Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Requests for deletion

Policy shortcuts:
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

Shortcut

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.
  1. 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.
  1. 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)}}
  1. 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

See also: Wikipedia:Deletion policy § Quick deletion

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

See also: Wikipedia:Deletion review
  • 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

Peyman KeshavarzEdit

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

Huji has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Created by a cross-wiki abuser who did undisclosed paid editing - Huji reply 14:00, 23 September 2020 (UTC) - Huji reply 14:00, 23 September 2020 (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 - now while we don't delete articles based on their creators, this one fails WP:GNG by a long shot. Absolutely no coverage at all. --IWI (talk) 19:46, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 14:00, 30 September 2020 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.


Beto AltamiranoEdit

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

Infogapp1 has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: There are several claims, but there's no proper citation to these claims. There's one mention on Forbes (by contributor, and possibly paid), so I'll leave it to the community to help decide if other claims can be substantiated Infogapp1 (talk) 23:00, 21 September 2020 (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 23:00, 28 September 2020 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.


Anikó GyöngyössyEdit

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

Macdonald-ross has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Team player in unplaced team in a minor sport (no other information) Macdonald-ross (talk) 08:35, 21 September 2020 (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'll start the ball rolling... This small page fails several GNG points, especially: The sources are not multiple or secondary or significant coverage. One can't say whether the editor is independent of the subject, but the bare fact is not disputed. However, an individual in a team sport without GNG is not a proper biography. Macdonald-ross (talk) 11:42, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Comment since water polo doesn't have its own spec set of criteria, I'm looking at WP:SPORTSEVENT: "The final series (or single game when there is not a series) determining the champion of a top league, e.g., 2009 Stanley Cup Finals, or 2009 All-Ireland Senior Football Championship Final, or Super Bowl XLIII, or 2006 UEFA Champions League Final". Claims such as "She played in the 2009 World Aquatics Championships,[1] 2010 Women's European Water Polo Championship,[2] 2019 World Aquatics Championships,[3] 2020 Women's European Water Polo Championship" may possibly fall under that. Current sources, however, fail to substantiate and they all seem to be routine sports reporting or brief sources that mention the subject as part of the group, though I've seen articles in pages 4 and onwards of Google such as [1], [2],[3] and [4]. Whilst they're in a foreign language and they're not exclusive feature pieces about her, thanks to Chrome's Google Translate, I think they may be substantial enough to establish her contributions in the team. After cite cleanup to substantiate the current claims in the page, I'd be leaning towards Weak Keep --Infogapp1 (talk) 13:46, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Keep with cleanup and these citations being added. --IWI (talk) 19:48, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 08:35, 28 September 2020 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.


Joy OngcachuyEdit

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

Infogapp1 has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Appears to be a case of WP:1E where the subject was covered for a single/one-off event. Not seeing any further notable events/cause of notability apart from that one event. Infogapp1 (talk) 13:57, 20 September 2020 (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 lady is a nurse who treated wounded in the 2017 London terrorist vehicle-ramming and knife attack on London Bridge. Eight people were killed and 48 were injured.
OBE is not in itself a particularly high award, but I thought you'ld like to know the context. Macdonald-ross (talk) 16:30, 20 September 2020 (UTC)
I took the award into consideration, and I even second-guessed whether that in itself confers notability. However, as I've noted, I didn't see any other notable events or references covering other reasons that would make the person notable apart from one event, by which she was given the award. --Infogapp1 (talk) 20:42, 20 September 2020 (UTC)
Yes, I agree with you. Probably we should delete this one. Macdonald-ross (talk) 07:52, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Delete - is only notable for one event, and coverage of her would not stretch past this. The award was given to her because of this single event, so she is not notable. --IWI (talk) 19:41, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 13:57, 27 September 2020 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.


Karina SaylerEdit

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

Infogapp1 has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: The claim of "She has been featured in over 50 magazines and has been on the cover of top 5." was not even substantiated. Existing sources do not appear to be credible and all the claims in the page read to be straight out of some press release. Infogapp1 (talk) 13:46, 20 September 2020 (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 13:46, 27 September 2020 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.


Prit KamaniEdit

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

Infogapp1 has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Potential COI aside, the sources appear to be passing mentions about his minor roles or self-initiated interviews. Take https://www.iwmbuzz.com/digital/celebrities-digital/maska-given-limelight-big-break-looking-prit-kamani/2020/04/06 for example and other sources Infogapp1 (talk) 13:29, 20 September 2020 (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. Lacks suitable evidence of notability. Macdonald-ross (talk) 11:06, 21 September 2020 (UTC)


This request is due to close on 13:29, 27 September 2020 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.


Mohsen MovagharEdit

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

ImprovedWikiImprovment has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Subject is not notable. No sources seem to have covered, and is likely a promotion. Content is not similar enough to the article deleted at this RfD to be QD'd. --IWI (talk) 13:15, 19 September 2020 (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

In the interest of fairness to this user, I will ping Yottie here as this message appears to be in French. If you have time, a translation would be helpful to the discussion :) --IWI (talk) 18:05, 20 September 2020 (UTC)
I can summarize as well: The IP editor says that according to the French notability guidelines (link above), politicians who are members of a national parliament have the right to have their own article. This applies to the case of Mohsen Movaghar. The Ip editor also wants that we re-instate the article about Jalal M, because he is (was?) the mayor of a city of over 100.000 people (130.000 people, in France: Limoges, for example). As to the FrWP guileline such people also have the right to get their own article. Kholedad M. : A person which is a translator, writer, or with a similar occupation, who gets two press articles also has this right.--Eptalon (talk) 18:29, 20 September 2020 (UTC)
I will suggest the following: This is a request to delete the article about Mohsen M. The question of whether to restore articles that were deleted should be treated at Deletion review. I will also note that the decisions to delete were founded, when they were taken years back. Each case needs proper examination and reasoning, and looking at the arguments in the request again; this is not something that can be done quickly within another RfD. IIRC most of the articles were deleted because of poor sourcing. En Francais: Les démandes de remettre des pages effacées se font sur cette page; la situation est assez compliquée. De mon souvenir: à l'époque, nous avions effacés les pages parce qu'elles contenaient très peu d'information, et obtenir des plus amples informations était très difficile; Régardez un article comme en:Ali Larijani pour voir que oui, c'est possible d'écrire sur un homme politique Iranien. Mais comme j'écrivais dans une des discussions: Passé les 5 à 10 villes Iraniennes les plus peuplés (et peut-être cellesavec une grande significance religieuse, comme Qom) obtenir des informations, et vérifier celles-ci, sera très difficile. --Eptalon (talk) 18:49, 20 September 2020 (UTC)
Comment: The IP editor's claims can be substantiated in the form of references. One of the references, for example, appears to be some sort of bibliography or cases, but not necessarily a bio of the subject suggesting that he holds a local position. This person may be a lawyer (at least based on what Google Translate shows), but in order for us to accept these claims of notability, they all need to be properly sourced. At its current form, these are simply claims in a foreign language, and I still see no reason to reverse my current vote. --Infogapp1 (talk) 20:39, 20 September 2020 (UTC)
Thanks for translating that Eptalon. So we have the enwiki guideline, which states "Politicians and judges who have held international, national, or (for countries with federal or similar systems of government) state/province–wide office, or have been members of legislative bodies at those levels." In other words, it agrees with the frwiki guideline as holding office in a national parliament is definitely holding national office. If reliable sources can back up the claim that this person held office in the parliament of Iran, it should be kept. However, I do not see such sourcing to back it up; not in the article and not anywhere else. --IWI (talk) 21:40, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 13:15, 26 September 2020 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.


MovagharEdit

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

Wekeepwhatwekill has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Fails WP:BLP and WP:CITE This page is about living (in most cases) people but contains no citations. Some individuals aren't notable either. Page needs to be deleted. Wekeepwhatwekill  Speak! 18:42, 18 September 2020 (UTC) Wekeepwhatwekill  Speak! 18:42, 18 September 2020 (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 , please note that the page was edited by socks of DJ Parisa, who is a well-known LTA. Bencemac (talk) 11:05, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
We don’t quickly delete articles based on who created them here. Being created by a blocked or banned user is not a criteria for QD. --IWI (talk) 12:37, 19 September 2020 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 18:42, 25 September 2020 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.


Christoph MartiEdit

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

ImprovedWikiImprovment (alt) has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Doesn't appear to be notable. The sources aren't sufficient and I couldn't find any others. --IWI (talk) 14:13, 16 September 2020 (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. Put up in a single edit by an IP with no other edits here; reads like a promotion of the subject, possibly by a PR agent. Not notable. Macdonald-ross (talk) 08:21, 17 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Already deleted as Christoph marti. Bencemac (talk) 15:51, 17 September 2020 (UTC)
  • I cannot judge if this is a notable photogrpaher, seems to have had several exhibitions, also at galleries abroad (Note: Isn't that pwhat a photographer should be known for?); What I can say though is that there's a Chtistoph Marti, who is an actor, who runs a small theatre venue in Berlin; he has an article at DEWP de:Christoph Marti). He is also known as Ursli Pfister, and his ensemble has the name 'Geschwister Pfister'. The DEWP page was created in 2007, and its last change was in 2018, two years ago; I don't know if that info is current. Note however, that de:Geschwister Pfister is an ensemble that won several prizes.Compare this to a photographer form the outskirts of Solothurn. So, to cut my ramblings short: delete this one (the photohrapher); if we want to create an article on the Christoph Marti/Ursli Pfister I just described, we should do so at Gewschwister Pfister. perhaps with a redirect. --Eptalon (talk) 12:27, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Delete Results are 90% UGC and self-promo. No reputable sources covering him or his works. --Infogapp1 (talk) 13:34, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 14:13, 23 September 2020 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.


Toni GilpinEdit

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

ImprovedWikiImprovment has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Doesn't appear to pass notability requirements. All sources are either primary sources or unreliable. Couldn't find any other sources online. Certainly wouldn't consider this person to have been covered in depth by a number of reliable, independent sources. --IWI (talk) 22:24, 1 September 2020 (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

  • Looks fine to me. Keep I don't see any unreliable sources. Can you please be specific? --Gotanda (talk) 05:50, 2 September 2020 (UTC)
    All of them are either primary sources or heavily biased unreliable sources. Political websites are not reliable at all and are most likely not independent either. --IWI (talk) 06:08, 2 September 2020 (UTC)
Gotanda, zero of these are reliable independent sources, most of them are user profiles/listings/etc and the only one that isn't is an article Toni Gilpin wrote herself. Does not even close to pass GNG. Naleksuh (talk) 06:20, 2 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Has no impartial sources, just puffs from people with vested interest in her side of a complex issue, or publishers with a financial interest in the book. No proper reviews. Delete. Macdonald-ross (talk) 07:13, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello -- I actually am Toni Gilpin, and have never contributed to Wikipedia before, and did not write the entry on me (I don't know who did), but received a Google alert that led me to this page. The entry, though brief, seems accurate as far as I'm concerned. Is there something more you need to keep it from being deleted? There are reviews for my books, for instance, in other sources, and I could contribute some of the actual articles that I've written. I'm not sure what sort of "impartial sources" one is looking for -- any books listed on Wikipedia, for instance, have a publisher behind them that has a financial interest in the book, so I don't get that objection. So let me know. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Solidaritysister (talk • contribs) 15:31, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

@Solidaritysister: Hello, and welcome to the Simple English Wikipedia. If you can provide us with any further sources you may be able to demonstrate that you are notable for inclusion here. We require sources that are reliable, impartial, and independent of you. They must also talk about you in depth. The current sources do not seem to meet these criteria. --IWI (talk) 15:44, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

Well, I'm a labor historian and author of two books. I received a journalism award for an article I wrote, and also (which is not noted, by whoever wrote it, on the page) was awarded an Honorable Mention for the prestigious Philip Taft Labor History Book award for my book The Long Deep Grudge. I've been interviewed and quoted in news stories (also not referred to in this entry), identified as a "labor historian." I don't know what I might add about my writing or career that might be "independent of me." I just looked and a friend and fellow historian, who got his Ph.D from Yale about the same time I did (Eric Arnesen) has about the same info on his Wikipedia page (which I think has been up for a while) as what has been entered for me. The well-known labor historian Nelson Lichtenstein also has about the same amount of info on his page, just a few bits of biographical info and mention of his books. Honestly I don't really care whether I have a Wikipedia page or not, but evidently somebody out there -- and honestly I have no idea who -- felt strongly enough that I do. But if you go by your criteria I'd think a lot of authors, who are probably identified on Wikipedia for the books they wrote, ought not to be included. But again, I'm still confused about what you're looking for. (Btw I tried to include links to the things I mentioned above but I tried to post this comment several times without success, so removed them thinking that might be the problem. If you need them I can supply them, but tell me how.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Solidaritysister (talk • contribs) 17:08, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

@Solidaritysister: Well, we have specific guidelines for authors that you can see over on the English Wikipedia here. The idea is that a notable author will be cited by at least several peers, so if that isn't the case for an author then they are not notable. There are other criteria too, but I don't think these have been met. --IWI (talk) 17:39, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

I just sent an email with a number of citations referring to me or my books to ImprovedWikiImprovment, in response to an email I received from them. But I also included in that email this thought, which I'd like to include with my response here: My book The Long Deep Grudge will also be reviewed by the Journal of American History, the premier academic journal in the field, but being an academic journal these things get done slowly and the review will not be published before next year. Frankly I resent the assertion that what has been published about my book thus far represents "just puffs from people with vested interest in her side of a complex issue," simply because my book was reviewed (among other places) in union newspapers and in outlets like Labor Notes and Jacobin. If that's the case I presume you reject citations to the likes of The Wall Street Journal and Business Week, since they are also publications that have a "vested interest" on labor issues. At any rate, as I said initially, I did not create the entry with my name on it, nor do I know who did (if I did, I would have supplied them with better citations) and really don't care if you include it or not. But I do take exception to the way certain sources have been characterized and it makes me concerned about the biases of your editors. Solidaritysister (talk) 20:34, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

  • Comment I wouldn't count Jacobin, In These Times, and other contributed/bylined articles by the subject. However, subject's work/book has been subject to [1], [2], and [3] - this one has several 'industry reviews', [4]. All these may be enough to merit notability as per WP:AUTHOR. I'm leaning towards Weak Keep. --Infogapp1 (talk) 21:13, 3 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Comment - I think the user was being blocked from adding links by the abuse filter. They have emailed them to me, so I will add them here as a courtesy. Awards: [1][2]; references to books/quotes: [3][4][5][6]; reviews of book: [7][8][9][10][11][12][13]. Whether these meen she meets WP:NAUTHOR or not is a question that can be discussed. --IWI (talk) 04:10, 4 September 2020 (UTC)
  •   Administrator note: I'm extending this conversation until 09/20/2020 (+5 days from now). Currently there is not enough participation to determine a consensus in either direction. Operator873talkconnect 21:00, 15 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Let's remember the basics: we are not judging the people -- the subjects of a biography -- except indirectly. We are judging the articles as they are in relation to WP:Notability and other guidelines. It is super-unwise of subjects to get involved in these discussions, and they can hardly be dispassionate. We have to ignore all that and put this article (in our minds) against the general standard of accepted notable articles. I think it fails by quite a distance. Macdonald-ross (talk) 17:01, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 22:24, 20 September 2020 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.


Mill Creek Falls, Narrows VirginiaEdit

Mill Creek Falls, Narrows Virginia (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

ImprovedWikiImprovment has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: This waterfall does not appear to be a notable one for inclusion. It is a very minor waterfall; no sources seem to have covered it. It is not to be confused with en:Mill Creek Falls, a waterfall in Oregon. --IWI (talk) 21:03, 10 September 2020 (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

Please delete this page. Shannon Bowling

  • Keep (see below). There is an equivalent article on English Wikipedia en:Mill Creek Falls, Narrows Virginia and a fair amount of coverage, including what is already in the article. Shannonbowling, you are the creator of both articles. What is your reason for wanting to delete this one? Voceditenore (talk) 07:16, 12 September 2020 (UTC)
    That article was created by the same user as here, and doesn't provide any more sources to demonstrate notability. I have nominated that one for deletion too. :IWI (talk) 16:35, 12 September 2020 (UTC)
I was aware that both articles were created by the same person. Hence my query to their creator. Having said that, I'm changing my opinion to neutral. It does have brief write-ups in the official websites of both Giles County and Narrows, but this is pretty marginal. Unfortunately, there is no article to merge this with, as there is on English Wikipedia, e.g. en:Mill Creek (conservation area). Voceditenore (talk) 15:30, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
  • I was not aware that I created the article on the Simple English Wikipedia, after reading the difference, I thought Wikipedia was a better fit. I disagree that this Waterfall is not notable, this is the exact reason that I created the page. As stated in the document, the dam was built in the 1780's and the creek served as a valuable resource for almost 200 years to a community. The creek and the waterfall have been featured in national commercials and is listed on many sites for hiking. After searching I have found many other waterfalls on Wikipedia that aren't any more "notable". Something doesn't have to be globally notable to be notable. It is notable to residents of the region and those visiting the region, especially those hiking the Appalachian Trail. Shannonbowling (talk) 04:00, 13 September 2020 (UTC)
  • The article may be notable under the following parts of WP:Notability (geographic features)/Geographical regions, areas and places:
"Populated, legally recognized places are typically presumed to be notable, even if their population is very low".
"Named natural features are often notable, provided information beyond statistics and coordinates is known to exist. This includes mountains, lakes, streams, islands, etc".
As we've noticed before, the guidelines for geographical features are noticeably open, not to say lax. But they are what they are. I would prefer to see the town of Narrows included in the article because the rapids are not the most impressive in the world. Macdonald-ross (talk) 08:49, 15 September 2020 (UTC)
@Macdonald-ross: that is true, but this is a natural feature with zero reliable sources about it, as it is so minor. I don’t think this meets the criteria you have outlined. --IWI (talk) 14:31, 15 September 2020 (UTC)
I agree its interest is minor. I would not have proposed a page like this myself, because I think it has too little interest for an encyclopedia. It stands to reason that a viewer would be very surprised that such an insignificant place warranted an article in an encyclopedia. Macdonald-ross (talk) 08:07, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 21:03, 17 September 2020 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

New end Date: 27. September--Eptalon (talk) 08:45, 20 September 2020 (UTC)


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.

Speedy deleted as recreation of a page that has been recreated many times at many titles. -Djsasso (talk) 16:33, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

J-Pimp (songwriter)Edit

J-Pimp (songwriter) (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Wekeepwhatwekill has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: No notability shown. Notability is a must for any article about a living person. No citations either, also a must for any article about a living person. We're also definetly not the place to advertise you're an up and comer in the music biz. Wekeepwhatwekill  Speak! 16:22, 23 September 2020 (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 16:22, 30 September 2020 (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

Retrieved from "https://simple.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_deletion&oldid=7119995"