fashion broadcasts which have interviewed him. There is a big difference.

Secondly, as for Notability, the Wikipedia article reads: ""Independent of the subject" excludes works produced by the article's subject or someone affiliated with it. For example, advertising, press releases, autobiographies, and the subject's website are not considered independent." Journalism in the form of podcasts, to my understanding, do not fall under this.

Lastly, I will make an effort to add more reviews of his books to provide more scope as to the census on his work; does that suffice to make it less promotional? Theobrad (talk) 12:09, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Fashion, and Japan. Owen× ☎ 12:18, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
comment Owen× if you need help understanding notability and WP:NOT please seek it at the Treehouse.Blanes tree (talk) 12:45, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I beg your pardon? Owen× ☎ 12:57, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
We are gathered here today at this deletion discussion to discuss whether W.David Marx meets WP:NBIO. Please stay on-topic.Blanes tree (talk) 17:12, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
And you find that me adding this AfD to relevant deletion sorting categories was off-topic? Are you trying to be funny, or just having trouble figuring out who said what here? If you need help deciphering a project Talk page, please check out WP:TALK. Owen× ☎ 17:31, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nori Bunasawa

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

The article seems to have started out as draft created by 110347nbtough in November 2020, who subsequently seemed to claim they were Bunasawa himself over on Wikimedia Commons here and here. The draft was then approved by DN27ND about a month later, even though the DN27ND account was only four days old and seems to have no experience as an WP:AFC reviewer. Moreover, DN27ND is an WP:SPA whose primary focus on English Wikipedia, Wikimedia Commons and Japanese Wikipedia has been creating/editing content about Bunasawa; in other words, it seems that the account was specifically and only created for that purpose.

I wasn't sure about the subject's Wikipedia notablity per WP:BIO and asked about the article at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Martial arts#Nori Bunasawa. DN27ND was pinged into the discussion but never responded. It was then suggested on my user talk page that the article be nominated for deletion. I tried some more WP:BEFORE but found nothing resembling significant coverage. I also tried looking at the Japanese Wikipedia article ja:樗沢憲昭 and the Egyptian Arabic Wikiepdia article arz:نورى_بوناساوا but found nothing resembling significant coverage being cited in either of them. -- Marchjuly (talk) 12:19, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. Marchjuly (talk) 12:19, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Martial arts-related deletion discussions. Marchjuly (talk) 12:19, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Marchjuly (talk) 12:19, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Olympics-related deletion discussions. Marchjuly (talk) 12:19, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Potential COI issues aside, the subject evidently seems to be a notable coach at Olympic and World Championship level, and for US colleges. Other pursuits as a magazine publisher/author and film consultant (?) would probably not rise to notability themselves, but the coverage for all three careers being mostly in 50+ year old newspapers – paired with the subject being otherwise covered by not only non-English, but non-Latin-alphabet, media – would be the AGF reason for fewer substantial sources (which is satisfactory here). The article could do with some clean-up, but from a glancing view I would also say it is not short on sources for its coverage, and that the coverage generally indicates notability. Kingsif (talk) 13:39, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There is no conflict of interest. I'm not getting paid by Bunasawa. In order to get leads on sources and information, we do have a working relationship (as a reporter would on their subject) where I could reach out and obtain information. I do have drafts of other judokas in the works but am working on securing their contact information in order to get additional leads to sources and information.

There are multiple sources online in various languages (English, Japanese, Russian, etc.) which indicates notability.

Bunasawa's involvement as a leader of judo in the USA

https://www.arkansasonline.com/news/2016/may/12/ichiban-sports-complex-shares-strange-s/

https://books.google.com.au/books?id=qNUDAAAAMBAJ&q=bunasawa&pg=PA38&redir_esc=y#v=snippet&q=bunasawa&f=false

Bunasawa as a co-novelist

https://www.abebooks.com/9780964898424/Toughest-Man-Who-Lived-Nori-096489842X/plp#:~:text=A%20book%20about%20Conde%20Koma,force%20in%20the%20martial%20arts.

Bunasawa's involvement in "Dead or Alive"

https://www.judoinside.com/judoka/90786/Noriaki_Bunasawa/judo-career

Bunasawa and José Padilha

https://www.instagram.com/p/Crg9KAmBek5/?utm_source=ig_web_copy_link&igsh=MzRlODBiNWFlZA==

José Padilha as the director on the BJJ-Judo movie project

https://www.imdb.com/news/ni62362469/

https://about.netflix.com/en/news/jos%C3%A9-padilha-attached-to-write-and-direct-feature-film-dead-or-alive-with-greg-silvermans-stampede-for-netflix

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/movies/movie-news/narcos-director-jose-padilha-tackling-netflix-jiu-jitsu-movie-dead-alive-1181926/

Nori Bunasawa's involvement in the movie industry

https://www.imdb.com/name/nm12094236/

Russian sources on Bunasawa's movies

https://www.kinopoisk.ru/film/4294861/?utm_referrer=www.google.com

https://en.kinorium.com/2680888/cast/

Japanese sources on Bunasawa's accomplishment and career

Shindo, Kenichi (October 3, 2020). "青春スクロール市立浦和高校". Asahi Shimbun.

Kudo, Raisuke (September 10, 1969). "日本代表決まる". The Judo Shimbun.

https://www.judo-ch.jp/result/ajsc/men1970.shtml

Russian news media company reporting on Bunasawa's comments and opinions

https://sputniknews.jp/20190902/6634165.html

Bunasawa is notable for his involvement in the sport of judo and for his involvement in the movie industry.

There are no COI issues and I sent him a draft on the article as a courtesy, in order to have a working relationship with him for leads on additional sources and for information regarding judo sports figures of which there will be wiki articles published in the future. DN27ND (talk) 05:03, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I also advised Bunasawa and his newspaper/magazine publishing team to create a wikipedia account in order for them to release some of the photos that they own to wikimedia commons. DN27ND (talk) 05:57, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I received information that Nori Bunasawa and his newspaper/magazine publishing company owns the photos that he uploaded and that were deleted off of wikimedia commons. DN27ND (talk) 06:00, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

And that he is in the process of consulting with his lawyers based in the USA. DN27ND (talk) 06:02, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Being paid is not the only criterion for conflict of interest. See WP:EXTERNALREL. I think the fact that you have a working relationship with this person and especially that you showed the subject of the article a draft itself (presumably for feedback, considering you asked for leads on missing info) is concerning.

The tone in the article has issues with WP:WTW; "dream team", "talented group", "further his education" are unencyclopedic and lean towards WP:PUFFERY.

Whether or not there actually is a COI is debatable, but even the scent of one can ruin your credibility on Wikipedia. You really should be more cautious in future. 104.232.119.107 (talk) 09:33, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"dream team" is a common phrase that was originally used to describe the 1992 Basketball Olympic team which swept the competition, and then has been adapted by culture to apply to various sports and teams to mean a team that has won by a large margin over opponents. Given the context and the results of the 1969 World Judo Championships in Mexico city, (this only happed twice in the history of the sport) this is an appropriate phrase to use to describe the events.

The phrase is also used in other wikipedia articles

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1992_United_States_men%27s_Olympic_basketball_team

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_men%27s_national_basketball_team#Dream_Team_II

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1996_United_States_men%27s_Olympic_basketball_team

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FIFA_World_Cup_Dream_Team

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_men%27s_national_sitting_volleyball_team

and the list goes on:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dream_Team

Would it be puffery to describe the 1992 US Olympic dream team as "talented"? Or would it be appropriate to describe any other sports team as talented on wikipedia?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1992_United_States_men%27s_Olympic_basketball_team

"Opposing teams were nonetheless overwhelmed by the talent of the American roster, losing by an average of 43.8 points per game"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_men%27s_national_basketball_team#Dream_Team_II

"The team assembled by USA Basketball for the tournament in Barcelona in 1992 was one of the most illustrious collections of talent assembled in the history of international sport"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1996_United_States_men%27s_Olympic_basketball_team

"USA Basketball officials sought to construct the team dubbed Dream Team III (Dream Team II was the moniker of the lesser-known 1994 FIBA World Championship team) with a winning combination of veteran players from the 1992 Dream Team that won the gold medal in Barcelona and some of the league's best young talent."

"When the first ten players of the 1996 United States Men's national basketball team roster were announced in the summer of 1995, that young talent, and first-time Olympians, included the likes of Penny Hardaway, Grant Hill, Shaquille O'Neal, and Gary Payton"

Regarding the phrase "further his education", there are sources that Bunasawa attended these universities after receiving a bachelors degree. If that isn't further one's education, then what is?

Are you saying that journalists never show their subjects a draft to ensure the correct sequence of events?

Please advise. DN27ND (talk) 11:33, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

We're not journalists. Wikipedia is WP:NOTNEWSPAPER. We're actually allowed to describe people as talented, but not in Wikipedia's voice per WP:NPOV. You have to attribute those kinds of opinions to notable people, like "journalist x described y as talented". 104.232.119.107 (talk) 13:25, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Also "Dream Team" I can concede on, but other flowery wordings I'm relatively confident in. When you're already bordering on having a COI, you should be paranoid about writing stuff that borders on excessively flattering or flowery, but you're not doing adequate due diligence. 104.232.119.107 (talk) 13:29, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The selection of the word "talent" in that context was to summarize the accomplishments of those selected to be on the 1969 Japan World Judo team and in that particular year. How else would you summarize a collection of people that had multiple world titles, and had multiple Olympic gold medals? In retrospect, even most of the alternatives selected as backups went on to win world titles in subsequent championships. To choose the "talented" word, is this not appropriate considering the results that these players had?

Considering the results of sporting competitions, is it "flowery" to describe Lebron James, Michael Jordan, Tom Brady, Cristiano Ronaldo, Lionel Messi, Muhammad Ali, Mike Tyson, etc., as talented without having to say "journalist x described y as talented".?These sporting figures have won multiple world and Olympic titles in their respective sport.

At the end of the day, we are not journalist but the human aspect still applies. Courtesy and respect towards one's subject goes a long way. Just because a writer chooses to show courtesy and respect towards the subject he is writing about, it doesn't mean there is a COI.

If a person chooses to take more college courses after achieving a Bachelor's degree, how would you describe that if not "furthering his education" ? There is newspaper evidence that Bunasawa was taking more university level courses while simultaneously coaching the varsity judo team.

Could you give other examples of "flowery" wording from the article? DN27ND (talk) 18:21, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There is also no "personal, religious, political, academic, legal, or financial" COI. It is common in journalism to keep good relationships (ie protection of anonymity of whistleblowers) with one's subjects/sources in order to further obtain information from them. There is precedence (especially in sports) of subjects denying access of information to journalists who may be rude, disrespectful, etc. Some of the information taken from newspaper sources, sports media sources (ie ESPN) require journalists to be able to contact sports figures for information. DN27ND (talk) 11:44, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Per above, we're not journalists 104.232.119.107 (talk) 13:30, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

We are not journalists. The info on wikipedia articles are not primary sources (birth certificates, actual signed contracts, actual college diplomas, identity cards, actual competition brackets etc). These are citations to newspapers and magazines, which are written by sports journalists or reporters. These are secondary and tertiary sources.

If wikipedia contributors are able to use primary sources, it would make writing these articles easier and actually more accurate (since I could just upload the proof)

Even though we are not journalist, having courtesy and respect towards one's subject could yield leads to information which would make summarizing events easier and more accurate. DN27ND (talk) 18:38, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Since wikipedia contributors aren't allowed to upload primary sources, in essence we are using journalist's opinions (ie journalist from the NY times, OC register, People magazine, Asahi Shimbun, Wall Street Journal, etc) as sources of evidence. Do you think the vetting process to obtain a journalist / reporter pass from these companies is strenuous?

In essence, it would be way easier, "neutral", and encyclopedic if wikipedia contributers were able to use primary sources as evidence rather than secondary, or tertiary sources written by "experts" hired by these media companies. DN27ND (talk) 18:53, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Check out the results of the 1969 Judo World Championships

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1969_World_Judo_Championships

Is that not a podium sweep where one team had a decisive victory over the other teams? That is the time of only 2 times this has happened in the sports history. If the phrases "dream team" or "talented group" is not appropriate to describe the sporting results. Perhaps those words need to be censored from all other wikipedia articles about sports where these words have been used to describe competition results. DN27ND (talk) 12:42, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That 1969 World Judo team had multiple World and Olympic champions on them. In the sport of judo, the World Championships are regarded as a more difficult achievement than the Olympics due to their respective qualification processes. DN27ND (talk) 12:49, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There are also many other newspaper and magazine articles that show Bunasawa's notability on the wikipedia article.

Rezell, John (March 3, 1988). "Top Judo Instructor comes to the defense of self-defense". Orange County Register.

"Judo". Orange Network. 385: 7. April 2023.

New Judo Instructor at 'Y' Here". Indiana Evening Gazette. February 21, 1975

"Instructor on Show". Rogers Daily News. April 1975.

I could scan these newspaper articles and send them to you. Or you can go into the library archives and look them up yourself. DN27ND (talk) 12:17, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Notice: I didn't question the person's notability. I'm questioning COI and your understanding of Wikipedia's editing style. These walls of text and excessive bolding are not necessary; I can read. 104.232.119.107 (talk) 13:26, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but the original poster (Marchjuly) did question notability and it is part of this page's discussion

"I wasn't sure about the subject's Wikipedia notablity per WP:BIO and asked about the article at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Martial arts#Nori Bunasawa. DN27ND was pinged into the discussion but never responded"

People have occupations, other obligations, and commenting on wikipedia doesn't pay the bills. I'm not sure if Marchjuly was expecting an immediate response or what? DN27ND (talk) 18:26, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tsutomu Kōno

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

Unreferenced, doesn't appear notable. IgelRM (talk) 11:50, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games and Japan. IgelRM (talk) 11:50, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: No hits on this person's name, only variations of the first or last name. I don't see any confirmation of his career. Oaktree b (talk) 15:15, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Atelier Double

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

Defunct game studio originally created as a sub-stub, was unable to find any sources in an online and VG magazine search. Fails WP:NCORP. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 08:46, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games and Companies. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 08:46, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 10:30, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: A list of games, virtually no encyclopedic value as is. IgelRM (talk) 09:09, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Saving Grace (Philippine TV series)

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

Case of WP:TOOSOON. Plenty of casting announcements but no filming. Churnalism and other unreliable sources but show was just announced and is "planned to air" in 2025. CNMall41 (talk) 15:41, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Philippines. CNMall41 (talk) 15:45, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The show already commence filming we will update the production details for reference. Also the announcement for 2025 airing is based on the network's statement however, exact date has not been discussed Tyamutz (talk) 15:46, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Mother_(Japanese_TV_series)#International remakes: given existing coverage and cast, opposed to deletion. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 23:31, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 23:32, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose and redirect to Mother_(Japanese_TV_series)#International remakes. There's not enough sources for this article. However, the draft I created that is not ready for submission, I can work on editing it, and it will take as many time as possible to get new reliable sources related to the upcoming TV show that will be put as a reference. JRGuevarra (talk) 04:15, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete or maybe redirect to the main article. The six ABS-CBN sources can't be used to show notability, obviously, and neither can the Facebook link to the production company. That leaves us with four potentially okay sources- which are all just routine casting announcements, regurgitating the press release. Much too soon. GreenLipstickLesbian (talk) 08:30, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Mother_(Japanese_TV_series)#International remakes. Not enough for an article but there's a cited mention at the parent article to warrant a redirect. --Lenticel ^(talk) 03:21, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thomas Lockley

AfDs for this article:

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

Does not seem to pass GNG or even SNG. His work may be notable, he is not. Slatersteven (talk) 13:21, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It appears that the deletion proposal has been compromised by it trending on Twitter/X, as I found out about the proposed deletion of this page through my Twitter/X feed.

Example: https://x.com/GiveMeBanHammer/status/1814652541755662480 Obversa (talk) 15:13, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Actually should have CSD'd as its been deleted before. Slatersteven (talk) 13:23, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The first deletion seems to have happened 6 years ago, back when his Yasuke book was yet to reach the other side of the pond. He and his work have since become much more notable since then, for better or worse. It's better we keep this page for that reason alone. --Jnglmpera (talk) 13:34, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The deletion proposal also appears to have been compromised by it trending on Twitter/X: https://x.com/GiveMeBanHammer/status/1814652541755662480. Due to this, I also think it is better to keep the page for now due to possible interference by non-Wikipedians for or against the deletion of the page. Obversa (talk) 15:15, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If outsiders notice it, it's fine, and not really a reason in and of itself for one course of action or another. Most people here are names I recognize. SWinxy (talk) 18:09, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. There is significant coverage and reviews of African Samurai: The True Story of Yasuke including in the Washington Post, The Houston Chronicle, Library Journal, Booklist, and a large number of other places. Author meets the notability guidelines at WP:Author.--SouthernNights (talk) 14:16, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Just want to point out that I think this policy is REALLY wrong-headed or at least used in ways not intended. The wording for 1-4 are vague and utterly subjective, and you can make a case for literally every author ever since almost every book gets a review somewhere at some point, and the definition of a PhD is to create new knowledge, and academics write on subject matter. It amounts to saying the person is an academic. It's a carte blanche to make thousands of Wikipedia pages on nobodies who no one has ever heard about. There absolutely has to be SOME requirement that SOME news source SOMEWHERE covered the actual person and not just some review of the book. Like it or not, Tia Tequila is more notable than 99.9% of humanity. Harizotoh9 (talk) 21:28, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The policy is actually 100% on point. The notability of creative people like artists and writers is determined by what they create. Many creative people also avoid publicity and the limelight, which is one of the reasons why this policy was developed. As for reviews, the gold standard are reviews from notable media sources like Publishers Weekly. As a result, we don't just accept any random review out there. SouthernNights (talk) 10:35, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The policy as written seems to be meant for a very, very, small niche of elite people, whereas it's more or less used that any author and academic deserves a Wikipedia page. In fact I'm hard pressed to see how ANY author or PhD would fail this test. If someone gets a PhD or writes a book on a subject, they're defacto an expert, and if they publish any work it's gonna get reviews. So we end up with thousands upon thousands of perma-stub wikipedia pages on utter nobodies. So somehow it doesn't matter that there's literally never been a SINGLE article anywhere on this person or a complete dearth of biographical information other than a 1-2 sentence bio from the publisher.

"Many creative people also avoid publicity and the limelight" ie 100 non-notable. And that notability isn't derived from their works, so if a book gets reviews it's the BOOK that should get a page, not the author! The advocates of this policy seem to cite morality, that it's a moral good to have pages on "important" figures like academics and scientists because otherwise the site would be filled with biographies on celebrities. And there's some projects that seem to make it their lifes mission to make these kind of pages to right some historical wrong. But that is just how notability works. Tia Tequila is more notable than most of humanity, and that is fine. These academics should be seen as SOURCES not subjects for Wikipedia. Harizotoh9 (talk) 17:12, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I really don't think having a single well reviewed book is enough to pass WP:AUTHOR. By this standard almost any academic who has published a book (which tend to be frequently reviewed in academic journals) would be notable. His citation record is quite weak [22] Hemiauchenia (talk) 04:40, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed on keep due to now increased notability as mentioned here and by Silver seren. SmallMender (talk) 11:02, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, United Kingdom, and England. Shellwood (talk) 17:05, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. Thibaut (talk) 18:44, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Meets WP:Author as explained by SouthernNights. His work is notable, and his authorship of one of his works has been widely recognized - this is enough to establish notability. Qflib (talk) 13:47, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Deleting this article is much less intellectually honest and useful than documenting how (Redacted). Wikipedia is ought to be an encyclopedia, and an encyclopedia is ought to tell the truth. 122.213.236.124 (talk) 02:29, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete/refocus article on book. Google scholar profile shows citations are nowhere near enough to pass WP:PROF [23]. A single book is not enough to pass WP:AUTHOR, though the book clearly passes WP:NBOOK. I would recommend this article be reworked to focus primary on the book, similar to the result of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Abigail Shrier. Hemiauchenia (talk) 04:45, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hemiauchenia, there's a major difference between a book that received just a few reviews and one that received a ton internationally. Which is why WP:AUTHOR doesn't refer to multiple books being the sole requirement of #3, but that a well-known work singular can be enough. Anyways, here I go.

And that's just from a Google search and ProQuest (and the main WPL one, which I didn't expect to find anything at all, surprised about the Geographical result), without even trying any variant searches or anything to tease out deeper stuff. Silver seren^C 07:13, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Also, you know, the second book and stuff I pointed out just below. Silver seren^C 07:13, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Citation counts from Google Scholar or any other such index are less informative in the humanities than they are in the sciences. XOR'easter (talk) 16:55, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Lockley has a second book that came out as of two months ago, A Gentleman from Japan, and though it is still rather new, there's still a fair number of reviews out, even in that short time period. Interestingly, there's also an older article from several years back covering his research on this newly released book. As for him personally, there's plenty of articles related to his first book release that include biographical details about him, such as this article from the Mainichi Shimbun. So I fail to see how he doesn't meet the requirements of both the WP:GNG and, if it matters, WP:AUTHOR. Heck, per #3, I would say his first book more than blows out of the water the "significant or well-known work" requirement, as the amount of reviews of the book across international media are really too many to count. The list would be incredibly long. Silver seren^C 06:19, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The many reviews of both Yasuke and A Gentleman linked above by Silver seren meet my usual standard for WP:AUTHOR: multiple published reviews each of multiple books. There appears to be a lot of race-related drama over this subject on the net, in Japanese media [24] [25], and at WP:ANI, on which I have no informed opinion, but that should not compromise our standards for notability. To the contrary, if any of that can be backed by reliable sources it would only increase notability. —David Eppstein (talk) 07:38, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per David Eppstein. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 11:57, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The person in question is currently the focus of the current Assassin's Creed Shadow's controversy with relevant discussions bombarded with near-live updates from sketchy twitter sources about the author to discredit him. There have been reports exclusive to unreliable sources and twitter that he has been either fired or is under investigation by Nihon University - but he is still listed on Nihon's website and this week was part of an editorial comission for Britannica's page on Yasuke. I do not wish to derail this into a wallpost of whether Lockley is a reliable source or not (there is already an RSN for that), but rather to show that the subject of the article is currently undergoing a media frenzy where a lot of claims made are fabricated or unverified, relevant wiki discussions are being flooded with SPA's that violate BLP at this person, and to ultimately suggest that Lockley's page should follow a 'wait-and-see' approach until (at the earliest) the ANI has concluded, sanctions on the topic are imposed, or it gets raised to Arbcom as has been suggested as a possibility. Relm (talk) 12:02, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. The off-site links posted above show a lot of interest in this page and the Yasuke page, for whatever reasons. I worry that this off-site interest will just cause headaches. I say keep it as is, until all of this current popularity is gone. Then reassess if needed, which I'm not sure of; based on other comments about the authors upcoming works and general notability. Hooples (talk) 16:22, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete/Refocus per Hemiauchenia's comment. BLP1E seems to apply here and that 1E is his book. Traumnovelle (talk) 04:24, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That might make sense if he had only one published and reviewed book, but there are two. —David Eppstein (talk) 16:04, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep A pretty straightforward pass of WP:AUTHOR, all things told. As noted just above, BLP1E does not apply, because there is not 1E but rather 2. XOR'easter (talk) 16:52, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep As almost everyone has said it clearly passes wp:AUTHOR.CycoMa1 (talk) 20:18, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keiichi Misawa

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

Does not meet WP:SPORTSCRIT, Sports biographies must include at least one reference to a source providing significant coverage of the subject, excluding database sources. Previously deleted by PROD. C 679 03:45, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Japan. C 679 03:45, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. C 679 03:48, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment A "small" HTML tag was left unclosed. This has been fixed. –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 04:51, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 18:24, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Fails in WP:GNG. Svartner (talk) 19:05, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Not enough accomplishments or sources for an encyclopedic article. Geschichte (talk) 07:57, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nomination. Corresponding article on Japanese Wikipedia is slightly longer, but it does not provide any significant coverage on him. ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 13:48, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Scan for Korea-related AfDs

Korea

Laos

Malaysia

Bukit Bintang Boys' Secondary School

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

Unnotable school does not satisfy WP:GNG, some editor decided to remove PROD with no improvements what so ever. N niyaz (talk) 00:45, 20 July 2024 (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/2024 July 20. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 01:00, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Schools and Malaysia. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:06, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Just to clarify the timeline here, the article was deleted on July 13 after User:N niyaz's PROD expired. User:Auyongcheemeng made an undeletion request, saying this is one of the few schools that predates the founding of Malaysia, and the request was fulfilled on July 17, restoring the article. The PROD tag was correctly removed by an admin as part of the undeletion process. Bsoyka (t • c • g) 05:04, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Bsoyka Unfortunately being 'one of the few schools that predates the founding of Malaysia' does not explain its failure in satisfying WP:GNG. For your information, there are thousands of schools that predates Malaysia's independence. And unless this school is a high achieving school which is rare, I don't see the school showing any significance. N niyaz (talk) 11:39, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I agree. It was not that few for the number of schools during that time. Ong Kai Jin (talk) 15:03, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is one example a mission school set up by missionaries in the early days in pre-Malaysia days, not that 'rare' yes, but they are getting there. In the current and foreseeable future of political climate and increasing Islamisation of Malaysia the number of these type of schools are on the decline (462 nationwide, 227 in peninsular Malaysia in 2011 ^[1] down to 420 nationwide, 191 in peninsular Malaysia in 2024 ^[2]. [Not that many of these schools have wiki pages written]. These schools have contributed in the Malaysia's early days as a nation to produce current and former leaders/notable persons. [Bukit Bintang Boys' Secondary School] is no exception (see its list of alumni). Not many schools among the 10,000+ currently operating schools in Malaysia can attest to that. Bukit Bintang Girls' School (also was a mission school, but sadly no longer exists) a sister school involved in its founding of BBBSS has its wiki page preserved.C.M. Au Yong (talk) 03:59, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I still stand by my earlier reasoning for this page to remain, being: historical and a pre-Malaysia school that has contributed to the early nation-building.C.M. Au Yong (talk) 03:55, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The facts of significance you provided deserve a place at article such as Education in Malaysia instead of this school. The school is not inherent of notability because it has early contribution to humanities as a missionary establishment per WP:ORGSIG. The school is not inheritable of notability because it has notable alumni per WP:INHERITORG.

Issue with this article is the history and other notable events sections fails to WP:PROVEIT with reliable sources. Other part could be just WP:MILL content. Ong Kai Jin (talk) 07:58, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

SMK Bukit Bandaraya

AfDs for this article:

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

Article does not satisfy WP:GNG; no significant coverage on the school. N niyaz (talk) 12:06, 13 July 2024 (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/2024 July 13. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 12:20, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education, Schools, and Malaysia. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 14:22, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - I tried to PROD the article but since it was classified as AfD before I couldn't. Isn't the lack of any user to defend the article explaining that it lacks notability? (Addition) I also just looked at the first nomination, it seems that it is a conversation between two sockpuppets. Could an admin check it out? N niyaz (talk) 00:06, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 12:31, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

SMK TTDI Jaya

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

Article does not satisfy Wikipedia's general notability guidelines (see WP:GNG.) The school already has an article in Malay Wikipedia so an English one would be unnecessary. N niyaz (talk) 07:34, 9 July 2024 (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/2024 July 9. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 07:54, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Schools and Malaysia. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:41, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:15, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge: We should not delete the article on SMK TTDI Jaya. Yes, there is a parallel in another Wikipedia edition. Yet, each language edition has distinct readers and needs. The English version fails WP:GNG due to a lack of significant coverage in reliable, independent sources. In that case, it may be suitable to merge the English content into a broader article about schools in the region. Or, we can draftify it until we find more sources. This approach respects the need for information on other language Wikipedias. It also maintains the quality and notability standards of English Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AstridMitch (talk • contribs) 07:12, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment ms:Sekolah Menengah Kebangsaan TTDI Jaya is the other article; unfortunately it is completely unsourced. Walsh90210 (talk) 15:25, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment If you are arguing for a Merge or Redirect, you have to identify an existing article in the English Wikipedia that it can be a viable target article. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:50, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - There are 11 thousand schools in Malaysia, schools like SMK TTDI Jaya, SMK Seri Kembangan and SMJK Yoke Kuan that lacks notability shouldn't be merged. If the outcome of these schools are merged or keep, it would mean 8-9 thousand schools are also eligible to have an article of its own. — Preceding unsigned comment added by N niyaz (talk • contribs) 00:15, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

SMK Seri Kembangan

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

Article does not satisfy Wikipedia's general notability guidelines ; most of the secondary sources cited are paid materials by Multimedia University (see WP:SPIP.) N niyaz (talk) 10:06, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education, Schools, and Malaysia. Shellwood (talk) 10:20, 8 July 2024 (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/2024 July 8. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 10:21, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Since I cited most of the secondary sources in the article. I would like to ask the nominator for deletion N niyaz, is it possible to list some of the secondary sources that you claimed are paid materials by Asia Pacific University? KjjjKjjj (talk) 11:06, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Okay @KjjjKjjj I made a little mistake there, what I meant was Multimedia University. Also the school receives no significant coverage and most of the sources are just mentions. Unfortunately what's best is to make it a redirect.

https://www.wilayahku.com.my/smk-seri-permaisuri-antara-13-sekolah-angkat-mmu/

https://sinarbestari.sinarharian.com.my/ipt/sekolah-angkat-mmu-persiapkan-pelajar-ke-arah-digitalisasi N niyaz (talk) 13:36, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@N niyaz: If I'm not mistaken and correct me If I'm wrong, both of the sources you said have no mention of being paid. KjjjKjjj (talk) 14:26, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@KjjjKjjj You could already tell by the topic and style of the writing that it is a press release/paid article. Trying to find a paid article disclaimer in the sources is just stupid. N niyaz (talk) 06:00, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Multiple secondary sources, passes WP:NOTABILITY at it's barest. KjjjKjjj (talk) 14:22, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 12:38, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 13:28, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Weak delete. Checked the sources listed in English. None of them provide significant coverage, just mentions or sponsored content/press releases. Cannot check sources in Malay, hence weak. Tried to find some more coverage for this article, but failed. Vorann Gencov (talk) 15:28, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletions

Wawa Zainal (via WP:PROD on 9 September 2023)

Mongolia

Nepal

Nepal Proposed deletions

Nepal Janahit Party (via WP:PROD on 5 February 2024)

Deletion review

Pakistan

Sakhira

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

I could be wrong, but I am not able to find any evidence this place exists. The coordinates listed don't go to a place with this name. Googling reveals just Wikipedia mirrors and Mari Shah Sakhira, which is a real place but already has a separate Wikipedia article. Article creator was no doubt working in good faith but seems to have had some other Pakistan place articles deleted for this same issue. Here2rewrite (talk) 19:20, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography, Pakistan, and Punjab. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 20:43, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. The place does seem to exist; in Google Maps, there are at least 2 establishments that use the address. However there are no other significant coverage about the place to merit an encyclopedia article. Prof.PMarini (talk) 13:50, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Baloch yakjehti committee

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

Questionable notability per WP:GNG and WP:SIGCOV. Note that this appears to be a rewrite of a declined draft about the same organization by the same author: Draft:Baloch Yakjehti Committee (BYC). The same issues regarding formal tone appropriate for an encyclopedia noted as problematic in the declined draft seem to afflict this version. Geoff | ^{Who, me?} 22:59, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Politics, and Pakistan. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 23:19, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: per NORG, though the article should be rewritten. Significant coverage in this Asian News International article, this Dawn article, this Times of India article, this The Wire article, etc. C F A 💬 23:20, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Funny how they left "Sure, here’s how you can add a zone category list to your infobox:" in while copying from ChatGPT. C F A 💬 23:20, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Burns Road Kay Romeo Juliet

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

Neutral nomination. Bringing here for consensus after disputed draftification and re-creation at Burns Road Kay Romeo Juliet (2024) by a number of socks. Not alleging libra is a sock, but this needs resolution in one direction or the other as the current situation is not sustainable. Star Mississippi 01:41, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Pakistan. Star Mississippi 01:41, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I will withhold my vote for now, until I make sure if it meets the GNG or not. But it's worth noting that the article on this topic has been created multiple times by socks of our prolific WP:PE Nauman335 and if this is also a case of UPE, it would be a clear violation of WP:TOU. — Saqib (talk I contribs) 08:52, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to List_of_programs_broadcast_by_ARY_Digital#Drama: for now, as a compromise; but opposed to deletion given coverage on production; bylined review: [26]. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 10:26, 19 July 2024 (UTC) or Keep given the other bylined review in a notable media, added recently with other sources.-My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 20:27, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Yes Redirection make sense, to me as well. By the way, do I need to reiterate that youlinmagazine is not a RS and should not be used to meet the GNG. — Saqib (talk I contribs) 10:35, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  You can reiterate what you wish, but there is absolutely no consensus on Youlin not being reliable and it can be used on the target page as a relatively independent bylined (:D) source for verification about the content of the program, in the present case. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 10:49, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  So what if there's no consensus for Youlin yet? Sometimes one should Ignore all rules and use WP:COMMONSENSE because WP:CONTEXTMATTERS. And indeed it can be used on the target page as a relatively independent bylined Who said one can't use it? However, I mentioned that one cannot use it to justify GNG, especially since the author of this review piece is a guest contributor with merely two published articles under their by-line. — Saqib (talk I contribs) 13:37, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to List_of_programs_broadcast_by_ARY_Digital#Drama although it received coverage but being a creator of this article, i dont want to entertain socks as the page is badly infected by socks just after its creation. Libraa2019 (talk) 12:54, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to, List_of_programs_broadcast_by_ARY_Digital#Drama as topic on lack it's notability and cited sources clearly not yet shown the notability to standa_lone.223.123.11.155 (talk) 19:34, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of programs broadcast by Geo Entertainment

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

Another one that fails WP:NLIST. I removed everything that does not have a reference or a Wikipedia page and there are only three current original programs. Everything else falls under WP:NOTTVGUIDE. I did a WP:BEFORE in an attempt to find sourcing that talks about their programming as a whole and was unable to find anything reliable. I recommend a redirect of the name and maybe include the three current programs on the main Geo Entertainment page as an WP:ATD. CNMall41 (talk) 22:00, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, Lists, and Pakistan. Shellwood (talk) 22:18, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:14, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge with Geo Entertainment: As the latter article is too short to justify splitting its content. WP:NOTTVGUIDE. — Saqib (talk I contribs) 20:22, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Standard split from the network. Redirect and merge is possible but those who wish it should imv verify what's redirecting to the list to avoid undue deletions if double redirects are created. Having spent too much time commenting and voting on similar Afds I will not make any further comments here. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 14:11, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Can point out the coverage where it "has been discussed as a group or set by independent reliable sources?" --CNMall41 (talk) 15:57, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

... Television Dramas and the Global Village Storytelling Through Race and Gender; Women and TV Culture in Pakistan, Gender, Islam and National Identity; Media Imperialism in India and Pakistan

contain passages that address the programming and content of the network as a set. Or this list. or this kind of pages. Or this kind of articles. Keep as a standard split as I'v repeated many times. See the category for those lists. I will not reply anymore as I've said multiple times on other Afd pages what I thought, and insisted a broader consensus should be established before nominating this type of pages (see Afd concerning Hum TV programming, where I had presented sources too, btw, but this too was ignored, so why bother?). So, again, I'll leave it at that even if there are questions, pings, comments, etc. And again size-wise, especially since users regularly perform drastic cuts before nominating pages, the merge is possible. I just don't think it is necessary. If it happens, I am inviting you again to check all redirects (I had done it last time, which you concurred was a concern but guess who checked the double redirects after all?) Good luck. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 16:34, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

And we are right back to NEWSORGINIDA. I only checked the first reference and didn't waste my time going deeper. [https://www.thenews.com.pk/magazine/instep-today/589695-top-drama-serials-on-geo-entertainment-this-year bylined by "Instep Desk." --CNMall41 (talk) 16:43, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

After all, this rude reply deserves a final comment: so you ask me to provide sources although I said I had no time but don't even open all links and ignore the academic study and the books? Just like last time!!! No comment on whether NEWSORGINDIA applies on the one source you opened, but hey. I hope the closer is an admin who will comment on your attitude. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 17:00, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mushy Yank, I don't think there's anything rude here. Just be careful when using GUNREL sources to establish WP:GNG. — Saqib (talk I contribs) 17:17, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

.....Thank you so much for your advice but that is clearly not the point, I'm afraid. Follow the sequence of events, please.

But since we're here, would you happen to have a link mentioning that The News International is considered generally unreliable? I'll be careful and check again myself so as not to waste your time. Let me check ...Surprise! It's quite the opposite, it's considered generally reliable, is that not correct? ~~(on a page you yourself created!!!)~~? Again, that is not the point, but since I'm replying again, despite having said I wouldn't, I thought better to check again.....as I had indeed (not only by checking the page ~~you created~~(in your userspace) but also the noticeboard for reliable sources and the board for perennial sources, before posting it in the first place, mind you.....

But never mind. Even the NEWSORGINDIA thing is not the point; the issue is not reading the sources one has asked for! whatever they are; and I don't think you can discard them but again, that is not the point. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 17:59, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wow. Don't jump to conclusions and before making claims a page you yourself created!, check the history of the page. The page was actually created by UPE sock farms to game the system, and I moved it to my user NS. How do you even know about this page? Are you in cahoots with them? — Saqib (talk I contribs) 19:23, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry I had missed this. My bad, you didn't create it, it's in your user space and I thought it was your work. I apologise for thinking you had worked on that page! Will amend my comment. No comment on the rest of your reply but feel free to ask at the proper venue if that is a real concern. But to the point: The News International is generally reliable, is it not?:D -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 19:49, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The News itself is RS, but as @CNMall41 pointed out, this specific coverage is not reliable for the reasons they explained. Therefore, it shouldn't count towards establishing GNG. Regarding feel free to ask at the proper venue if that is a real concern. Sure, I'll take it to the proper venue when and if I deem it necessary and when I've enough evidence to support my report. — Saqib (talk I contribs) 19:56, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Good. Still waiting for your apologies. And your point was "GUNREL", as you repeat below; so, no, it's not GUNREL, that's what I thought. QED. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 20:05, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The source dramaspice.net you cited is indeed GUNREL. Oh, why on earth should I apologize to you? — Saqib (talk I contribs) 20:46, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Last-minute adjustment drifting from the precise topic of the original conversation :D but even then, I will reply. Maybe Dramaspice is not independent and should not be used and maybe, it is not a good source but that is not what WP:GUNREL stands for (not listed there, which is the precise point of GUNREL, not a description but a list established by a consensus). Or just don't user "GUNREL" but other wording then. And even pretending it was, that would leave us with 5 non-GUNREL sources that you ignore, :D, including a fully available academic article focusing on the programs as a set in a comparative study. But maybe you did not have the time to open it, and that's probably my fault.

As for why you should have apologised, I'm not the one who will explain that to you, I'm afraid. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 10:18, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I certainly do not see how that is rude. I am only responsible for what I say, not how you interpret it. What I was pointing out is you have a history of ignoring NEWSORGINDIA in AfD discussions. The News International is considered reliable yes, but not THIS PARTICULAR REFERENCE as it is clearly churnalism. Just like Forbes is considered generally reliable but sources written by non-staff writers in Forbes are not. Not sure how to make that any clearer. It is ad nauseam at this point to go further when the first source is just a repeat of the same argument. --CNMall41 (talk) 18:22, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

CNMall41, Not only has a history of disregarding NEWSORGINDIA in AfD's but also consistently relying on GUNREL sources to establish GNG. — Saqib (talk I contribs) 19:27, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is a really nasty and undue comment.....so inappropriate. Hope you will apologise.... -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 19:52, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have a history of ignoring WP:NEWSORGINDIA is an inappropriate comment here: but, please, do feel free to report me at the appropriate forum if you think I am of bad faith and that my input here and elsewhere (as you clearly assert) is disruptive. In the present case, I disagree with what I understand of your interpretation of that information page, an interpretation which is not the consensus, as far as I can see, and I simply do not understand your explanation (or lack thereof): "use of generic bylines not identifying an individual reporter " is one sign that a source might not be independent, not THE proof that you cannot use it at all. But again, that was not my point, as you can see if you make the effort of reading me with attention; and I cannot see why you are focusing on that particular section of an information page when replying to the 6 sources mentioned.

And what I find rude, in case you really did not understand, in the present discussion, is the fact that even if I was not expecting thanks for providing sources at your request in an Afd you iniated, you blatantly and explicitly ignored all of them but one you discarded contemptuously (rightly so or not (not the point, again)) and continue to do so, as you don't even mention them... I'll leave it at that, now. I don't understand the end of your reply but I guess it does not really matter, as I finally give up, this time too. Again, I do hope the closing administrator will comment on this issue. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 19:40, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There was no intent to be rude but I understand if you are concerned about the comment. I do not have an apology unfortunately but would recommend going to ANI should you feel my conduct is out of line.--CNMall41 (talk) 06:55, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Muzzammil Aslam

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

The creator of this BLP SheriffIsInTown claims that this BLP falls under NPOL, but NPOL is not applicable here. Any advisor to Chief Minister of a province, must meet the GNG, which they do not. — Saqib (talk I contribs) 07:54, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. — Saqib (talk I contribs) 07:54, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Fails WP:NPOL. Youknow? (talk) 08:22, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Youknowwhoistheman There is extensive coverage in the Urdu language media and press about this individual and his work, as seen in the search results on Google here. Given this, would you reconsider changing your vote? Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 04:17, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I respect your argument. But I don't think that being an advisor to any Chief Minister, he is passing WP:NPOL. And if we talk about WP:GNG, then he is not able to pass even that subject. First, neither WP:SIGCOV is there, from WP:RS is available. Hope you have understood. Best of luck for the future! Youknow? (talk) 05:24, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
SheriffIsInTown, If you believe the subject has extensive coverage, could you provide the WP:THREE best sources that meet WP:RS, WP:SIGCOV. Simply saying WP:GOOGLEHITS won't suffice — Saqib (talk I contribs) 18:30, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Saqib @Youknowwhoistheman With hundreds of sources available, selecting just three is challenging. Most reliable sources cover his statements or financial initiatives, now they wouldn’t report on a non-notable nobody. His notability is evident from the coverage his statements receive. His position contributes to his notability, and this isn’t his first role; he was previously an advisor to Prime Minister Imran Khan. Despite the difficulty in choosing from many sources, a We News piece in Urdu language focuses exclusively on him, and numerous reliable sources with alternative spellings of his name report on his statements and work. This Express Tribune is all about him as well. Then, there are many which cover his appointment to the cabinet, one of them being this Dawn piece. There are plenty more under alternative spelling of his name here. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 03:40, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
SheriffIsInTown, You mentioned there are hundreds of sources available, but since you've provided 03 coverages, I would like to assess them individually. Firstly, I don't even consider We News a RS. I'm unsure if it has been discussed at WP:RSN, but given its scarce use on WP, I'm not inclined to spend time debating its reliability there. WP:COMMONSENSE suggests it isn't a RS, especially for BLPs. The coverage in the Express Tribune doesn't directly and thoroughly discuss the subject, though this coverage can be used for WP:V, not to establish GNG. The same can be said for the Dawn coverage; it's WP:TRIVIALMENTION and lacks sig./in-depth coverage of the subject. While I don't dispute that there may be some press coverage, but we need solid coverage that delves into detail as required by the GNG for it to contribute to meeting WP:N. We do not establish the WP:N of BLPs based on WP:TRIVIALMENTION or WP:ROTM coverage. — Saqib (talk I contribs) 05:41, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Saqib Why wouldn't you consider We News reliable? Limited usage doesn't necessarily indicate that the source is unreliable. What do you think about this and this? These three combined should be enough to meet WP:SIGCOV and WP:GNG. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 03:49, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
SheriffIsInTown, I'm not saying We News isn't a RS because it's seldom used here. Please re-read my comment. We News isn't reliable for many reasons, one of which is that the author who wrote about Muzzammil Aslam tends to produce sensational/tabloid-style stories. Additionally, all the sources you've provided (incl. this and this) are just announcements about his appointment as an Advisor in the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Government, making this a clear case of WP:BLP1E. Please allow me to ping @S0091: to get their take on the provided coverage/sources. — Saqib (talk I contribs) 08:35, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please note that pinging specific editors to get their views in a deletion discussion may be construed as canvassing. voorts (talk/contributions) 14:47, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
1) this specific editor does not always share the same views as mine. 2) I'm not seeking their vote; I just want their feedback on the provided coverage. 3) WP:CANVASS doesn't explicitly prohibit pinging others. — Saqib (talk I contribs) 15:43, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Saqib is correct that I do not always agree with him. However, I will not offer an opinion by being pinged to an AfD in which I have not already participated because even the appearance of canvassing is enough to sew distrust which is the last thing AfD needs, especially a contentious one which appears to be the case here. S0091 (talk) 17:58, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sure, no problem. However, @OwenX mentioned here that it’s safe to occasionally ping others for their input. But anyway I understand your position. — Saqib (talk I contribs) 18:03, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Advisor's portfolio is considered equal to a minister making them functional part of the cabinet. In this case, they are a member of the provincial cabinet. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 14:46, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- SheriffIsInTown, Firstly, this notification does not state they have the same status or powers as a minister. Notifications typically mention such if an advisor is getting the same power/status as a minister. And even if they did, I don't think it falls under NPOL. — Saqib (talk I contribs) 14:59, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  Given that the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province does not have a finance minister, Aslam's role becomes particularly significant. He is currently the sole individual in the cabinet overseeing financial matters, which underscores his importance and justifies the need for an article about him. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 13:47, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I agree that NPOL does not cover advisors to ministers. There is no consensus that it does and no good reason has been provided to extend NPOL's reach that far. I won't !vote because I can't effectively search for coverage in Urdu. voorts (talk/contributions) 02:00, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Voorts Please take any references I've given in Urdu, copy the text, and use Google Translator to translate it from Urdu to English. Even if NPOL doesn't apply to him, I believe he still has enough coverage to meet GNG. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 02:25, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
We News appears to be reliable and is SIGCOV. Tribune and Dawn are trivial mentions. Not enough to meet GNG. voorts (talk/contributions) 03:15, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Voorts How about this one and this one? Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 03:45, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Voorts I've briefly explained above why I don't think We News is a RS. SheriffIsInTown Just getting some press coverage doesn't make someone notable or meet the GNG. Fwiw, Waqar Zaka has considerably more press coverage, yet his BLP was deleted because it failed to meet the rigorous GNG requirement. — Saqib (talk I contribs) 08:49, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not being used often on Wikipedia does not make a source unreliable. We News appears to have an editorial board and some reporting standards. I'm not seeing any huge red flags on their website. Also, the fact that another article was deleted is neither here nor there because we evaluate each article on its own merits. voorts (talk/contributions) 14:45, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Voorts I hope you didn't overlook my previous comment where I shared two additional English language sources (TNN and Mettis Global) that provide detailed coverage of Aslam. These might help you reconsider and change your comment to a keep vote. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 15:19, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Mettis is a trivial mention announcing his being hired. TNN is also routine coverage about him being hired. voorts (talk/contributions) 15:21, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Voorts I never claimed that the infrequent use of a source makes it unreliable. — Saqib (talk I contribs) 15:45, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I misread your point above. Apologies. But the fact that it isn't used much doesn't mean we can just hand-wave away its reliability in this discussion. voorts (talk/contributions) 15:46, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Voorts, Noted. And that's precisely why I pinged @S0091, for a third opinion on this source. Also I mentioned Waqar Zaka because he also served as an expert in the same government, albeit in a different role. And he has received significantly more press coverage than Muzzammil Aslam. This was merely an example and not meant to establish a precedent. — Saqib (talk I contribs) 15:50, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Saqib @Voorts The TNN story covers him as a person, stating he is a renowned economist, mentions his date of birth, two decades of experience, and leadership positions in several private institutions. It also covers his joining PTI, his previous role, and his educational qualifications in detail. Mettis Global discusses his appointment and mentions others who have been appointed as advisors, but the rest of the piece is about him, indicating his greater notability. The rest of the piece, like the We News and TNN stories, talks about his role as a spokesperson, his 15 years of business experience, and detailed coverage of his educational qualifications. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 16:46, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
SheriffIsInTown, I understand your point but I’m still not convinced. As I mentioned earlier, both stories discuss his appointment as an advisor. Thus, I concur with @Voorts that both are just routine coverage about him being hired. A clear case of WP:BLP1E. While I’m fine with citing them for WP:V, but imv they don’t meet the criteria for establishing GNG. In case it’s useful, the Mettis Global coverage doesn’t even have a byline. And does Tribal News Network even have an editorial team? — Saqib (talk I contribs) 17:47, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 06:25, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

~~Leaning towards Delete: the sources I found did not go beyond his nomination. — Alien333 (what I did & why I did it wrong) 18:58, 14 July 2024 (UTC)~~ Changing my vote to Keep per the latest additions by SheriffIsInTown, that go past WP:BLP1E's criteria. — Alien333 (what I did & why I did it wrong) 16:23, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as falling short of the GNG. gidonb (talk) 23:32, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: He has significant coverage in Urdu and English news. Even Bloomberg also mentioned him. Daily Jang, UrduPoint, GeoNews all cover him. So, in my opinion, its KEEP.--Ameen Akbar (talk) 21:47, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- امین اکبر, Everyone needs to avoid WP:THEREMUSTBESOURCES. They'll need to back up their claims with coverage that discusses the subject directly and in depth and enough coverage to clear WP:GNG. By the way, Bloomberg's mention is just a WP:TRIVIALMENTION. — Saqib (talk I contribs) 06:16, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  Yes, but he is not mention in Bloomberg only. He has significant coverage in Urdu and English news Ameen Akbar (talk) 12:43, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  Once more, please avoid WP:THEREMUSTBESOURCES. — Saqib (talk I contribs) 13:57, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I think there is a consensus that WP:NPOL is not the standard to meet here but instead it's GNG and there are different opinions on whether coverage mention is SIGCOV or passing mentions or routine. The burden falls on those arguing to Keep to supply RS. Don't just mention publications, please provide links to articles that can establish notability.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:19, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Liz The links were provided. In my opinion, the following three meet the SIGCOV and GNG. They are not merely passing mentions, but there is disagreement:

Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 15:17, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not passing mentions, true, but all of these only cover him in the context of his nomination, so that's a clear case of WP:BLP1E (Reliable sources cover the person only in the context of a single event.), which makes this non-notable even without discussing the (discutable) reliability of these three sources. — Alien333 (what I did & why I did it wrong) 09:19, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

+1— Saqib (talk I contribs) 09:24, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Alien333 You are overlooking the points under BLP1E. BLP1E applies only if all three conditions are met, but that is not the case here. He continues to receive significant coverage due to his role as a finance advisor in a provincial government, which exceeds the criteria of BLP1E. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 15:06, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@SheriffIsInTown And can you please give the mentioned coverage after his nominations? With links, please? So far all you've given was only in the context of his nominations. — Alien333 (what I did & why I did it wrong) 15:14, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Alien333 Here are just a few sources covering his role as the sole person managing the provincial government's finances. There are hundreds more if we include alternative spellings like Muzamil Aslam and sources in Urdu. These sources have emerged after his appointment, and such coverage will continue as long as he holds this position and the current government remains in power, typically for a five-year term. This consistent coverage exceeds the scope of BLP1E:

The following coverage is all from 2021/2022, when he was part of the federal government, making it two separate events:

Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 15:57, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

With these sources, you've got me convinced. Will change my vote accordingly. — Alien333 (what I did & why I did it wrong) 16:22, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

But I'm still not convinced he meets the GNG. The coverage provided lacks by-line and seems to be based on press releases — "he said this," "he said that." which is typical for a spokesperson activities. — Saqib (talk I contribs) 17:25, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Gidonb @Youknowwhoistheman Considering the above comment and the sources mentioned, would you be willing to reconsider your vote? Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 17:39, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletions

Files for deletion

Category discussion debates

Template discussion debates

Redirects for deletion

MfD discussion debates

Other deletion discussions

Philippines

DYDW

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

Fails WP:GNG, requires significant coverage (not mentions in passing or inclusion in lists/directories) in multiple independent secondary sources. Dan arndt (talk) 10:22, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Radio, Companies, and Philippines. Dan arndt (talk) 10:22, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:58, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mt. Nebo, Valencia

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

Does not satisfy WP:NPLACE only sources I found is WP:TRIVIALMENTION of the place Warm Regards, Miminity (talk) (contribs) 12:32, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Asia and Philippines. Warm Regards, Miminity (talk) (contribs) 12:32, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Valencia, Bukidnon as per WP:NPLACE "disputed regions". Don't see any point in merging due to the lack of information. Vorann Gencov (talk) 16:05, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fractured (miniseries)

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

Technically a second nomination, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fractured (Mini-series) was the first (and the article creator then re-created it under this title a month later, seemingly about an hour after re-creating it under the original title and getting G4-ed). My Before revealed no sources discussing this web series in any great detail past routine announcements, and while the current sources look ok at first glance, but one is independent.

[27][28][29][30] were all written by the production company, which has a financial incentive to write about their own shows.
[31] appears independent, but scrolling to the bottom shows the letters PR in bold at the bottom. That, the tone, and the lack of an author byline means I'm confident saying that this is a Press Release.
[32] is the only okayish source, but the first few lines (only part I can access) show that it's just regurgitating the press release, with no attempts at a review, commentary, or discussion past the premise. It doesn't show notability, but even if it did it would be one source. That's simply not enough.

And yes, I did consider a G4, but it's been a year and I have no idea what the original article looked like. GreenLipstickLesbian (talk) 09:20, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Philippines. GreenLipstickLesbian (talk) 09:20, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete and salt. Previous AfD demonstrated that the user kept moving article back into article namespace after being repeatedly moved into draftspace, one time even while the AfD was ongoing. I don't trust the creator to not do the same thing here again. Sources also do not demonstrate notability. Procyon117 (talk) 09:31, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to List_of_iWantTFC_original_programming#Drama: opposed to deletion given cast and production coverage. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 10:31, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Saving Grace (Philippine TV series)

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

Case of WP:TOOSOON. Plenty of casting announcements but no filming. Churnalism and other unreliable sources but show was just announced and is "planned to air" in 2025. CNMall41 (talk) 15:41, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Philippines. CNMall41 (talk) 15:45, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The show already commence filming we will update the production details for reference. Also the announcement for 2025 airing is based on the network's statement however, exact date has not been discussed Tyamutz (talk) 15:46, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Mother_(Japanese_TV_series)#International remakes: given existing coverage and cast, opposed to deletion. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 23:31, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 23:32, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose and redirect to Mother_(Japanese_TV_series)#International remakes. There's not enough sources for this article. However, the draft I created that is not ready for submission, I can work on editing it, and it will take as many time as possible to get new reliable sources related to the upcoming TV show that will be put as a reference. JRGuevarra (talk) 04:15, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete or maybe redirect to the main article. The six ABS-CBN sources can't be used to show notability, obviously, and neither can the Facebook link to the production company. That leaves us with four potentially okay sources- which are all just routine casting announcements, regurgitating the press release. Much too soon. GreenLipstickLesbian (talk) 08:30, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Mother_(Japanese_TV_series)#International remakes. Not enough for an article but there's a cited mention at the parent article to warrant a redirect. --Lenticel ^(talk) 03:21, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Milagrosa

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

Similar case as Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sirang Lupa (2nd nomination). Poorly-sourced barangay (administrative ward/village) article. The only source supports the statement about the name change from Tulo to Milagrosa, but that alone does not make this barangay notable. Article seems to have created to only serve as a directory and community portal as evidence by its list of schools and the "neighboring barangays". See also Wikipedia talk:Tambayan Philippines/Archive 47#Are barangays notable? (can we please have a consensus now?). At the most closest alternative, redirect to Calamba, Laguna#Barangays. AfD is created to provide a strong basis for redirection. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 02:43, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Philippines. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 02:43, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Calamba, Laguna#Barangays as an WP:ATD. HueMan1 (talk) 04:12, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Convert to dab

Milagrosa may refer to:

Places
- a baranggay in Calamba, Laguna
- a baranggay in Carmona, Cavite
- a baranggay in Quezon City

Buildings and structures
- Church of La Milagrosa, a Roman Catholic church in Spain
- Puente La Milagrosa, a bridge in Puerto Rico --Lenticel ^(talk) 02:47, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think barangays can even be listed in dab pages unless there is an actual article, or that it is discussed on another article; mere mentions in lists of barangays don't count.

With that being said, Milagrosa in Quezon City is historical for being the first and still only place where a People's Initiative made it to a ballot. Howard the Duck (talk) 15:52, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@JWilz12345 and HueMan1: Are you fine to convert it to a dab instead? See my suggestion above. --Lenticel ^(talk) 02:49, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:47, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support disambiguation as above: I don't see enough that would make this substantially notable enough for its own article, and there seem to be many similar places that would be better in a disambiguation page rather than picking one to be the sole redirect target. Bsoyka (t • c • g) 04:40, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

DWAD-TV

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

This was marked as {{db-hoax}} by Myrabert01. Not sure whether it is a hoax or not, but it is certainly unsourced and was until recently about a different station of the same name. Expert attention needed to decide what should be done here. See also the talk page. —Kusma (talk) 15:18, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Philippines. —Kusma (talk) 15:18, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Looking at the (blocked) page creator's talk page and other contributions certainly makes "hoax" look very likely. —Kusma (talk) 16:11, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete I see trouble ahead. The details in the infobox do not make sense to anyone who understands the history of All TV or ABS-CBN. Even if this wasn't a hoax, I'd have problems with sourcing and possible existence thereof. I am pinging one user whom I trust to have the final word: WayKurat. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 17:31, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Revert, then delete or redirect to a list of ABS-CBN transmitters. Even de-hoaxing it does not provide significant coverage to work from. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 06:09, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Revert to older version This is the last stable version of this article, before it was bombarded with hoax information by several IP editors. Deleting this article should not be done since the hoax edits were just made last June 2024. -WayKurat (talk) 01:29, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 16:24, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 16:46, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Revert to older version and if need be, apply revision deletion to hoax edits (may be covered under criteria RD2 and/or RD3) as a form of denying recognition with regards to whatever they're up to. -Ian Lopez @ 12:09, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Shortcut

WP:SGDS

Singapore

Men's Folio

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

May not meet WP:NMAGAZINE and WP:GNG. Unable to find significant coverage of the publication. Article is supported by sole subject's About us page at the time of nomination. Article was dratified and then subsequently moved back to mainspace by the article creator. – robertsky (talk) 05:16, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: News media and Singapore. – robertsky (talk) 05:16, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 07:21, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Catholic Business Network

AfDs for this article:

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

Fails WP:NCORP, nothing is reliable. First reference is also about us page of this company, which cannot be considered reliable in any way. Youknow? (talk) 07:21, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and Singapore. Youknow? (talk) 07:21, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Business and Christianity. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:57, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment This seems to be focusing on the Singapore organization only, when most of the Google News coverage I see is for the United States organization(s). Maybe it doesn't need to be deleted, but rearchitected to cover the PRIMARYTOPIC. Jclemens (talk) 21:10, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Extraordinary Writ (talk) 07:47, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

del insufficient independent coverage. - Altenmann >talk 16:50, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletions

South Korea

Red Storm (webtoon)

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

Fails significant coverage. The little commentary I found is in this CBR listicle, others are just plot summary and mention in other listicles. Neocorelight (Talk) 02:28, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Comics and animation and Webcomics. Neocorelight (Talk) 02:28, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of South Korea-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:24, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: could there be Korean sources we're missing? Not to say it might not be non-notable. Mrfoogles (talk) 08:52, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Who knows? Maybe you can find them? I can't read Korean. Neocorelight (Talk) 09:32, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Per WP:GNG, before you nominate articles for deletion, you really should search in the native language of the topic. As you're the one making the proposal, I'd argue the burden of proof is on you to follow through with it. With machine translation it's really not that hard, as you only need a high-level understanding of what each source says. Almost every day I see deletion nominations like these.

That said, I'm leaning delete. I'm a Korean speaker and didn't find much convincing sigcov. 211.43.120.242 (talk) 07:04, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Weak delete – I am not an expert at Korean sources and cannot quite tell you which of these sources are reliable right now, but this is what I'm finding:

gameca.com, three paragraphs as part of a list.
techm.kr, three paragraphs as part of a list.
news.nate.com, listed entry, basically nothing.
news.nate.com, listed entry, basically nothing.
mk.co.kr, listed entry, basically nothing.
yna.co.kr, listed entry, basically nothing.
chosun.com, author quote, basically nothing.
sisaprime.co.kr, listed entry that is given ridiculously high praise (Google Translate gives me Kakao Webtoon, which has created major action/martial arts/fantasy masterpieces that will leave a lasting mark in webtoon history, such as .. Red Storm. Segye.com might be a copy, extremely similar text)

I currently have no idea which of these are reliable, but sourcing is fairly weak either way. If someone can find better sources I haven't found yet, I'd be happy to see them. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 15:59, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Korean here-- of the ones you've listed, the only widespread sources I can see are Nate News, Yonhap News (YNA), and Chosun Ilbo, none of which have coverage focused on said Webtoon. Though the KakaoPage website indicates that there's about 4 million subscribers to the Webtoon, I'd still argue delete here since I can't find any significant coverage that would warrant an article. MetropolitanIC (💬|📝) 02:39, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

weak keep: Coverage in a newspaper from Uganda [33], doesn't appear to be a "pay to publish" article, I suppose Ugandans watch South Korean online manga-type stories? Oaktree b (talk) 00:52, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
or a redirect to Kakao [34], the publisher? Oaktree b (talk) 00:54, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Observer.ug article is a coverage of a different comic. Red Storm is only mentioned. The second source is just a single-sentence announcement. Neocorelight (Talk) 01:31, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

With this source I would probably support an article on the author, but it doesn't help much for this specific work. A redirect to a listing at Kakao Webtoon would be appropriate, yes. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 06:53, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oh I saw incorrectly, we do not have a list of Daum/Kakau webtoons. Probably for the best, as the Naver equivalent list is a mess. Deletion still feels like the correct choice. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 06:47, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:35, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:23, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Taiwan related deletions

Thailand

Thailand proposed deletions

Vietnam

List of Vietnam Airlines destinations

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

Fails WP:NOT, WP:NCORP.

Specifically this is a catalogue of the services of a company and as such is excluded under WP:NOTCATALOG no. 6 which states that "Listings to be avoided include [...] products and services". This is essentially an article entirely about run-of-the-mill announcements about services from a company, the equivalent of an article trying to list the locations of all Burger Kings or Pizza Huts. Any information that is not simply run-of-the-mill is already included at the Vietnam Airlines article.

Other headings under WP:NOT that are failed include WP:NOTTRIVIA (since this is a listing of rapidly-changing temporary company services that can change on a scale of days/weeks), WP:IINFO (since this is an indiscriminate effort to provide a complete listing of all services offered by a company regardless of significance, instead of summarising them), WP:PROMO (since this is effectively an advert for the company's services based on sources controlled ultimately by the company), WP:NOR (since this is the compiling of a list of company services to state things not stated in the original sources - for example that services to Russia are terminated now because they were suspended in 2022, or that services to Tegel were previously operated when the source only says that Tegel is now shut, and more broadly that all of these services are operating now when the sources are only true for the date they were published), WP:NOTGUIDE (since this is effectively a travel guide), WP:NOTNEWS (since this appears to be an attempt to create a list of up-to-the-minute services offered by the company), and WP:CRYSTAL (since nearly every announcement used discusses plans to start doing something in the future, and since dates in the future are included - for example announcements for October 2024).

WP:NCORP is also failed. Most of the listings here are unsourced, and realistically cannot be sourced from anywhere but the company website, press-releases, company spokespeople, or other sources controlled by the company, meaning that it automatically fails WP:ORGIND, because this information cannot be obtained from a source independent of the company.

That this is true can be seen from the sources provided in the article. Going through these one-by-one we get:

The Vietnam Airlines website
A Saigon Times article about a government announcement about restructuring of the airline that does not mention any destinations
A profile in industry-press based entirely on information from the airline
The Vietnam Airlines website
An industry-press article based on a company press-release
A local news story based on a company press-release
A link to the Berlin airport website saying that Tegel airport has been shut down - the conclusion that Vietnam airlines ever flew here is not supported and basically OR
An announcement about future plans in industry press, with comments from the CEO of Munich airport who are obviously also not independent of the airline as they are a business-partner of theirs
An announcement in government-controlled press about flights to India, since Vietnam Airlines is state-owned and managed by a board appointed by the government this is not independent
Announcements from the company about future plans relayed via Aeroroutes, which is a blog/industry press, and also not significant coverage since it so short
Another Aeroroutes link regarding future plans
A short Reuters piece about flights to Moscow being suspended in 2022 based on an announcement in Vietnamese state-owned press - not significant coverage of the topic of the destinations since it is so short and is anyway not reliably and independently sourced. Additionally this does not support the statement that flights are terminated now in 2024 so this is OR.
Another brief Aeroroutes link about future plans
A Condé Nast travel-magazine article based on a statement from the Vietnam Airlines CEO. Whilst other sources are also quoted in the article, all of these sources ultimately track back to Vietnam Airlines - the Airline Geeks article (industry press/blog) is sourced to a company press release, the Vietnam+ article is sourced to statements by the CEO, the Twitter source is from Vietnam Airlines Twitter account. There is no independent reporting here.

As a list split from a larger article, this still needs to have stand-alone notability per WP:AVOIDSPLIT, but it clearly does not since it fails the relevant notability guide for company products and services (WP:NCORP). FOARP (talk) 10:22, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Business, Travel and tourism, Transportation, and Vietnam. FOARP (talk) 10:22, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:52, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Aviation-related deletion discussions. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 00:13, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per the numerous WP:NOT violations listed by nom. Rosbif73 (talk) 06:45, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep You're making things up:
- WP:NOTCATALOG says we are not "A resource for conducting business" with significant context and other examples indicating that products and services shouldn't be listed as a way to sell them. This is not a catalogue with the time of day these flights depart and what planes they use. To suggest we cannot provide a list like this with an overly broad reading of that would call for the deletion of all of Category:Lists of products.
- WP:NOTTRIVIA says nothing about "temporary services". Where an airline flies is not "rapidly-changing". Sure it can change, but it's not that frequent or difficult to understand. We do not have any prohibition on content that can change or be updated, and that's the beauty of a wiki that we can do so. Articles are not expected to be static. As I say below, there may be possibilities for reform rather than complete deletion.
- This is not indiscriminate. It's clearly defined as places the airline flies or has flown. It's not overly broad or difficult to define.
- It's not an advertisement and it's patently ridiculous to call this promotional. It's perfectly appropriate to provide a straightforward list of a company's services. Is it a promotional advertisement to list a movie studio's films, a gaming company's products, a brand's flavors, or a train's routes?
- This is not original research. Indeed, it's poorly sourced, but it's not full of things for which sources are impossible to find or that reach a synthesized conclusion. Sure, the citations for Russia is bad, but this and this are substantive articles about about the flights between Vietnam and Russia, including Vietnam Airlines' route.
- This is not a travel guide any more than List of Amtrak routes is a travel guide. It does not tell people about how to contact the company or to make a booking, describe the costs and the airline's booking structures, review the seats and flying experience, or give what time of day the flights leave. It's misguided and undercuts your argument to call a simple list of destinations a travel guide.
- This is not news. It's not original reporting, a routine report about an event only relevant the day it happened or written in news style, or a who's who. This is not something that changes day-in, day-out. It is not "up-to-the-minute" any more than List of Amtrak routes. Hey, the Chicago – St. Paul route just opened on May 21, is this bad to be "up-to-the-minute"? Why would it be a bad thing to be current? This is not something changing so much that editors are unable to keep up and have let it fester with outdated content either. Being cited to news is standard and does not make the list itself news.
- This is not a crystal ball. It is not forbidden to describe something planned for the future. Saying the route is scheduled to start in October is neither speculation, a rumor, a presumption, nor a prediction. It is easily verifiable, and it's embarassing and weakens your argument to say the article must be deleted because it states a simple, sourced statement about something planned.
- NCORP is not relevant. Vietnam Airlines is a notable corporation and this is about them and what they do, and this is an appropriate subarticle of the main topic. Being unsourced or poorly sourced is a cleanup issue, not necessarily grounds for deletion.
- You make the poor comparison to listing Burger King locations. No, we don't need to list the 19,000 stores they have, but we do have Burger King products and List of Burger King products. Selling the products is the service they provide, and taking passengers to these airports is the service Vietnam Airlines provides. Maybe a simple table like this isn't the best way to present the information, but it's not inherently disallowed to have this content.

I agree there are issues with these lists, namely that they list destinations rather than routes. It could be more informative to say that they operate routes from Hanoi and Ho Chi Minh City to Sydney, and between Ho Chi Minh City and Bangkok, rather than simply that Sydney and Bangkok are destinations. There are other ways this could be restructured or merged, which is why the proposed RFC could be helpful, but I do not believe this violates NOT whatsoever. Reywas92^Talk 13:45, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lists of Amtrak routes is a bad comparison - those are railway routes requiring permanent infrastructure to be built and maintained. An airline can schedule and re-scheduled from day to day and as such are ephemeral trivia.

NCORP is entirely relevant since it applies to goods and services of companies just as much as it does to companies (it literally says this in the first line: "This page is to help determine whether an organization (commercial or otherwise), or any of its products and services, is a valid subject for a separate Wikipedia article dedicated solely to that organization, product, or service"). The goods and services of a company do not inherit the notability of their parent company per WP:INHERIT, and a split-list has to has stand-alone notability per WP:AVOIDSPLIT. Every single source comes ultimately from the company itself which is exactly what WP:ORGIND is there to prevent.

Obviously I disagree with you other points but I doubt I'm going to change your mind on them, suffice it to say that a list of all the services of a company obviously falls in to what WP:CATALOG no.6 tells us not to include ("Listings to be avoided include [...] products and services") and reading WP:NOT any other way requires reading it to meaning something opposite to what it clearly states.

The examples you cite have a very straight-forward rejoinder: "What about X?".

I don't get how you can repeatedly admit that this is badly-sourced, not produce any examples of independent, 3rd-party coverage to fix that (Aviationweek is industry press and their article is based on a press-release, the VN Express article is also based on a press-release, and anyway only mentions the airline briefly), and then still conclude that the article should be kept. FOARP (talk) 14:55, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Just because air routes can be rescheduled doesn't mean they are actually from day to day. Many international routes require regulatory approval, and it's not insignificant for a destination to be served as routes are important for business and tourist connectivity beyond just being a product on the shelves. Calling this "ephemeral" is nonsense. Amtrak does not even maintain most of its own track infrastructure, and it can also change what routes it provides and stations it stops at; how about List of Metrobus routes in Washington, D.C.? Again, editors are perfectly capable of tracking this because it does not in fact change on a daily basis. Flight frequency and timing details are more ephemeral, but we're not saying which routes are daily or biweekly.

If you don't think the split list has stand-alone notability, then I would recommend a merge and possible restructure. But I don't think this content needs to be separately notable when Vietnam Airlines is already notable and this is complimentary. It's disingenuous to dismiss sources that say "X airline flies to Y airport" – a very straighforward fact – as not being independent because the airline has also stated this, particularly if you're connecting anything from government-owned news to the airline.

Again, this is obviously not "A resource for conducting business" and it's ridiculous to suggest something this general without details about the flights themselves or the cabin experience is a forbidden catalogue; the airline is not using this to sell tickets. You are taking this out of context and reading this the opposite way, because it's no more forbidden to say "Vietnam Airlines flies passengers to Tokyo and San Francisco" than it is to say "Apple sells iPhones and MacBooks".

Some other sources include [35][36][37][38][39][40][41][42][43][44][45][46][47][48][49]. I didn't search in Vietnamese. Reywas92^Talk 17:17, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see any significant coverage of the topic of a List of Vietnam Airlines destinations from a source that would meet WP:ORGIND in those articles. The SMH article mentions the destinations of Vietnam Airlines exactly once, in a quote from a travel agent (“I’ve been able to find great prices with Vietnam Airlines into Paris or Frankfurt going via Ho Chi Minh City, so clients have opted to take a three or four night stopovers in Vietnam after holidaying in Europe.”). The Vietnam Investment Review piece is industry press based on a company statement. OAG is industry press and the piece doesn't even mention ANY destinations of Vietnam Airlines. I'm not bothering to go through the others here because it looks like a WP:REFBOMB - can you please say which of these you think is actually significant coverage of the specific topic under discussion here? FOARP (talk) 07:49, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment – Linking previous nominations involving this page:

–24 October 2015– Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pages in Category:Lists of airline destinations;

–26 March 2024– Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of British Airways destinations. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 22:34, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I completely agree with everything Reywas92 has posted here. I understand "per X" AfD !votes are frowned upon, but that was comprehensive enough that I don't really have anything else additional to add. SportingFlyer T·C 11:48, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletions

Comment on the talk pages of the articles, not here. If you agree with the proposed deletion, you don't have to do anything. If you think the article merits keeping, then remove the {{prod}} template and make an effort to improve the article so that it clearly meets the notability and verifiability criteria.

^ "Mission schools in Malaysia". The Edge Malaysia. Retrieved 2024-07-23.
^ "Directory of Christian Mission Schools in Malaysian (2024)" (PDF). Federation of Christian Schools Malaysia. Retrieved 2024-07-23.)

[1] "Mission schools in Malaysia". The Edge Malaysia. Retrieved 2024-07-23.

[2] "Directory of Christian Mission Schools in Malaysian (2024)" (PDF). Federation of Christian Schools Malaysia. Retrieved 2024-07-23.)

[1]

[2]