Wikipedia

User:Fixing26/RfDs/Delete/Archive 1

< User:Fixing26 | RfDs | Delete

Sorted by month of closure.

July 2021

change
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The outcome of this request for deletion was to   Delete. Notability clearly not there, also possible COI...--Eptalon (talk) 20:48, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

C4009 (youtuber)

change
C4009 (youtuber) (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

つがる has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Does not seem to be notable, using Google to lookup, I found no results. Sending to RFD for discussion.... Tsugaru Let's Talk! :) 🍁 22:16, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

Discussion

change
  •   Delete Clearly not notable. Fixing26 (talk) 14:50, 28 July 2021 (UTC)
  •   Quick Delete under section A4. –Morneo06 (talk) 15:51, 28 July 2021 (UTC)
  •   Quick Delete A4 and A6. Unclear how this youtuber has high tier play buttons. Darubrub (Let me know) 16:03, 28 July 2021 (UTC)
  •   Quick Delete This is obvs created by someone who knows the YouTuber or even the YouTuber themselves as they are certainly not worthy of an article, it took me ages to find their YouTube channel! Thegameshowlad (talk) 18:25, 28 July 2021 (UTC)
  •   Quick Delete -- IAmSwiz (talk) 19:04, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 22:16, 3 August 2021 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The outcome of this request for deletion was to   Delete. Clear case, also salted for 3 months, the last RfD of this was at most a month ago...--Eptalon (talk) 20:45, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

Kamran Ahmed

change
Kamran Ahmed (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

C1K98V has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: notablity C1K98V (💬 ✒️ 📂) 05:00, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

Discussion

change
  • I'm guessing this is referring to Kamran Ahmed, in which case, definite   Delete. I was the nominator for the previous RfD of this article, and I still believe my rationale for nominating applies. Fixing26 (talk) 11:22, 27 July 2021 (UTC)
I agree with the rationale provided by Fixing26 in previous rfd. --C1K98V (💬 ✒️ 📂) 17:24, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 05:00, 3 August 2021 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The outcome of this request for deletion was to   Delete. Quickly deleted as copyright violation, which we cannot permit to keep --IWI (talk) 14:12, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Freedom Haven

change
Freedom Haven (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Eptalon has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Originally listed as a copyvio (of http://freedomhaven.org/Tony/FreedomHaven/index2.html?5800771.8848421555) this looks like the attempt to create a micro-nation (like there are others). As the QD is ocntested, I think we might as well discuss it: So: where's the encyclopedic notability, or what other criteria can we find to include it (Provided ithe article is cleared from the copyvio allegations)? Eptalon (talk) 23:47, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

Discussion

change
  •   Delete - Lack of coverage in reliable sources. Fixing26 (talk) 10:44, 25 July 2021 (UTC)
  •   Keep - Seasteading is an established existing valid WikiPedia topic, and the Seasteading Institute lists Freedom Haven as an active seasteading project, and even wrote an article about Freedom Haven's humanitarian efforts to help refugees fleeing oppressive regimes and who are looking for a better life for themselves and their posterity. Despite the Freedom Haven project having been around for 3 years, those researching seasteading on WikiPedia would currently not find humanitarian projects, like Freedom Haven, listed there. The goal is to fill that gap and provide the important information currently missing from WikiPedia. Please help me know anything I can do to achieve this goal. {{helpme}} TonyOlsen (talk) 12:42, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
    Hi there, the issue at hand is it's lack of coverage by reliable sources that show notability. Some people believe the article hasn't had enough coverage by reliable sources to show that it is notable enough to remain on Wikipedia.
    Whilst not a rule, I'd suggest trying to find enough sources covering the subject of the article to show that it can stay. Fixing26 (talk) 21:11, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
    @Fixing26: Thank you. Does the list below help? Is there anything else that can be done to help keep the page?

"...enough sources covering the subject of the article to show that it can stay." Here are some links from different websites on various details in the large Freedom Haven project:

  1. Open-Design CAD model of "New Liberty", the main floating structure in Freedom Haven.
  2. The legal framework of the laws in Freedom Haven (here's the free audio book of this legal framework)
  3. Colonize The Ocean Podcast discussion on Freedom Haven
  4. Seasteading Insititute's "Seasteading Today" podcast discussion on Freedom Haven
  5. An article that Freedom Fest published on Freedom Haven (and how it can help Hong Kong)
  6. Catherine Tan, a researcher at Cambridge University's Geography Department, will be publishing a research project on Freedom Haven - expected sometime late in 2021.
  7. T.J. Raphael, from Sony Music Podcast, is planning a new podcast series that will feature the Freedom Haven project.
  8. While Social Media is not seen as a trust-worthy reference, we have hundreds of members of the project that are actively working on this Open source (Open-Design) project.
  9. Additional information can also be found on Freedom Haven's website

We can show that Freedom Haven is verifiable and authentic, but because it is not yet popular it has not showed up on any major news outlets. Is WikiPedia a mirror for what is/was trending on the major news networks, or does it also reflect the under-reported verified underdogs? TonyOlsen (talk) 11:40, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Social media and similar aren't usually acceptable as reliable sources. Self-published sources aren't accepted as reliable, and it is preferred that there are secondary sources. The argument for deletion below by Etoza explains a bit more about reliable sources.
It is up to the closing admin of this RfD will decide if it is notable enough to stay. Fixing26 (talk) 11:51, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Of course, the challenge isn’t just Wikipedia. Because we’re based on secondary source material, Wikipedia is often simply a mirror held up to the world’s biases. We know that throughout history, the majority of humanity has not been deemed worthy of encyclopedic notability, including women, people of color and almost anyone from outside of Europe and North America. They also have been systematically underrepresented in media, academic literature, awards and professional recognition. We all have a lot of work to do.

Seeing that the author of this article is also the creator of Freedom Haven (Tony Olsen), I would argue that this is a advertisment, and it should not be here. Etoza (?) 11:26, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

@Etoza:

"author of this article is also the creator of Freedom Haven"

Sounds like a newbie error on my part - sorry. How can I fix this? If the page is instead created by someone else, would that address this issue? Is there a way to transfer that over, or does the page need to first be deleted and then recreated to update the initial creator?

Of course, the challenge isn’t just Wikipedia. Because we’re based on secondary source material, Wikipedia is often simply a mirror held up to the world’s biases. We know that throughout history, the majority of humanity has not been deemed worthy of encyclopedic notability, including women, people of color and almost anyone from outside of Europe and North America. They also have been systematically underrepresented in media, academic literature, awards and professional recognition. We all have a lot of work to do.

This is not talking about individuals, but instead groups of individuals, of which Refugees are one of. Plus the topic of underrepresention is applicable on the subject of "encyclopedic notability" which is the main subject of why we are gathered here. "Freedom Haven", and its plans for helping refugees, is "underrepresented in media". What can be done to address and correct this?

Inclusion Request

change

In a 2017 Poynter article, Katherine Maher (the chief executive officer and executive director of the Wikimedia Foundation) was quoted as saying "Wikipedia is often simply a mirror held up to the world’s biases. We know that throughout history, the majority of humanity has not been deemed worthy of encyclopedic notability ... [we] all have a lot of work to do. The good news is that Wikipedians love nothing more than solving problems." {{helpme}} TonyOlsen (talk) 12:42, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 23:47, 31 July 2021 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The outcome of this request for deletion was to   Delete. Closed early as obvious hoax --IWI (talk) 14:14, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Pak Sindhiana Island

change
Pak Sindhiana Island (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

50.30.176.27 has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: I cannot find evidence that Pakistan claims a part of Antarctica as a dependent area. If I do a Google search for "Pak Sindhiana Island", I see few results. Pakistan has research stations, so the section "Pakistan in Antarctica" might be correct. If the article is not deleted for made up claims, then maybe it should be renamed. The subject can be about Pakistani research in Antarctica, and the comments about "Pak Sindhiana Island" can be removed. Note: the account that wrote the article was blocked from English Wikipedia, Urdu Wikipedia, and Wikimedia Commons. 50.30.176.27 (talk) 05:12, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

Discussion

change

This request is due to close on 05:12, 28 July 2021 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The outcome of this request for deletion was to   Delete.  --Auntof6 (talk) 11:40, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

Vladimir Novosselov

change
Vladimir Novosselov (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Gordonrox24 has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Don't believe this subject, nor his charity, have yet reached the level of notability we would expect on Wikipedia. Gordonrox24 | Talk 20:14, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

Discussion

change
  •   Delete Besides minor mentions in news articles, I can't find anything about Novosselov alone. It seems he's only known alongside his company. Fixing26 (talk) 08:41, 17 July 2021 (UTC)
  • Delete Doesn't appear to be notable. Rubbish computer (Talk: Contribs) 16:11, 18 July 2021 (UTC)


This request is due to close on 20:14, 23 July 2021 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The outcome of this request for deletion was to   Delete.  --Ferien (talk) 07:56, 15 July 2021 (UTC)

Rodney Damon Collins

change
Rodney Damon Collins (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

50.30.176.22 has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: I do not think he is yet a significant actor, in the present day. 50.30.176.22 (talk) 07:55, 8 July 2021 (UTC)

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

Discussion

change


This request is due to close on 07:55, 15 July 2021 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The outcome of this request for deletion was to   Delete. Not notable Peterdownunder (talk) 22:50, 15 July 2021 (UTC)

Deepanshu Titoriya

change
Deepanshu Titoriya (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Ferien has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Does not appear to be notable. Can't find any reliable sources. --Ferien (talk) 18:49, 7 July 2021 (UTC)

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

Discussion

change
  •   Comment: The initial contributor has added several web sources, so I think the reliability of these references shall also be discussed. MathXplore (talk) 08:47, 8 July 2021 (UTC)
  •   Delete Looking at the sources added to the article, they don't seem to be reliable (openpr) or have the ability to establish notability (imdb, indianfilmhistory). Fixing26 (talk) 14:01, 8 July 2021 (UTC)
  • I will try to fix this page. I request you not to delete this page.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Imwikimaster (talk • contribs) 03:54, 8 July 2021 (UTC)
    • Added from talk page. --Ferien (talk) 14:29, 8 July 2021 (UTC)
  •   Delete Needs more reliable references and filmography to show notability. MathXplore (talk) 08:35, 14 July 2021 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 18:49, 14 July 2021 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The outcome of this request for deletion was to   Delete.  --Auntof6 (talk) 09:08, 14 July 2021 (UTC)

Ezequiel Matthysse

change
Ezequiel Matthysse (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Local Variable has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Copy from English Wikipedia (quick deletion criteria A3 may apply, but I am not sure). Not written in Simple English. Editor appears to be involved in cross-wiki abuse, see sockpuppet investigation at enwiki Local Variable (talk) 12:46, 4 July 2021 (UTC)

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

Discussion

change
  •   Delete. The En wiki investigation shows this character has been spammed-up by sockpuppets. It's basically an attempt by a not notable web person to gain publicity. Macdonald-ross (talk) 07:36, 6 July 2021 (UTC)
  •   Delete - Clearly not notable, article seemingly made for promotional purposes. Fixing26 (talk) 17:25, 7 July 2021 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 12:46, 11 July 2021 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The outcome of this request for deletion was to   Delete. --Eptalon (talk) 20:34, 3 July 2021 (UTC)

Smit Shetye

change
Smit Shetye (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

50.30.176.23 has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Not notable person. 50.30.176.23 (talk) 01:30, 26 June 2021 (UTC)

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

Discussion

change
Some sources.[1][2][3] Knowledgedonor (talk) 19:56, 1 July 2021 (UTC)
Hi, they don't seem to be reliable. They're in a listed format and all from one website, I don't believe it helps establish the notability needed. Fixing26 (talk) 21:14, 2 July 2021 (UTC)

References

  1. ↑ Warren, Tesla (2020). "101 Fastest Growing Indian Startups Founded in 2020". startupill.com. Retrieved 1 July 2021.
  2. ↑ startupill.com, Hassan (2020). "101 Best Media and Entertainment Startups of 2020". startupill.com. Retrieved 1 July 2021.
  3. ↑ startupill.com, Hassan (2020). "101 Best Social Media Startups Of 2020". startupill.com. Retrieved 1 July 2021.
  •   Delete - Clearly not notable. No reliable sources cover him and seems to just be self-promotion. Fixing26 (talk) 09:00, 2 July 2021 (UTC)
  •   Delete Quite a few profiles used as references. No reliable sources to be find on the page, or on search engines. --Ferien (talk) 14:13, 3 July 2021 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 01:30, 3 July 2021 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The outcome of this request for deletion was to   Delete. --Eptalon (talk) 20:32, 3 July 2021 (UTC)

2013-2014 National Computing Intelligence Olympiad Winners

change
2013-2014 National Computing Intelligence Olympiad Winners (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

50.30.176.45 has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Is this notable? 50.30.176.45 (talk) 15:57, 25 June 2021 (UTC)

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

Discussion

change
  •   Delete - Doesn't seem to be notable. I can't find any coverage of the organization as a whole, yet alone their 2013-2014 competition. Fixing26 (talk) 19:16, 25 June 2021 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 15:57, 2 July 2021 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.

June

change
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The outcome of this request for deletion was to   Delete. --Eptalon (talk) 08:17, 26 June 2021 (UTC)

Lauren-Brooke Eisen

change
Lauren-Brooke Eisen (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Djsasso has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Can't find any references that talk in depth about her. Can only find mentions that she holds certain positions. Does not appear to meet WP:GNG. Djsasso (talk) 16:17, 18 June 2021 (UTC)

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

Discussion

change

  Delete. Delete on grounds of notability not established. Macdonald-ross (talk) 16:06, 22 June 2021 (UTC)

  •   Delete - can't find coverage of them online, doesn't seem to fit notability guidelines as stated in nom Fixing26 (talk) 11:23, 24 June 2021 (UTC)


This request is due to close on 16:17, 25 June 2021 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The outcome of this request for deletion was to   Delete.  -Djsasso (talk) 14:03, 29 June 2021 (UTC)

Alaa Al-Saddiq

change
Alaa Al-Saddiq (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Eptalon has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Article about an activist, who was based in the UK, and who died in a car crash a few days ago. This woman was the head of a group fighting for greater freedoms in the United Arab Emirates, where her father seems to have been held. BBC and Aljazeera reports are linked in the article. Taking this to RfD to be looked at by a larger audience; originally it was flagged as A4/cross-wiki article creation. What is a bit surprising though: there's just a Turkish language interwiki; I would have expected an Arabic language article as well? Eptalon (talk) 20:04, 20 June 2021 (UTC)

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

Discussion

change
  • Keep First, the Arabic page was deleted without looking at the sources and without discussion! Eptalon, also she is a prominent Emirati activist. There are many news about her on Al Jazeera, Reuters, BBC and Arab sources as well. For the person who asked for deletion, I think he does not know anything. Aliaboomar (talk)
Very unlikely for a sysop to delete an article without looking at the sources. ~Styyx Talk? ^-^ 06:43, 21 June 2021 (UTC)

also i linked the page to English Page — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alaa Al Zahrani (talk • contribs)

Atleast don't make the sockpuppeting obvious..... ~Styyx Talk? ^-^ 06:40, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
  •   Delete Subject seems to be only notable/well reported on for one event, breaking WP:BLP1E. Only other news sources that mention her seem to be around the arrest of another Saudi activist, and she seems to be a minor topic in the article. Fixing26 (talk) 08:38, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
  • Note: The above account is a sock for a long term abuser. Now locked globally, and he already engaged in a lot of (Cross-wiki promotion) since 2017 till now (For example, Wikipedia:Requests for deletion/Requests/2021/Ali Mahmoud Oglu). Best --Alaa :)..! 21:36, 26 June 2021 (UTC)
@علاء: looking at their enwiki contribs, seems like the new account is User:Aydinaydin2020. ~StyyxTalk? ^-^ 10:58, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
  • Keep First,The page was retrieved in Arabic by the administrator and was accepted, as well as the English page. The person who requested the deletion is a dog of the UAE regime! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Turk MIT (talk • contribs)

I think the discussion should be closed and the page should be keep

@Eptalon: The user above initially signed the message as you and threatened me on my talk page. I think you should be notified about this small issue. ~StyyxTalk? ^-^ 16:10, 28 June 2021 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 20:04, 27 June 2021 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The outcome of this request for deletion was to   Delete. --Eptalon (talk) 22:51, 22 June 2021 (UTC)

Yogendra karki

change
Yogendra karki (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Gotanda has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: No notable. Top web results IMDB followed by LinkedIn. No results in top news search. Gotanda (talk) 04:56, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

Discussion

change
  • Not notable if the sources are not better than IMDB and LinkedIn. (There are no notable sources - therefore (any possible) notability can not be shown (or demonstrated). ) 89.8.138.130 (talk) 16:06, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
    The article says: "A discussion page has not been created yet! Because of this, the page won't get deleted as no one knows it is up for deletion. Click here to create a discussion page!". 89.8.180.237 (talk) 21:13, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
    It should be showing now. Fixing26 (talk) 21:25, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
  •   Delete Not notable - can't find any sources, seems to just be an attempt at promotion. Fixing26 (talk) 21:25, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 04:56, 23 June 2021 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The outcome of this request for deletion was to   Delete. --Eptalon (talk) 19:18, 21 June 2021 (UTC)

Arvis Vladislav

change
Arvis Vladislav (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

50.30.176.46 has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Is there evidence? 50.30.176.46 (talk) 00:54, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

Discussion

change
  •   Delete - Can't seem to find any media coverage or news coverage. The only thing I can find in connection to him are social media users, failing notability. Fixing26 (talk) 08:00, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 00:54, 22 June 2021 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The outcome of this request for deletion was to   Delete. While Enos was a Biblical character, much of the text in this article is a hoax --Auntof6 (talk) 01:26, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

Enos

change
Enos (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

2601:444:201:9E70:E1FB:40F8:97F3:924F has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Trying to be a notable article 2601:444:201:9E70:E1FB:40F8:97F3:924F (talk) 15:20, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

Discussion

change
  • Delete 50.30.176.23 (talk) 15:24, 9 June 2021 (UTC)
  • Delete. A minor figure in the Hebrew bible with little or no independent evidence. Not even listed in En List of minor Old Testament figures, A–K. Honesty compels me to admit it is accepted as a C-class article on En wiki (but move discussions in progress). It may end up in their List of minor biblical figures. In general, we should try and avoid the wiki being used for or against any religion. Major figures in a religion are OK, but marginal figures are not OK, IMO. Macdonald-ross (talk) 07:49, 10 June 2021 (UTC)
    A move discussion was in progress nearly 11 years ago regarding the capitalisation of the article name, enwiki ended up moving it from Enos (Biblical figure) to Enos (biblical figure). Macdonald-ross, how is this page against or for any religion? Simply having a page on a religious figure is not using the wiki for or against a religion in my opinion. --Ferien (talk) 19:18, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
  • Delete. The arguments above, work for me. 89.8.101.210 (talk) 21:18, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
  • Keep it's present on major wikipedias. the text may be improved, but the article should be kept in my opinion. --Sorrow3 (talk) 10:00, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
  • Delete - too small a figure. Seems to lack notability and is quite a minor figure when spoken about. Fixing26 (talk) 18:47, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
  • Keep Even the most minor figure in the bible is written about extensively. -Djsasso (talk) 19:22, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
  • I don't think that the delete !votes really persuade me. There's no reason to delete regarding notability. Per that and my comments above, I'm !voting   Keep. --Ferien (talk) 19:28, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
  • Remember, we don't have just stand-alone articles. We could have a page "Minor biblical figures" for such as this. Why should we be flooded with figures which are in common sense not essential to the Hebrew and Christian story? If there is such a thing as a minor biblical figure, he's it! Macdonald-ross (talk) 19:49, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
  • Comment (I already voted above): Almost everything in this article is made up. Enos was not born in the year 1002. It would have been in BC, not AD. According to the Bible, he lived 905 years, not 69 years. He was not named after "Enosburg". There were no kings at that point in the Bible story. There was no "Babylon prison". Babylon did not exist yet at the time of Enos, according to the Bible. He did not have a son named Enos II. There is no story about Enos being handcuffed. 50.30.176.46 (talk) 00:09, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 15:20, 16 June 2021 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The outcome of this request for deletion was to   Delete. --Eptalon (talk) 22:35, 18 June 2021 (UTC)

Uday Biswas

change
Uday Biswas (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Djsasso has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Not seeing anything indicating meeting WP:GNG. Djsasso (talk) 18:29, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

Discussion

change
  • {  Delete Can't seem to find anything that shows he's notable. Photograph used on article seems to be taken by someone closely affiliated or friends with the person in article. Fixing26 (talk) 19:01, 11 June 2021 (UTC)
  • {  Delete Seems to be someone who's doing SEO manipulation. — Jeluang Terluang (talk) 12:39, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 18:29, 18 June 2021 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The outcome of this request for deletion was to   Delete.  -Djsasso (talk) 19:40, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

Tapan Sheth

change
Tapan Sheth (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Eptalon has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Article about a nature photographer from India, who won a number of prizes (but without reference). Has references to newspapers (such as the Irish Sun, or Mail Online (presumably: Daily Mail). I do want to say however, that the article reads pretty generic. Question to the community: keep or delete? Eptalon (talk) 19:57, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

Discussion

change
  •   Quick Delete @User:Eptalon You just deleted this on the 17th. It is a hoax. Even if you look at the nat geo link they provided it goes to a photo contest entry form. I cannot remember who created it, but I remember putting the tag on it. PDLTalk to me!OMG, What have I done? 19:58, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
    A4 doesn't apply because they claim to have won an award, which is a claim to notability. It also doesn't appear to be an obvious hoax, pretty sure he's a real person and maybe he's done some of the things claimed. An obvious hoax would be telling us he landed on Mars in 1981, not that he has awards for photography. Also QD G4 doesn't apply to an article that was previously Quickly deleted, it only applies to pages deleted after an RfD. So, I don't see how this can be QD again.--Gordonrox24 | Talk 01:52, 2 June 2021 (UTC)
  • This feels like a bit of an interesting one. The guy definitely exists. His work has been used by news organizations in their stories. I tried and cannot verify that he won the Nature’s Best Photography Asia 2016 award, their website only goes back to 2017. The subject doesn't appear to be widely cited by their peers, doesn't appear to have innovated a method, no verified significant work or critical acclaim. I think we must delete.--Gordonrox24 | Talk 01:52, 2 June 2021 (UTC)
  •   Delete From my understanding, Daily Mail and The Sun aren't reliable sources for establishing notability. If there's not any sources beyond those 2, I'd suggest deletion. Fixing26 (talk) 00:01, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 19:57, 6 June 2021 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The outcome of this request for deletion was to   Delete.  --Auntof6 (talk) 01:27, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

Radhesh Aria

change
Radhesh Aria (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Praxidicae has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: completely non-notable vanity spam with dubious unsupported claims to fame. hasn't ever had a major role and has no coverage Praxidicae (talk) 17:22, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

Discussion

change
  •   Delete None of the sources are reliable at all. --Ferien (talk) 17:23, 9 June 2021 (UTC)
  •   Keep I found lots of sources on bing with a quick search and the sources on the wikipedia page are still conected to websites and are a little notable. Should we keep it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:444:201:9e70:ac9f:9625:7a50:b191 (talk • contribs) 14:52, 10 June 2021 (UTC)
  •   Delete The sources are mostly from wikis (Wikipedia and a FANDOM wiki). The sources are not reliable and I can't seem to find any mainstream reliable coverage regarding him, other than a Radio Times article that briefly mentions his role in a movie. Definite delete. Fixing26 (talk) 23:51, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 17:22, 16 June 2021 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The outcome of this request for deletion was to   Delete. Not notable Peterdownunder (talk) 03:52, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

Verdis

change
Verdis (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Darubrub has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Article was originally QDed for A6, but it is now restored for this process. This article still lacks secondary soruces and significant coverage to pass WP:GNG as I noticed in the en-wiki afd. This could also possibly be created by a locked user sockpuppet. Darubrub (Let me know) 12:56, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

Discussion

change
This account was only created to vote here. Etoza (?) 09:49, 9 June 2021 (UTC)
  • Abstain - shows to be attracting more and more attention. i suggest keeping it for a few months and reviewing it again later if it continues to gain more secondary sources. so far I think it has enough to stay. 67.183.124.12 (talk) 09:46, 9 June 2021 (UTC) Sock strike. Darubrub (Let me know) 22:32, 11 June 2021 (UTC)
This account was only created to vote here. Etoza (?) 09:49, 9 June 2021 (UTC)
you cant be serious. wikipedia is banned in my part of the country I live in so I have to use a VPN sorry. besides, you cant call an IP an account. 67.183.124.12 (talk) 10:01, 9 June 2021 (UTC)
I wonder... Etoza (?) 13:46, 9 June 2021 (UTC)
IP Addresses change all the time, it's how the internet works. That person isn't an account, so you can't accuse them of that. 49.183.35.159 (talk) 14:26, 9 June 2021 (UTC)
Not all the time, very slowly unless you use some methods. Does not address w:WP:NOTTHERE. Darubrub (Let me know) 14:40, 9 June 2021 (UTC)
It's so nice of these random IPs to suddenly care about this one RFD thread when most discussions have only a couple (trustable) editors voting, and they haven't made a single edit yet!   Etoza (?) 14:58, 9 June 2021 (UTC)
  •   Delete The most of the article's sources aren't reliable. I saw news aggregators and self-published sources. The decent sources are local, which means that the micronation isn't popular outside those countries (and I'm assuming that they even popular there). The other micronations on this Wiki have a history and culture behind them and international coverage, which Verdis doesn't have. I also suspect COI. Etoza (?) 14:14, 9 June 2021 (UTC)
RTL is a large source, especially in Croatia. TELEX is a very known Hungarian news site. 49.183.35.159 (talk) 14:26, 9 June 2021 (UTC)
I smell a case of w:WP:BLUDGEONING. Darubrub (Let me know)
In the Telex source, Verdis takes up less than a paragraph, only a couple of sentences. Also, the existence of the microstate doesn't mean it should have an article. It just exists, only covered by local news, without history or culture behind it. This seems more like an attempt to popularise it. The suspicious accounts (probably sockpuppets, but I can't make careless statements) don't make this any better. Etoza (?) 14:58, 9 June 2021 (UTC)
  •   Delete - Lacks reliable sources and continuous mainstream coverage. The few articles that do mention either do not dive in deep about it or only mention it once on their entire news website. :Wikipedia's not the news and shouldn't mention minor fads unless they have some sort of lasting effect, which this doesn't. Fixing26 (talk) 19:05, 10 June 2021 (UTC)
  •   Delete Clearly a hoax, set up by a 14 years Australian boy. No reliable sources. Article was set up by an account that proved to be a sockpuppet after a sockpuppet investigation on the English Wikipedia. The Banner (talk) 11:05, 10 June 2021 (UTC)
  •   Keep like he said Like Plenty of secondary sources. Not hoax. And 3 dlete 6 keep keep wins! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:6C40:1700:610:FD20:965C:54AF:BC4D (talk • contribs) 16:39, 10 June 2021 (UTC)
    Wikipedia is not a vote. Fixing26 (talk) 23:45, 10 June 2021 (UTC)
  •   Delete. Non-encyclopedic nonsense. Macdonald-ross (talk) 20:57, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 12:56, 15 June 2021 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The outcome of this request for deletion was to   Delete.  --Auntof6 (talk) 01:19, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

Alhaji Abdulrahman Musa Bashar

change
Alhaji Abdulrahman Musa Bashar (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Eptalon has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Contested Quick-deletion ('A4-Notability'). A quick google search for the name didn't turn up anything useful. Therefore, I propose deletion.. Eptalon (talk) 15:56, 6 June 2021 (UTC)

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

Discussion

change
  •   Delete - searched on several search engines, couldn't find anything verifying claims made in the article or of significant media coverage Fixing26 (talk) 16:27, 6 June 2021 (UTC)
  •   Delete. Lacks verification of notability. Macdonald-ross (talk) 14:27, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 15:56, 13 June 2021 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The outcome of this request for deletion was to   Delete. QD as 'nonsense'--Eptalon (talk) 22:05, 6 June 2021 (UTC)

Cat racism

change
Cat racism (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Darkfrog24 has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: The things in the article are real, but I don't think they add up to an article by themselves. Ordinarily, I'd turn this into a redirect, but even if we had a "cats and superstition" section in Cat, adding sources that say black cats are adopted last and used to be thought of as witch familiars, I don't think "cat racism" would be a good redirect for it. Darkfrog24 (talk) 14:38, 6 June 2021 (UTC)

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

Discussion

change
  •   Delete - no sources, short and seems to be using related real-life situations and calling it racism, which doesn't seem to be accurate Fixing26 (talk) 15:08, 6 June 2021 (UTC)
  • Very far-fetched, essay-like. There was a short story named Black cat, by Edgar Allan Poe (of the 1840s, I think). There's also different folklore, as to black cats. But since what we have here completely lacks sources, and is taken out of context, I think we should delete it. --Eptalon (talk) 16:01, 6 June 2021 (UTC)
  •   Delete. Complete rubbish. Macdonald-ross (talk) 18:21, 6 June 2021 (UTC)
  •   Delete. Wouldn't this qualify under 'hoax'? PDLTalk to me!OMG, What have I done? 19:05, 6 June 2021 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 14:38, 13 June 2021 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.

May

change
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The outcome of this request for deletion was to   Keep. No consensus to delete, and sources have apparently been added. --Auntof6 (talk) 05:05, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

Josh fight

change
Josh fight (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

ImprovedWikiImprovment has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Per en:WP:NOTINDISCRIMINATE and en:WP:NOTNEWS. Nothing significant or notable about this meme for an encyclopedia, despite the sporadic covereage. --IWI (talk) 01:19, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

Discussion

change
  • Keep I created the article. If Storm Area 51 gets an article, so should this one. While the bar for Internet meme coverage is very high on Wikipedia, this one has strong significance for Internet culture; Internet culture has become increasingly impactful. Swiz | Ping!
    Please see en:WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. --IWI (talk) 12:29, 26 April 2021 (UTC)
  • Delete I believe the storm area 51 event to be on a completely different level than this. Storm area 51 had prolonged coverage leading up to and after the event. In the case of the Josh fight, I don't think we're going to see any more coverage after today. If we start to see this become an annual event with increasing relevance, with copycat events and the like, then we can consider keeping it. But for now, it's a one day story in a rapid news cycle.--Gordonrox24 | Talk 02:02, 26 April 2021 (UTC)
  •   Delete and   Comment: Doesn't meet notability guidelines. This page is under contestation in other Wikipedias too, with the English Wikipedia considering it for deletion, the Ukrainian Wikipedia doing the same, the French Wikipedia raising several concerns about the article, with the 3 all having the same issue at the centre, notability. The other Wikipedias with the article seemingly have just translated it from the English version. Fixing26 (talk) 20:03, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
  • Keep Shouldn't we wait a fair while to see if notability is established, then have this discussion? JoshFight (talk) 10:23, 2 May 2021 (UTC)
The short answer to this is no. It is a requirement that page topics must be notable, and support this with reliable referenced sources. This is our procedure. We decide on what we see. Nothing stops editors reapplying if it turns out that new evidence of notability occurs. Macdonald-ross (talk) 06:11, 4 May 2021 (UTC)
  •   Keep I have just now cleaned up the text and added two sources from reliable news agencies, USA Today and the Lincoln Journal Star, and many more appear to exist. I think this event is notable enough to include on the Simple English Wikipedia. Darkfrog24 (talk) 01:53, 9 May 2021 (UTC) And I just added CNN and the Wall Street Journal, so four reliable sources. Darkfrog24 (talk) 02:03, 9 May 2021 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 01:19, 3 May 2021 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The outcome of this request for deletion was to   Delete.  --Ferien (talk) 08:27, 15 May 2021 (UTC)

Jake Martin

change
Jake Martin (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

24.130.152.125 has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: An filming assistant director would not be notable. Potentially if he has 45 thousand YouTube subscribers he could be notable but I don't think so. 24.130.152.125 (talk) 18:11, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

Discussion

change
  Delete - Seems to be a bunch of nonsense, the claimed affiliated YouTube channel only appears to have ~50k subscribers ('The Martin Boys') yet the infoblox claims 50 million. Either way, the person lacks notability. Fixing26 (talk) 19:52, 27 April 2021 (UTC)


This request is due to close on 18:11, 2 May 2021 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.

April

change
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The outcome of this request for deletion was to   Delete. Not notable Peterdownunder (talk) 12:21, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

Neomee Shah

change
Neomee Shah (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

SpaceGuy32 has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Doesn't appear to meet notability guidelines and seems somewhat like self-promotion. Milo, Talk, Contribs 16:44, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

Discussion

change

This request is due to close on 16:44, 22 April 2021 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The outcome of this request for deletion was to   Delete. Not notable, no independent sources Peterdownunder (talk) 00:53, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

Artur Kasperek

change
Artur Kasperek (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Gordonrox24 has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Don't believe this subject passes WP:NMUSIC. Gordonrox24 | Talk 00:47, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.


Discussion

change

This request is due to close on 00:47, 14 April 2021 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The outcome of this request for deletion was to   Delete. Notability not shown Peterdownunder (talk) 00:40, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

Jaisalmer News

change
Jaisalmer News (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

ImprovedWikiImprovment has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Doesn't seem to be notable --IWI (talk) 12:22, 3 April 2021 (UTC)

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

  •   Delete Doesn't appear to be notable, can't find anything in other media publications and isn't on other front pages of search engines that've I've tried Fixing26 (talk) 23:58, 3 April 2021 (UTC)

Discussion

change

This request is due to close on 12:22, 10 April 2021 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The outcome of this request for deletion was to   Delete. Not notable Peterdownunder (talk) 00:34, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

Arpana Sharon

change
Arpana Sharon (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

ImprovedWikiImprovment has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Appears to fail en:WP:MUSICBIO and WP:GNG. --IWI (talk) 12:20, 3 April 2021 (UTC)

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

  •   Delete Not notable. I can't find her in any news, the only items on the web I can find mentioning her are her own YouTube channel, with 7,000 subscribers. Fixing26 (talk) 23:55, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
  •   Delete - per nom, a non-notable individual.-KH-1 (talk) 01:47, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Discussion

change

Underpants90 (talk) 16:45, 3 April 2021 (UTC) Arpana Sharon was featured in the multiple online sources.

This request is due to close on 12:20, 10 April 2021 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.
Retrieved from "https://simple.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Fixing26/RfDs/Delete/Archive_1&oldid=7714964"