Wikipedia:Requests for deletion

If you think a page should be deleted, read the deletion policy to make sure.
Then follow these instructions on how to request a page for deletion. To find more information on what discussed deletions and quick deletions are:
PLEASE READ THIS

Before nominating: checks and alternatives Edit

Prior to nominating article(s) for deletion, please be sure to:

A. Read and understand these policies and guidelines
  1. The Wikipedia deletion policy, which explains valid grounds for deletion.
  2. The main four guidelines and policies that inform deletion discussions: notability (WP:N), verifiability (WP:V), reliable sources (WP:RS), and what Wikipedia is not (WP:NOT)
  3. Subject-specific notability guidelines, which can be found at Category:Wikipedia notability guidelines
B. Carry out these checks
  1. Confirm that the article does not meet the criteria for quick deletion.
  2. If there are verifiability, notability or other sourcing concerns, take reasonable steps to search for reliable sources. (See step D.)
  3. Review the article's history to check for potential vandalism or poor editing.
  4. Read the article's talk page for previous nominations and/or that your objections haven't already been dealt with.
  5. Check "What links here" in the article's sidebar, to see how the page is used and referenced within Wikipedia.
  6. Check if there are interlanguage links, also in the sidebar, which may lead to more developed and better sourced articles. Likewise, search for native-language sources if the subject has a name in a non-Latin alphabet (such as Japanese or Greek), which is often in the lede.
C. Consider whether the article could be improved rather than deleted
  1. If the article can be fixed through normal editing, then it is not a candidate for RfD.
  2. If the article was recently created, please consider allowing the contributors more time to develop the article.
  3. If an article has issues try first raising your concerns on the article's talk page, with the main contributors, and/or adding a cleanup tag, such as {{notability}}, {{hoax}}, {{original research}}, or {{advert}}; this ensures readers are aware of the problem and may act to fix it.
  4. If the topic is not important enough to merit an article on its own, consider merging or redirecting to an existing article. This should be done particularly if the topic name is a likely search term.
D. Search for additional sources, if the main concern is notability
  1. The minimum search expected is a normal Google search, a Google Books search, a Google News search, and a Google News archive search; Google Scholar is suggested for academic subjects.
  2. If you find a lack of sources, you've completed basic due diligence before nominating. However, if a quick search does find sources, this does not always mean an RfD on a sourcing basis is unwarranted. If you spend more time examining the sources, and determine that they are insufficient, e.g., because they only contain passing mention of the topic, then an RfD nomination may still be appropriate.
  3. If you find that adequate sources do appear to exist, the fact that they are not yet present in the article is not a proper basis for a nomination. Instead, you should consider citing the sources, or at minimum apply an appropriate template to the page that flags the sourcing concern. Common templates include {{unreferenced}}, {{refimprove}}, {{third-party}}, {{primary sources}} and {{one source}}.

Discussed deletionEdit

Put the deletion tag on the article.
  1. Click "Change source" at the top of the page to be deleted.
  2. In the edit box, add this tag: {{rfd|REASON}}. Put it at the top of the page, above the rest of the text. Then, replace the text "REASON" with a short reason why the page should be deleted. Do not be too specific here. You can add more details on the discussion page (see below).
    • It is a good idea to write a change summary to let others know what you are doing. You can say "nominating for deletion", "requesting deletion", or something like that.
  3. Click "Save changes" at the bottom to save the page with the deletion tag at the top.
    • You can also check the "Watch this page" check box to add the page to your watchlist. This lets you know if the page for deletion has been changed. If the deletion tag is removed any time before the discussion is closed, it should be put back.
Create a discussion page.
  1. If the deletion tag has been added to the page, a box should appear at the top of the article with a link saying "Click here to create a discussion page!" Click that link.
  2. You should be taken to a page starting with "Creating Wikipedia:Requests for deletion/Requests/..." along with the current year and the name of the article to be deleted. In the edit box, the following tag should have already been added: {{RfD/Preload/Template}} . Replace the text PLACE REASON HERE with a more detailed reason why the page should be deleted.
    • It is helpful to include links to the various policy pages about Wikipedia (that begin with Wikipedia:). Here are some examples of this: "This article is [[Wikipedia:COMPLEX|not easy to understand]]" or "Not a [[Wikipedia:notable|notable]] topic''. This will make others more aware of why the page is not acceptable under Wikipedia's policies.
  3. Click "Save changes" to save the new discussion page when you are done.
    • A change summary you can write for this page is "creating discussion page", "starting deletion discussion", or something like that.
    • As with the page for deletion, you can check the "Watch the page" box. This will let you know if someone else has replied to your discussion.
List it here
  1. Copy the title of the discussion page to the clipboard. You can do this by dragging the mouse over the text from "Wikipedia" to the end of the page title to highlight it, then right-clicking and selecting "Copy".
  2. Go to the list of deletion requests, and click "change source" beside the words "Current deletion request discussions".
  3. At the top of the list of discussions, paste the title from the clipboard (right-click and select "Paste"). Add a pair of curly brackets before and after the title to make a template that will copy the content of the discussion page onto the main deletion page, like this:
    {{Wikipedia:Requests for deletion/Requests/2020/(name of page to be deleted)}}
  4. Finally, click "Save changes" to add the discussion to the list. If the page saves successfully, you should see your deletion discussion at the top of the list. And that's it!

Quick deletionEdit

If you think a page has nonsense content, add {{non}} to the top of the page.

If you think a page does not say why the subject is important, add {{notable}} to the top of the page.

If you think a page should be deleted per other quick deletion rules, add {{QD|reason}} to the top of the page.

Notifying the userEdit

Generally, you should try to be civil and tell the user that created the page to join the discussion talking about the page. This can be done by adding {{subst:RFDNote|page to be deleted}} ~~~~ to the bottom of their talkpage.

DiscussionsEdit

  • The discussion is not a vote. Please make suggestions on what action to take, and support your suggestion with reasons.
  • Please look at the article before you make a suggestion. Do not make an opinion using only the information given by the nominator. Looking at the history of the article may help to understand the situation.
  • Please read other comments and suggestions. They may have helpful information.
  • Start your comments or suggestions on a new line. Start with * and sign after your comment by adding ~~~~ to the end. If you are responding to another editor, put your comment directly below theirs and make sure your comment is indented (using more than one *).
  • New users can make suggestions, but their ideas may not be considered, especially if the suggestion seems to be made in bad faith. The opinion of users who had an account before the start of the request may be given more weight or importance.
  • Suggestions by users using "sock puppets" (more than one account belonging to the same person) and IP addresses will not be counted.
  • Please make only one suggestion. If you change your mind, change your first idea instead of adding a new one. The best way to do this is to put <s> before your old idea and </s> after it. For example, if you wanted to delete an article but now think it should be kept, you could put: "Delete Quick keep".
  • If you would like an article to be kept, you can improve the article and try to fix the problems given in the request for deletion. If the reasons given in the nomination are fixed by changing, the nomination can be withdrawn by the nominator, and the deletion discussion will be closed by an administrator.
  • Try to avoid confusing suggestions, such as delete and merge.

Remember: You do not have to make a suggestion for every nomination. You should think about not making a suggestion if:

  1. A nomination involves a topic that you do not know much about.
  2. Everyone has made the same suggestion and you agree with that suggestion.
  • All times are in UTC.

Current deletion request discussionsEdit

Surendra Raj GosaiEdit

Surendra Raj Gosai (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Eptalon has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Local Nepali politician, member of a local assembly. Might be notable, so no A4. Let's discuss.... Eptalon (talk) 10:58, 8 February 2023 (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.

DiscussionEdit

This request is due to close on 10:58, 15 February 2023 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.


Shailendra Man BajracharyaEdit

Shailendra Man Bajracharya (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Eptalon has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Local Nepali poltician, serving as a member of a provincial assembly. Originally nominated as 'A4-Notability', I think there may be at least a claim to notability. We get two references, I haven't looked at how independent or reliable they are. As there is at least a claim, I would prefer to go through discussed deletion. So... comments? Eptalon (talk) 10:43, 8 February 2023 (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.

DiscussionEdit

This request is due to close on 10:43, 15 February 2023 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.


LZ77 and LZ78Edit

LZ77 and LZ78 (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Rathfelder has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Impossibly complex Rathfelder (talk) 23:22, 7 February 2023 (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.

DiscussionEdit

  •   Keep - the article does need simplifying, but deletion is not cleanup. --IWI (talk) 10:10, 8 February 2023 (UTC)
  • They are two versions of a lossless data compression algorithm. They are very important, LZW (Lempel-Ziv-Welch is a variation/slight-improvement of LZ78. I think it is used extensively for the GIF-Format used by Compuserve. Because there was a patent on LZW, this caused the development o formats such as PNG, which are patent-free. But as above, deltion is not for cleanup, so keep--Eptalon (talk) 10:38, 8 February 2023 (UTC)
  •   Comment: I removed the example, and rewrote the article based on EnWp It might still need simplifying, but should be easier to understand now.--Eptalon (talk) 10:38, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 23:22, 14 February 2023 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.


Dina RaeEdit

Dina Rae (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

97.85.139.136 has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: As mentioned in:

This person appears to fail WP:MUSICBIO because her only claim to fame seems to be having sung on a few Eminem (or Eminem-related) songs.

97.85.139.136 (talk) 03:37, 7 February 2023 (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.

DiscussionEdit

This request is due to close on 13:52, 15 February 2023 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.


Template:Buffalo Bills roster navboxEdit

Template:Buffalo Bills roster navbox (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Auntof6 has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Nominating two NFL team roster navboxes, each with only one blue link in the body. Navboxes can't do their job of making it possible to navigate between related pages if there's only one page linked.

The navboxes being nominated are:

Template:Buffalo Bills roster navbox (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete)
Template:Chicago Bears roster navbox (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete)

We have three other NFL team roster navboxes, but each of them has more than one blue link in the body.

These navboxes appear to be used, but that's only because they're linked (not transcluded) in Template:NFL Roster navbox template list, which is used as a footer in NFL team roster navboxes. That means these navboxes are linked (again, not transcluded) in all the roster navboxes (of which there are three besides these two) and in individual player articles that uses any of the roster navboxes. Auntof6 (talk) 01:39, 7 February 2023 (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.

DiscussionEdit

I have made some player pages and plan on making more. Hopefully this fixes the issues Carhles (talk) 15:42, 7 February 2023 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 01:39, 14 February 2023 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.


Jeremiah Omoto FufeyinEdit

Jeremiah Omoto Fufeyin (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Pure Evil has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Notable? Pure Evil (talk) 17:02, 6 February 2023 (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.

DiscussionEdit

This request is due to close on 17:02, 13 February 2023 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.


CultivateEdit

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

ImprovedWikiImprovment has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Per en:WP:NOTDICTIONARY. Enwiki redirects it to cultivation, a page we do not have. --IWI (talk) 11:31, 6 February 2023 (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.

DiscussionEdit

  • There is an entry in Wiktionary, and this pretty much reads like a dictionary definition. delete-Eptalon (talk) 11:45, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 11:31, 13 February 2023 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.


Caveginia Primary SchoolEdit

Caveginia Primary School (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request
Dore Numa College (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete)

Fehufanga has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Not notable, but these are schools, A4 doesn't apply. Enwiki keeps these as a redirect to Warri FWIW. — *Fehufangą✉ Talk page 02:46, 6 February 2023 (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.

DiscussionEdit

  •   Delete both as non notable. To be clear, I don't agree with the concept on enwiki that most/all US public high schools are notable, while most foreign high schools are not. I think that for the purposes of simplewiki, most high schools are not notable, even if they are in the US. Lights and freedom (talk) 03:03, 6 February 2023 (UTC)
  • Non notable. Both have the same notable alumnus (currently a redlink). Even if the person was notable, notability isn't transitive, which means it doesn't affect the notability of the schools. So... delete both of them.--Eptalon (talk) 11:56, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 02:46, 13 February 2023 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.


Template:Canada family-oriented television channelsEdit

Template:Canada family-oriented television channels (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Auntof6 has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Unused navigational box that says it's for Canadian television channels, but none of the links are specific to Canada. Auntof6 (talk) 02:46, 6 February 2023 (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.

DiscussionEdit

This request is due to close on 02:46, 13 February 2023 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.


Susil Nelson-KongoiEdit

Susil Nelson-Kongoi (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Pure Evil has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Notable? Pure Evil (talk) 02:21, 6 February 2023 (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.

DiscussionEdit

This request is due to close on 02:21, 13 February 2023 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.


DevamalaEdit

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

DRC-B5 has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: I received a message from @Lights and freedom: about the notability of this topic. After seeing, I see very rare sources about her, no historic achievements or contributions. So, she is not at all notable to me. Comments? Dibyojyotilet's chat 07:34, 5 February 2023 (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.

DiscussionEdit

  • No sir please don't delete it. Please do not delete that article pleaseGomateshwari (talk) 09:34, 5 February 2023 (UTC)
    Why? Is there some reason you feel she is notable enough for an entire stand alone article. Is there something she has done to warrant such treatment? Is there a large amount of coverage on her from sources that are seen as reliable? (News articles, books, scientific papers, ect from sources with a good history of fact checking) Pure Evil (talk) 16:47, 5 February 2023 (UTC)
  •   Delete (or   Quick Delete) No claim of notability, the only hint of notability is by relation which is not a good reason to keep. At best, redirect to the article on her husband and have her mentioned there if he is notable. Pure Evil (talk) 16:47, 5 February 2023 (UTC)
    I strongly disagree. Being a queen is a claim of notability. Lights and freedom (talk) 16:49, 5 February 2023 (UTC)
    @Pure Evil: Indeed, again, there is a credible claim of significance in the article, so A4 cannot be used. It is a lower bar than actual notability; this article has to be deleted through RfD. --IWI (talk) 17:08, 5 February 2023 (UTC)
    1. I don't see an unsourced claim to be a queen as a valid claim of notability. "A credible claim of significance is a statement in the article that attributes noteworthiness, or information written about the subject in reliable sources."
    IMO, being a queen consort is not noteworthy on its own and there is nothing about reliable sources.. Are you saying that just stating a person is a queen is makes that a noteworthy claim? It the queen of the ball sufficient as a claim? What level of queen is the cut off? Pure Evil (talk) 17:18, 5 February 2023 (UTC)
    Was she a queen? or a queen consort. The historic difference in naming is terribly small but the level of notability between the two is huge. Being the wife of the King and ruling the land with him are very different. Most (not all) historic queens were consorts with little affect on history. Those that ruled as the head of state (Liz 1/2, Victoria, Beatrix, Cleopatra) are certainly notable. More recent Consorts (Carmilla, Maxima, Rania. Philip) tend to be notable as there is a large amount of media coverage on them to pull from but past consorts will often fail to get more than passing coverage. There are many modern first spouses (which a consort essentially is) who are not notable on there own and are redirected to the article for the spouse due to limited local coverage on them. In this case, there is no hint that she was a co-ruler and not a consort. Stating that she ruled with her husband would be a claim of notability.Pure Evil (talk) 17:08, 5 February 2023 (UTC)
    Being a queen consort is definitely a claim of notability. I am aware that she is not a queen regnant, and I didn't say that. Lights and freedom (talk) 17:10, 5 February 2023 (UTC)
    I know, but the sources I see was about the reference that "she was the queen consort". I didn't see much information about her.
@Lights and freedom: Just the correction, I see at the article of her husband about her reference as "queen". I checked many sources. I guess the sources of the dynasty include about her as queen of the reign. Nothing more than that.
Dibyojyotilet's chat 17:08, 5 February 2023 (UTC)
  • @DRC-B5 Where is this reference? Can you provide a link? Lights and freedom (talk) 17:12, 5 February 2023 (UTC)
     (change conflict) Both would be a credible claim of significance, this doesn't mean she is "notable", just that the article cannot be quickly deleted. --IWI (talk) 17:14, 5 February 2023 (UTC)
    I think the issue here is that I have a higher requirement on what claims are acceptable. There need to be a cut off as to what claims are valid and which are just idle fluff. It is bad enough that as written, almost no article can be deleted as A4 as the creator will almost always see the subject as notable and that is enough to invalidate the reason. To accept just any claim, no matter how petty, just makes the reasoning less than useless (negative useful?) Pure Evil (talk) 17:33, 5 February 2023 (UTC)
    @Pure Evil: It's ok to disagree with the quick deletion policy, but that is how it is applied. A4 is not, in fact, even about whether the subject is notable or not; that is for RfD. Any claim of significance that is not obviously false in an article will fail A4 and have to go here. --IWI (talk) 17:58, 5 February 2023 (UTC)
    @DRC-B5 Can you provide a link to this reference? Or are you talking about a Wikipedia article (if so then it doesn't count, and could be fake). Lights and freedom (talk) 17:22, 5 February 2023 (UTC)
    No reference I found. w:en:Agnimitra has reference about her. Nothing found on her spouse. Dibyojyotilet's chat 17:27, 5 February 2023 (UTC)
    I also checked on Wikidata for the sources but nothing such I got. Dibyojyotilet's chat 17:28, 5 February 2023 (UTC)
  •   Delete – I cannot find enough coverage to pass WP:GNG. --IWI (talk) 17:16, 5 February 2023 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 07:34, 12 February 2023 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.


James McCoubreyEdit

James McCoubrey (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Eptalon has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Supercentenarian, died aged 111, of peumonia. Seems to have been taken as the oldest man for some time, in error(?); articles on several other wikipedias. Originally posted as QD by an IP editor with the comment 'This biography is not relevant for Wikipedia, as the person is known for nothing else than his longevity. '. As it exists on other wikis, doing an RFD. Comments? Eptalon (talk) 03:46, 5 February 2023 (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.

DiscussionEdit

  • I am leaning towards keep based on the "Oldest living man in the world" item. Supercent and oldest living American are bonuses to get past 1 event but being the singular person (confirmed) to be something out of 7 billion people is, to me, notable. Pure Evil (talk) 04:54, 5 February 2023 (UTC)
  •   Delete Being the oldest man for a time does not make someone inherently notable according to any guideline I know of. There appears from my searches to be insufficient coverage in reliable sources to pass WP:GNG. --IWI (talk) 10:28, 6 February 2023 (UTC)
  • Very Strong   Keep Being recognized as the world's oldest man even once is good enough. This person's longevity record is far more noteworthy than Evelyn Kozak who was keeped her article (Wikipedia:Requests for deletion/Requests/2022/Evelyn Kozak). His age is fully verified by the Gerontology Research Group [1] for Guinness World Records as the one of the oldest male in history. Interestingly, he reached nearly 112 years of age, even though men live much shorter lives than women, making him number 2 among men out of a world population of about 7,100,000,000 in 2013. If you have to vanish people with "only" longevity achievements, what about articles that just mention about a tall mountains and sports athletes?.--Ayuta Tonomura (talk) 16:24, 6 February 2023 (UTC)
  •   Delete He got old. He was American. Nothing notable about those things singly or in combination. --Gotanda (talk) 00:01, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 03:46, 12 February 2023 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.


Template:OS Market ShareEdit

Template:OS Market Share (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Lights and freedom has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Ten years out of date and it will continue to be out of date if not updated very often. Also, it's not very useful on articles about past versions of operating systems, because when the past versions were released, the market shares were different. It would be better to use a graph or table instead, which can be added to each page individually. Lights and freedom (talk) 02:21, 5 February 2023 (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.

DiscussionEdit

  •   Delete Not accurate or useful. Pure Evil (talk) 04:55, 5 February 2023 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 02:21, 12 February 2023 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.


RizzEdit

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

Lights and freedom has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Wikipedia is not a dictionary Lights and freedom (talk) 00:44, 5 February 2023 (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.

DiscussionEdit

  •   Delete Dicdef. unsourced, likely OR, vague info (someone on YouTube.. Someone?) It is possible to be made into something more than a dicdef, but that information is not provided here and what we have is not very useful or trustworthy. Pure Evil (talk) 05:01, 5 February 2023 (UTC)
  •   Delete As per above Gamowebbed (talk) 16:14, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 00:44, 12 February 2023 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.


Joseph ArujoEdit

Joseph Arujo (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Vermont has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Every source is an interview except the primary sources for his participation in the Our Town off-broadway production, and being on the Born This Way advisory council. Oh, and the socialblade link.

In terms of usable secondary sources...this leaves us with only the intros to the interviews, at least for the ones in reliable sources. They do not provide much in the way of content for an article, and in line with this I do not believe the subject meets the notability guideline. It's definitely borderline, though. Also noting that it's almost certainly a paid article. Vermont 🐿️ (talk) 02:49, 4 February 2023 (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.

DiscussionEdit

  • Oppose: Meets WP:GNG based upon significant coverage in reliable sources independent of the subject, including such sources as Business Insider, Vice News, Channel Kindness, Mirror, Manchester Evening News, Stage Scene Los Angeles, and several others. These sources cover both his career working as a community leader in the TikTok Diversity Collective and time serving as an advisory board member for the Born This Way Foundation. DestinyinDestiny (talk) 08:21, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
    The two from Business Insider are conglomerated infleuncer interviews/passing mentions; one of them is so much of a passing mention that it simply says he uses some influencer service, the other gives a one-line intro and two quotes from him. The Vice News piece includes a few sentences from him about the queen, as well as a bunch of other comments from people interviewed simply because they were waiting in the queue. The Mirror article takes a half-sentence quote from the Vice News piece. Roughly the same with the Manchester Evening News piece. This is not coverage of Arujo.
    The Channel Kindness source is a primary source to his being on the board of the Born This Way Foundation. It provides 5 sentences of info, as it does with everyone else on the board, and is not likely to be secondary. The Stage Scene source is a primary source for his being in an off-broadway play.
    Everything else used here is an interview. There is no significant coverage of the subject, and no independent coverage at all. There are many passing mentions and interviews. It does not equate to notability. Vermont 🐿️ (talk) 00:09, 5 February 2023 (UTC)
  •   Delete Non notable "influencer" with apparent ego issue. Dime a dozen run of the mill "content provider" who has done nothing of interest. The flooding of banal sources just screams "look at me!!!" Reason enough to delete.. Pure Evil (talk) 22:04, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
  •   Keep: The article in question provides ample reliable sources, not limited to interviews with the subject. The use of interviews as a limited source is in line with Wikipedia's guidelines and many of the introductory statements provide valuable insights into the subject's work and achievements. Arujo is a well-known figure in the entertainment and mental health space, working directly with Lady Gaga's Born This Way Foundation and in the TikTok Diversity Collective. It is evident that his contributions are notable and deserve recognition. Furthermore, the criticism provided by @Pure Evil in the discussion section lacks substance and seems to be part of a pattern of denigrating articles under AfD. It is imperative that we consider the credibility and reliability of the sources provided and not let baseless comments sway our judgment.
Ishola0 (talk) 09:05, 5 February 2023 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 02:49, 11 February 2023 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.


Methodist Primary School, BadagryEdit

Methodist Primary School, Badagry (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Ferien has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Appears to fail WP:GNG and w:WP:NSCHOOL. --Ferien (talk) 23:04, 3 February 2023 (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.

DiscussionEdit

  • Non notable organization with no claim of notability. Pure Evil (talk) 21:50, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
  • Sometimes people have new ideas, and found a school, to pass on the idea. Sometimes, religious orders are known primarily for educating people. In both cases it is the person, the idea or the order that is notable, and not the school. delete--Eptalon (talk) 12:10, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 23:04, 10 February 2023 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.


Ron FadlonEdit

Ron Fadlon (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Ferien has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Not notable. Fails WP:GNG and shouldn't be on the list of people per w:WP:LSC. --Ferien (talk) 23:02, 3 February 2023 (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.

DiscussionEdit

  •   Quick Delete complete vandalism. The other part of this vandalism has been undone. The IP added a name to a list then created this redirect to that entry. As the added info was removed, this redirect is in error. Pure Evil (talk) 21:37, 4 February 2023 (UTC)


This request is due to close on 23:02, 10 February 2023 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.


Segun OgunsanyaEdit

Segun Ogunsanya (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Ferien has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Appears to fail WP:GNG, I can only find social media when searching. --Ferien (talk) 22:38, 3 February 2023 (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.

DiscussionEdit

  • @Ferien: The sources at en:Segun Ogunsanya don't seem like social media. Lights and freedom (talk) 22:42, 3 February 2023 (UTC)
    A lot of those sources don't show notability IMO, they are mostly about what Airtel has done, not what he has done. There are a few sources that are about him but these are mostly about him becoming CEO of Airtel, and to me this looks like a case of w:WP:BLP1E. --Ferien (talk) 22:46, 3 February 2023 (UTC)
  •   Comment: Not sure that he is notable, but do have to agree that there is more than social media out there. As the CEO of a national telecommunications company that provides coverage to many sub-Saharan markets, there is info out there to be used. There may or may not be enough to support an article (as En has done) rather than a redirect to the company, but the sources do exist. To claim it is only social media would be false. Pure Evil (talk) 21:47, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
  • Keep A quick search finds plenty of coverage in African business press. --Gotanda (talk) 00:09, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 22:38, 10 February 2023 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.


Template:US ChinatownsEdit

Template:US Chinatowns (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Auntof6 has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Navbox template created in 2015 with only one navigable blue link in the body. With only one navigable link, a navbox can't do its job of helping link between related pages. The only use is by a template that is used on only one page. Auntof6 (talk) 08:46, 3 February 2023 (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.

DiscussionEdit

  •   Delete per previous stance on non-useful navboxes. Pure Evil (talk) 22:09, 4 February 2023 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 08:46, 10 February 2023 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.


Template:Universal Studios Hollywood AttractionsEdit

Template:Universal Studios Hollywood Attractions (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Auntof6 has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Navbox template created in 2015 with only one navigable blue link in the body. With only one navigable link, a navbox can't do its job of helping link between related pages. The only use is by the page the navigable link redirects to. Auntof6 (talk) 08:40, 3 February 2023 (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.

DiscussionEdit

  •   Delete per previous stance on non-useful navboxes. Pure Evil (talk) 22:09, 4 February 2023 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 08:40, 10 February 2023 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.


Tribe BhaskarEdit

Tribe Bhaskar (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Fehufanga has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Fails GNG, not a notable news outlet. — *Fehufangą✉ Talk page 06:40, 3 February 2023 (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.

DiscussionEdit

  •   Delete - no reliable coverage at all as far as I can see; first google result is the deleted enwiki page. --IWI (talk) 13:46, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 06:40, 10 February 2023 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.


Local Authority Primary School, IberekoEdit

Local Authority Primary School, Ibereko (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

ImprovedWikiImprovment has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Likely not notable, fails GNG (en:WP:NSCHOOL). --IWI (talk) 22:35, 2 February 2023 (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.

DiscussionEdit

  •   Delete Not notable. Pure Evil (talk) 04:34, 3 February 2023 (UTC)
  •   Delete so far, I haven't seen a notable primary school. Yes, there are many religious movements who founded schools, and some religious orders are notable for teaching in schools. Finally, some people had idea and founded schools to educate others based on these ideas. In none of the cases, though it is the school that is notable. It is always the person education, or the person having the idea, or the idea.--Eptalon (talk) 22:59, 5 February 2023 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 22:34, 9 February 2023 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.


Hindi Olympiad FoundationEdit

Hindi Olympiad Foundation (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

ImprovedWikiImprovment has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Appears to fail GNG. --IWI (talk) 17:55, 2 February 2023 (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.

DiscussionEdit

This request is due to close on 17:55, 9 February 2023 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.


Aaron BuckinghamEdit

Aaron Buckingham (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

ImprovedWikiImprovment has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Not quite suitable for A4 quick deletion, but the subject appears to not be notable. --IWI (talk) 16:31, 2 February 2023 (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.

DiscussionEdit

  •   Quick Delete The only claim in the article is that he was in a band (which I never heard of) that was active for 2 years almost 2 decades ago with no international hits.. and is gay. so.. no claim of notability at all so d-A4 is completely valid and he is completely not notable so it is a delete overall anyway. Pure Evil (talk) 04:30, 3 February 2023 (UTC)
    Firstly, I don't see the relevance of the "gay" comment exactly, but I do hope you aren't suggesting that this would be a negative thing. In any case, you may not have heard of them, but being a member of a notable band is a "credible claim of significance", meaning A4 cannot apply. It is important to remember that A4 is based on the enwiki equivalent, and does not actually refer to whether the subject is notable or not, but whether the article claims the person could be significant enough to have an article. --IWI (talk) 04:40, 3 February 2023 (UTC)
    For the record, I don't see an intentional diatribe or otherwise backhanded comment on the subject's gayness or sexual orientation. It is clumsily worded, at best... but I don't think Pure Evil meant any offense. The commentary was on the content of the page and not of the person. Operator873 connect 08:09, 3 February 2023 (UTC)
    Since that does seem to be the case, I apologise for suggesting it; I misunderstood. It now appears as if the comment was about the claims of significance in the article, and not anything more. Best, --IWI (talk) 08:16, 3 February 2023 (UTC)
    The point was that there are two things stated in the article: 1 he was in a band. 2. he was gay. Neither of these things are a claim of notability. A person is not inherently notable for being in a band. Nor is that person notable because of their choice in sexual partners. As those are the only two things covered by the article for this person, there is no valid claim of notability and therefore, A4 would be a valid reason for quick deletion. (and if anything in that was negative, it would be the "in a band" part.. Thankfully he seems to have been a singer and not .. a bassists.. or worse.. a drummer ) Pure Evil (talk) 22:19, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
    @Pure Evil: It indeed doesn't make someone inherently notable, but that doesn't mean there isn't a credible claim of significance to signifying that they could be notable (as the band is notable for Wikipedia, this is a significant enough claim to surpass the threshold of A4, so it can't apply. Therefore, the path for deletion is RfD. --IWI (talk) 04:54, 5 February 2023 (UTC)
  Delete I can't find any reliable sources on the dude. The closest I got to one is this [2]. However, only spent a few minutes looking. Either this guy or another man of the same name is working as an agent now, I think. I say delete without prejudice. And the gayness is not relevant to notability in this case, seriously, why even mention it, PE? Darkfrog24 (talk) 06:20, 3 February 2023 (UTC)
EDIT: I think I see what happened. The line break in my viewer at least pur it as "and is gay, so no" as if that were one idea when it's "...[insufficient claim 1], [insufficient claim 2], [insufficient claime 3 - "is gay"]" as one idea and "so no claim to notability" as the conclusion. That explains it. Darkfrog24 (talk) 18:11, 4 February 2023 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 16:31, 9 February 2023 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.


Template:TRTS routesEdit

Template:TRTS routes (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Auntof6 has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Nominating two related templates. The first (details above) is an unused navbox with no blue links in the body. The second (details below) is used only by the navbox.

Second template:

Template:TRTS color (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete)

Both templates were created by a user who has been both indeffed here and globally locked since 2011. Auntof6 (talk) 05:24, 2 February 2023 (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.

DiscussionEdit

This request is due to close on 05:24, 9 February 2023 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

Recently closed deletion discussionsEdit

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. Syre (river) kept and redirecting the rest, as the reason for deletion has been addressed (we have the article now, and the template is serving a purpose). Red links wouldn't be a delete reason here, because the template does more than just navigation. --IWI (talk) 13:37, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

Template:Syre (River)Edit

Template:Syre (River) (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Auntof6 has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Nominating two unused templates (and a redirect to one of them) related to a river in Luxembourg. We don't have an article about the river.

Templates nominated:

For what it's worth, English Wikipedia doesn't have these templates, and their article on the river doesn't use any equivalent templates. Auntof6 (talk) 07:03, 1 February 2023 (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.

DiscussionEdit

  •   Delete Collection of redlinks.. from a river we don't have to other articles we don't have. Not exactly something useful. Pure Evil (talk) 15:22, 1 February 2023 (UTC)#
    The red links aren't really a problem because this is not a navbox. -- Auntof6 (talk) 21:13, 3 February 2023 (UTC)
  • Keep Syre (river) Redirect the others I've created an article for the syre and included the main template which has some use as for crossings and tributaries of the syre. There is no equivilent on the enwiki, but I plan to create one like what there is for The River Aln — Preceding unsigned comment added by N1TH Music (talkcontribs) 13:12, 2 February 2023 (UTC)
    @N1TH Music: Thanks for creating the article. Note that any plans you may have for work on enwiki don't affect this discussion. I mentioned that enwiki doesn't have these templates only because that means any pages imported from there in the future wouldn't need them. -- Auntof6 (talk) 10:50, 4 February 2023 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 07:03, 8 February 2023 (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) 11:03, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

Charlie KristensenEdit

Charlie Kristensen (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

ImprovedWikiImprovment has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Appears to fail GNG. --IWI (talk) 18:50, 31 January 2023 (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.

DiscussionEdit

  •   Delete - While BBC is definitely a RS, it doesn't add much to his notability. No significant coverage outside of the anti-bullying campaign.— *Fehufangą✉ Talk page 14:05, 1 February 2023 (UTC)
    I respectfully ask you to consider what is notable if not the success of the anti-bullying campaign, his Diana Award, the Pride of Reading Child of Courage Award and What's on Stage Angel award for raising awareness of bullying and helping people cope with it, along with his work supporting The Diana Award and Acting for Others charities, are not notable enough as a 13 year old? Many say he has been and remains an inspiration, a tall poppy and beacon of light that gives them hope that the world is still a kind place. He recently attended and spoke to several hundred head and senior teachers at the PiXL event - https://mobile.twitter.com/CharlieKristens/status/1595143298993524736 and I have now added further sources for citations to attempt to follow the kind advice and guidance I have received to date from admins/ mods so I can make the page less biased and more appropriate for Wiki. I would be grateful if you would retract your delete recommendation on the basis that I am trying to improve the page and following the advice and guidance given, and willing to make changes to improve the quality and neutrality of the information on the page. Very many thanks in advance. Gary Gary Kristensen MBE (talk) 02:55, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
    @Gary Kristensen MBE Then please link to reliable sources which can support his notability. Social medias are generally self-published sources, and are not a reliable source. This includes Twitter. Being an inspiration may be a claim of notability, but it alone does not support the subject's actual notability. Also, as you have disclosed your relationship with the subject, it is best that you do not edit the article, per our conflict of interest guideline. — *Fehufangą✉ Talk page 03:53, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
  •   Delete one minor event Pure Evil (talk) 15:06, 1 February 2023 (UTC)
    This is a delete vote from a deleted page profile.....I don't see how this carries any weight of opinion or adds any credence to the delete vote! Please take this into account. I have researched thus user's activity and there appears to be a trend of this sort of vote. Gary Kristensen MBE (talk) 03:00, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
    @Gary Kristensen MBE Some users choose not to create user pages. That is perfectly fine, and the absence of a user page does not make his argument weaker, nor does having a user page make his argument stronger. Pure Evil is a well-established contributor here. There is nothing suspicious with his many delete !votes. I too, probably have more delete !votes than keep !votes. — *Fehufangą✉ Talk page 03:46, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
    My sincere apologies to @Pure Evil. I did wonder why a user would comment and then the profile would be deleted, but your explanation @Fehufanga now makes sense. In response to Pure Evil, Charlie's notability is not 'one minor event'.....it is many and considering he is only 13 now, he has achieved much in the past 3 years since #CheerUpCharlie commenced. Is he an inspiration to others? Notability encompasses many things......so I think we should be careful to judge based on just one event....which is opinion rather than fact, as his profile and activities demonstrate....Is he more prominent than a 'normal' person (such as myself)? Is he distinctive - does he stand out for what he does or advocates? Is he well known? Does he have a broad and deep social media following, and are many of those follower also notable people? Has he performed or achieved more than one would expect for a 13 year old? Does his young age contribute to his notability given what he has done to date? Additionally, and it's not yet on the page, as it is not yet formally announced, but he also now heads up a registered Charity - The Charlie Kristensen Foundation - where under privileged children and adults will be provided with help, support and financial assistance to pursue performing arts, alongside the continued promotion of anti-bullying. Many thanks for reading, and once again, sorry for my misunderstanding of the user page profile! Gary Kristensen MBE (talk) 04:05, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
  •   Delete Seems to be notable for only one event. I've searched the subject on Google and this article was the second one on the first page. Although the campaign might be notable because it has significant coverage, it has to be by reliable sources to support its notability. Jolly1253 (talk) 04:40, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
  •   Delete Fails WP:PEOPLE. Notability is supported by significant, in-depth coverage in multiple reliable and independent sources. This person is a good kid, I'm sure... but the quality of their character and/or accomplishments is not being discussed. What is being discussed is whether the threshold of notability has been met as supported by those sources, which is simply: No. Operator873 connect 05:01, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
  •   Delete, very well this story fits in Reddit or Twitter threads, but not here, because this is not a channel of thoughts, nor half works, my answer is no. GeogieTax (talk) 15:21, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
  •   Delete, per WP:GNG, and one event won't make a person notable.--Dibyojyotilet's chat 07:44, 5 February 2023 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 18:50, 7 February 2023 (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.  --IWI (talk) 17:29, 7 February 2023 (UTC)

User:Jon698/1984 Republican Party presidential primariesEdit

User:Jon698/1984 Republican Party presidential primaries (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Ferien has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Per Wikipedia:Requests for deletion/Requests/2022/User:Jon698/1980 Republican Party presidential primaries. A user draft that hasn't been edited for 3 years and we already have an article on this. --Ferien (talk) 17:09, 31 January 2023 (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.

DiscussionEdit

This request is due to close on 17:09, 7 February 2023 (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. Consensus to delete--BRP ever 13:20, 5 February 2023 (UTC).

Category:ConservativesEdit

Category:Conservatives (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request
Category:American conservatives (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete)
Category:British conservatives (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete)

Ferien has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Per w:Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2008 December 30#Category:Conservatives, too vague to be useful. --Ferien (talk) 20:56, 22 January 2023 (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.

DiscussionEdit

  • Delete per nom. Any category that includes both MLK and Alex Jones isn't clearly defined enough to have encyclopedic value. American Eagle (talk) 00:13, 23 January 2023 (UTC)
  • The British and American uses are quite different. The British Conservative Party is right of centre, but only modestly so. It is the party of government more often than its opponents, the Labour Party. The American usage is very different. This can be fixed by having two pages: "British C..." and "US C..." The British C party is 100% against the kind of street violence which, sometimes, characterises the U.S. variety. Now to the other point. You cannot just delete a term or name which is official and important. The British Conservative Party is not just the party of government at present, but it is the linear descendent of the old Tory Party. It is absolutely not a vague term in the UK. Macdonald-ross (talk) 14:52, 24 January 2023 (UTC)
    I don't think this is about members of a party that has the word "conservative" in its name. I think its about classifying people as politically conservative, regardless of what party they belong to (or whether they belong to a party at all). No one is saying to eliminate the category/ies for people in the Conservative Party (UK). -- Auntof6 (talk) 22:56, 26 January 2023 (UTC)
  • I think I could make the same argument as with the category liberals (also noimated for deletion): As is the definition is too broad; yes there are conservative thinkers, and people who defined what "conservatve" ought to mean. Also, depending on where you are, "conservartive" can mean different things. In Europe, conservatives focused on the state, that plays a central role; in Anglo-Saxon counties (England, the US), the focus is more on the individual. SO again, the category is too broad to meaningfully bridge the gaps there are. So... delete--Eptalon (talk) 20:28, 27 January 2023 (UTC)
  •   Delete - All of them. Too broad to be definine, and opens up room for OR/self-interpretation.— *Fehufangą✉ Talk page 22:26, 27 January 2023 (UTC)
  • Keep It is very difficult to categorise people by political orientation as things vary so much from country to country. But I dont think we should bottle it. Maybe it should be containerised so only people who are members of conservative organisations are included - but the term conservative was in use before the Conservative Party existed and there are plenty of people and organisations outside the party who are described as conservatives. Rathfelder (talk) 20:23, 4 February 2023 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 20:56, 29 January 2023 (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) 11:19, 5 February 2023 (UTC)

Template:Panzer Dragoon seriesEdit

Template:Panzer Dragoon series (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Auntof6 has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Navigational box with only one blue link. Navboxes can't do their job of helping navigate if there's only one blue link. Auntof6 (talk) 22:13, 30 January 2023 (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.

DiscussionEdit

  •   Delete per nom. Added to one article a year and a half ago. not useful Pure Evil (talk) 17:19, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 22:13, 6 February 2023 (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.


Related pagesEdit