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

WP:BEFORE

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

A. Read and understand these policies and guidelines

The Wikipedia deletion policy, which explains valid grounds for deletion.
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)
Subject-specific notability guidelines, which can be found at Category:Wikipedia notability guidelines

B. Carry out these checks

Confirm that the article does not meet the criteria for quick deletion.
If there are verifiability, notability or other sourcing concerns, take reasonable steps to search for reliable sources. (See step D.)
Review the article's history to check for potential vandalism or poor editing.
Read the article's talk page for previous nominations and/or that your objections haven't already been dealt with.
Check "What links here" in the article's sidebar, to see how the page is used and referenced within Wikipedia.
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

If the article can be fixed through normal editing, then it is not a candidate for RfD.
If the article was recently created, please consider allowing the contributors more time to develop the article.
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.
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

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.
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.
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.

Click "Change source" at the top of the page to be deleted.
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.
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.

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.
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.
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

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".
Go to the list of deletion requests, and click "change source" beside the words "Current deletion request discussions".
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)}}
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:

A nomination involves a topic that you do not know much about.
Everyone has made the same suggestion and you agree with that suggestion.

All times are in UTC.

Current deletion request discussionsEdit

Shot (rapper)Edit

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

Belwine has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Fails WP:GNG. —Belwine (talk) 18:14, 6 March 2021 (UTC)

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

DiscussionEdit

Delete Not notable. --Hellothere4 (talk) 20:03, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
Delete - The references in the article all seem BLOGgy.... Searching his name on Google brings up rappers who have all been shot so haven't found anything myself. –Davey2010^Talk 20:09, 6 March 2021 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 18:14, 13 March 2021 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

Category:Arctic HighwaysEdit

Category:Arctic Highways (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Auntof6 has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Grouping highways as being in the Arctic doesn't seem helpful. The highways here could be categorized as being in whichever countries they're in. For what it's worth, Englist Wikipedia doesn't have such a category. If this category is kept, the it should be renamed so that "highways" is in lower case. Auntof6 (talk) 07:09, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

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

DiscussionEdit

Delete I don’t think motorways should be categorised this way. --IWI (talk) 11:19, 5 March 2021 (UTC)
I change my mind about the category, so Delete. --Cuddles9999 • 💬 • 📜 13:37, 5 March 2021 (UTC)
Keep Perhaps we need to look at it differently: The arctic Circle is at 66° 33" Northern (and Southern) latititude. Its probably safe to assume, that at such latitudes, permafrost is common. Road-building can probably take that into account. Big cities north of the Polar circle are Murmansk (310k people), at almost 69° degrees north, Norilsk (180k people), at over 69 degrees north; Vorkuta (70k people), at over 67 degrees north; Tromsø (80k people), at over 69 degrees north; Bodø, at 67 degrees north... Even if they are far north, they will need roads/highwys of some kind. Compare that th the project to build a (paved) highway across the Sahara, for example from Algiers to Lagos, or from Tripoli to Brazzaville. So, yes, if we had an article that pointed out the (perceived) difficulties of such roads, such a category might well make sense. A few moths bacj, there was an environmental disaster in Norilsk, because the ground thawed (Norilsk lives from mining ore).--Eptalon (talk) 18:06, 5 March 2021 (UTC)
Delete per nom * IWIW. Pointless category imho. –Davey2010^Talk 20:02, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
Comment as the creator of the category requested deletion, is this a speedy delete under G7? —Belwine (talk) 20:04, 6 March 2021 (UTC)

No. To be a QD/G7, the creator would have to put a QD request on the page. --Auntof6 (talk) 20:09, 6 March 2021 (UTC)

Additionally, we have at least one member of the community above who wants it kept. Let the RfD run its course. --IWI (talk) 20:19, 6 March 2021 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 07:09, 12 March 2021 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

Category:TrombonesEdit

Category:Trombones (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Naddruf has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Category has only two items and should be merged into Category:Brass instruments Naddruf (talk) 21:25, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

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

DiscussionEdit

Merge as there's not really a need for a subcategory of 2 items. —Belwine (talk) 21:37, 4 March 2021 (UTC) Keep as my reason no longer applies —Belwine (talk) 11:21, 5 March 2021 (UTC)
Comment I have written a third article for the category, so, if it is only for the three entries, the category can be kept now.--Eptalon (talk) 23:46, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
Merge ~~per Belwine~~. Even though there is now 3 pages, I think it would be better to merge it ShadowBallX (talk) 00:24, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

@ShadowBallX: Could you please say why, so that the closing admin has something to consider? Remember that this is not a straight vote: the closing admin needs a reason. --Auntof6 (talk) 19:28, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

Keep There's 3 now so it can have it's own. --Hellothere4 (talk) 00:25, 5 March 2021 (UTC)
Keep with three entries it is a suitable category. --IWI (talk) 11:20, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 21:25, 11 March 2021 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

Judeo-ChristianEdit

Judeo-Christian (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Darkfrog24 has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Non-subjective: This article has no sources. Subjective: I believe the content is inaccurate. For one, it claims in Wikipedia's voice that Jesus was born into the royal family of Israel, and historians don't think he was. Usually, the word "Judeo-Christian" refers to anything that comes from both Judaism and Christianity, like when someone calls America a "Judeo-Christian country" or when calls the Ten Commandments a Judeo-Christian thing because the chapter that contains the TC is in both modern Christian and modern Jewish holy books. But this article says things that can be interpreted as "Jews believe Jesus Christ was the Messiah" and the short answer is that they don't. One of the official views of Judaism is that JC was an apostate (Christians call his followers "apostles," so it's not like most Christians would disagree with that.) I don't have any grounds to accuse the person who composed this article of misconduct, but there are branches of Christianity that like to pretend the two religions are closer than they really are in a way that Jewish Americans have been a bit vocal that they don't agree with or like. I think the article's content is too controversial to go without clear, reliable sourcing. Darkfrog24 (talk) 13:50, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

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

DiscussionEdit

Christianity started as a Jewish sect, I think, and 'Judeo-Christian' is used as a reference to this 'common heritage', or to describe the way in which this happened. As a side-note: Islam split a few hundred years later. I am not a theologian, but as I remember, if you leave out the writings of Jesus followers, very little (historically verifiable) has been written about Jesus. It looks like, similar to Christianity, there are a few different movements within Judaism. Statements about a 'judeo-christian' heritage will likely be very generic. Note that I added the iw link to the EnWp page (en:Judeo-Christian). The term is commonly used, there's no reason to delete the article. --Eptalon (talk) 14:55, 4 March 2021

Eptalon, if the article said the things you are saying, I wouldn't think it needed deletion. Instead, it's saying "The main belief in Judeo Christianity is that the Jew named Jesus, who was born into the royal family of the Nation of Israel was and is the Messiah." Jews don't think Jesus was the Messiah. Darkfrog24 (talk) 16:00, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

You know, anyone can change articles in Wikipedia. A request for deletion is a process, that usually lasts a week. During that week anyone can edit the article (provided the {{rfd}} template stays). Given a competent editor, a few edits later, this article would porbably be keepable. As to Jesus having royal blood, remember: Christianity is/was a religion for the poor: It promised them a better world (in the afterlife), if they tried hard enough. But once again: This isn't a discussion about belief or religiion, it is a discussion whether to keep or delete the article. I think queen Hatshepsut had developed a theory that had many of the later Christian elements: She was a woman, and before her, all pharaohs were men. But this isn't about religion, or history of religion. I bet you can be bold and make this article keepable, probably in less than ten edits. --Eptalon (talk) 16:18, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

No, Eptalon, this is not a quick fix. Whoever fixes this article will spend a long time looking up sources, and all the existing text would have to be deleted or replaced. Darkfrog24 (talk) 16:34, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

Look at what the article looks now, probably keepable. I guess, ifd you insist on having references, there are a few in the EnWP article.--Eptalon (talk) 16:37, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

That is much better than it was, Eptalon. It is no longer harmful. Darkfrog24 (talk) 16:40, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

(change conflict) Keep deletion is not cleanup, and the page having no sources is not a reason to delete. If the page has issues, time would be better spent fixing them in the case of a notable topic such as this. Please take a look at WP:BEFORE the next time you nominate an article. --IWI (talk) 14:59, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

It sounds like you're asking, "Darkfrog24, why did you nominate this article for deletion instead of finding it a source or two and making repairs like you usually do?" The answer is "Because that's all those other articles needed. Almost every word of this article's existing draft would have to be deleted anyway. And because it promotes falsehoods about a controversial topic and might be part of a political push, it does harm in its current form. Better to scrap it and add 'Judeo-Christian' to the requested articles list for someone who actually wants to write about this topic to address at their leisure." Darkfrog24 (talk) 16:34, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

@Darkfrog24: No, this is a volunteer project and I am not suggesting you do (or should have done) anything. But your rationale for starting this request is a reason for cleanup, not deletion. Therefore, there is no reason to delete. Eventually, it would be expected a member of the community would improve the article to be more accurate, which is what has happened in this case. --IWI (talk) 18:14, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

That is exactly what I do when the article in need of cleanup is harmless. Darkfrog24 (talk) 13:56, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

@Darkfrog24: I think you are misunderstanding my point here. An article being inaccurate or under sourced is a reason that the article would need cleanup, and not deletion when we are talking about a notable topic. Therefore, such articles should not be brought to RfD and should not be deleted. --IWI (talk) 21:01, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

There is a misunderstanding here, yes, but it's about why I nominated the article for deletion: because it was harmful. But since our conversation has moved away from the article itself, perhaps we should continue elsewhere. Darkfrog24 (talk) 01:04, 6 March 2021 (UTC)

Keep after edits by Eptalon and Darkfrog24. Naddruf (talk) 22:06, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 13:50, 11 March 2021 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

DipittEdit

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

Eptalon has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Looks like an food-producing company, which produces food for the brands of large supermarket chains, eg. for their 'own-brand soy sauce'; currently reads a bit biased. note that the user created another similar article ('Gorbel Inc.') earlier today (that was some manufacturing/industrial company). So possibly we are looking at paid editing. To come back to this RfD though: References in the article, so company possibly notable. Problem though: the average consumer is not aware of the company that produces the soy sauce or chicken nuggest of his/her favorite retailer. So, keep or delete? Eptalon (talk) 13:49, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

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

DiscussionEdit

Delete. This page is through-and-through promotional. Macdonald-ross (talk) 11:41, 5 March 2021 (UTC)
Delete fails the general notability guideline and would need a major rewrite to become encyclopedic —Belwine (talk) 11:44, 5 March 2021 (UTC)
Delete as obviously PROMO. Presumably they tried EN first and got no where hence this article here. Nuke it. –Davey2010^Talk 20:12, 6 March 2021 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 13:49, 11 March 2021 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. (Ryden Statue)Edit

Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. (Ryden Statue) (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

TDKR Chicago 101 has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: The main reason is because I cannot find how this statue is notable. The article is need of work and the sources provided does not provide concrete reasoning towards article notability. TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 04:53, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

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

DiscussionEdit

Delete. Notability not assured, no illustration, and text looks like it has been copied from an unacknowledged source. Not suitable at all as a wiki page. Macdonald-ross (talk) 10:14, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 04:53, 11 March 2021 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

Enea KadiuEdit

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

ShadowBallX has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: he looks like he would pass NFOOTY, however I cannot find any sources for him (first google result was a Pinterest page). He is listed on en:Albania national beach soccer team, but I want to know the opinion of everyone else ShadowBallX (talk) 17:08, 2 March 2021 (UTC)

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

DiscussionEdit

No evidence as a player of soccer; Albanian team is not recognised under FIDE; Active perhaps in beach soccer; Not notable as a soccer player. Delete. Macdonald-ross (talk) 17:21, 2 March 2021 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 17:08, 9 March 2021 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

Matea BolívarEdit

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

Eptalon has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: I cannot really determine the notability of this person. There's a Spanish Wikipedia article here); it is tagged with needing more sources, and doesn't really mention her educating Simon. When Simon was born, she seems to have been around ten years old. As I haven't used Spanish in a while, I'd like to ask the community for help. If as claimed, she's seen as a national hero in Venezuela, there must certainly be more (also Spanish-language) sources? Eptalon (talk) 11:03, 2 March 2021 (UTC)

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

DiscussionEdit

1. If you read the English language source in this article, it mentions her educating Simón. 2. If you do a Google search, more sources can easily be found. I will be adding some more when I have a chance. 3. The Spanish language source about her status as a national heroine is a statement on a Venezuelan government website. DoSazunielle (talk) 12:21, 2 March 2021 (UTC)
Keep the sources in the article are enough to demonstrate this person meets WP:GNG. Doesn’t appear to be a reason to delete. --IWI (talk) 10:25, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
Keep Enough sources to meet GNG. -Djsasso (talk) 15:12, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 11:03, 9 March 2021 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

Sevim GözayEdit

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

BRPever has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: An article about Turkish author and journalist, but I couldn't find many secondary reliable sources upon search. The ones I came across were either primary (social media profiles and such) and few other sources which were not significant enough to make the individual notable. I looked into the articles on other wikis and there too the notability is questionable, so I think listing this article here for discussion would give the community the appropriate time to see if the person has sufficient coverage in sources in non-English languages or not. Thank you. BRP^ever 09:59, 2 March 2021 (UTC)

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

DiscussionEdit

Comment I've noticed that there are sources in Turkish that are not just mentions of Gözay. I am leaning keep, but I'm not quite sure if these sources I've found are reliable. —Belwine (talk) 10:05, 2 March 2021 (UTC)
Yes, this mention in Cumhuriyet is fairly reliable source imo. However, it does look more like a news, so I am not certain if we can be certain of notabilty based on that.-BRP^ever 10:20, 2 March 2021 (UTC)
Comment A lot of reliable sources have been published after her death: [1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6], [7], [8], [9], [10]. I'm unsure to Keep, as they are all published right after her death and some of the sources are parroting each other. All sources are about her background information and/or news of death. ~Styyx ^{Talk? ^-^} 13:00, 2 March 2021 (UTC)
Keep with so many apparently reliable sources covering her death, it seems likely she is notable. --IWI (talk) 10:42, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 09:59, 9 March 2021 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

Category:Caribbean womenEdit

Category:Caribbean women (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Auntof6 has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: It has been our practice not to categorize by gender without a particular reason to do so. I don't think categorizing by gender/region is necessary. However, if this category is kept, we would need the corresponding male category as well. Auntof6 (talk) 05:09, 2 March 2021 (UTC)

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

DiscussionEdit

Delete doesn't seem to be a reason to deviate from the status quo. We keep it simple here. --IWI (talk) 07:35, 2 March 2021 (UTC)
I do see a particular problem here: The Carribean is a group of islands in the Carribean Sea, and perhaps countries next to it. It might make sense to talk about Cuban women, as well as from any of these countries. Yes, I know, some of them are quite small (e.g Montserrat, an island of perhaps 10 by 20 km; half of which is uninhabitable after a volcano erupted, some years ago). Look at en:Candelaria Figueredo; she lived in the 19th century, in Cuba, and had a prominent role in fighting against Spanish rule. If we find two others (yes, they do exist), we might create a category 'Cuban Women', 'women from Cuba' or similar. To sum it up: this category is unneeded; we might as well talk about 'European Women', or 'Asian women'; except that an European looks slightly different from an Asian, there really is no reason for such categories (by gender), as they are too broad. In short: delete (and re-classify its current entries appropriately). --Eptalon (talk) 10:49, 2 March 2021 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 05:09, 9 March 2021 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

Category:Venezuelan womenEdit

Category:Venezuelan women (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Auntof6 has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: It has been our practice not to categorize by gender without a particular reason to do so. I don't think categorizing by gender and nationality is necessary. However, if this category is kept, we would need the corresponding male category as well. Auntof6 (talk) 05:06, 2 March 2021 (UTC)

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

DiscussionEdit

Delete there doesn't seem to be a reason to deviate from the status quo. We keep it simple here. --IWI (talk) 11:58, 2 March 2021 (UTC)
Looking at the parent category, there are 15 pages; another 4 of them women. As was pointed ot elsewhere, being a woman is not a reasonable distinguishing feature, when talking aobut nationality. I would therefore propose we don't do it; if the parent category becomes too large (that is: we re-add the 3-4 current entries to the parent), it would probably be better to split by occupation, or by era, rather than sex. Note that this argument probably doesn't always hold; I'd expect a category 'Female nobel prize winners' to be much smaller than 'Male nobel prize winners'. Anyway: delete, and re-merge entries into parent category. --Eptalon (talk) 22:40, 2 March 2021 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 05:06, 9 March 2021 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

T.M.R.P.K. TennakoonEdit

T.M.R.P.K. Tennakoon (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Gotanda has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Not notable. Recreation of previous QD, so now up for RfD. Gotanda (talk) 23:48, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

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

DiscussionEdit

Delete fails GNG. Clearly any sources that are there are related, given that they have an identical title. --IWI (talk) 11:59, 2 March 2021 (UTC)
Delete. Not at all notable, and claims unsupported by appropriate independent sources. Definitely not a county-level cricketer, IMO as a former Middlesex CCC member. Just a slovenly promotion of a not notable person. Macdonald-ross (talk) 10:31, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 23:48, 8 March 2021 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

Hari Om SrivastavaEdit

Hari Om Srivastava (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Belwine has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Does not appear to be notable, fails the general notability guideline. —Belwine (talk) 17:04, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

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

DiscussionEdit

Comment This person may be notable because they are head of the World Development Foundation. I found one source: [11] This person has a Wikidata entry but no other Wikipedia entries. Darkfrog24 (talk) 20:14, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
Comment see the consensus on enwiki here —Belwine (talk) 21:42, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
Delete nothing indicates they meet any of the points at en:WP:NACADEMIC, and they fail WP:GNG also. I'll also add that it doesn’t appear they are the president of the WDF looking here. The source provided above appears to be a self-written bio. Either way, this RfD indicates this wouldn’t make him notable anyway. --IWI (talk) 10:28, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
Delete as not notable. Macdonald-ross (talk) 11:50, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 17:04, 8 March 2021 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

Three's Company (2009 TV series)Edit

Three's Company (2009 TV series) (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Darkfrog24 has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: A cursory search produced sources for the 1970s TV show and for an upcoming movie but none for a 2009 TV show. I would QD but it's possible the sources are in French or something and this matter can be cleared up. Darkfrog24 (talk) 13:20, 1 March 2021 (UTC) Darkfrog24 (talk) 13:20, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

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

DiscussionEdit

This request is due to close on 13:20, 8 March 2021 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

Kevin KaliherEdit

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

Djsasso has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Could not find any sources on him. Does not appear to meet WP:GNG. Djsasso (talk) 12:37, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

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

DiscussionEdit

This request is due to close on 12:37, 8 March 2021 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

Thomas ChaseEdit

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

Djsasso has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Unable to find any sources on him. Doesn't appear to meet WP:GNG. Djsasso (talk) 12:35, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

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

DiscussionEdit

This request is due to close on 12:35, 8 March 2021 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

Jessica BorutskiEdit

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

Djsasso has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Can't find any references for them. Fails WP:GNG. Djsasso (talk) 12:29, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

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

DiscussionEdit

Delete Couldn't find any reliable sources. She doesn't have an article on enwiki or any other wiki either. IMDb is not a reliable source. GhostDestroyer100 (talk) 17:50, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 12:29, 8 March 2021 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

Yuki HeEdit

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

Camouflaged Mirage has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Was queried about my views about this person on Talk:Yuki_He. I will say this person created a platform called live.me. Apparently quite big on China. But as notablity isn't inherited, the platform might be notable, the person isn't. I don't see any sources that seems notable. Seeking ideas from community. Note: Not as a deletion reason, but no enwp and even zhwp page, what we do have is a Baidu Baike page but that is also very CV-ish. Propose delete? Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 18:32, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

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

DiscussionEdit

This request is due to close on 18:32, 7 March 2021 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

DWOB-AMEdit

DWOB-AM (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

ImprovedWikiImprovment has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Appears to fail en:WP:NRADIO, given that it has not yet broadcast. Couldn't find coverage that could allow it to meet WP:GNG either. --IWI (talk) 13:30, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

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

DiscussionEdit

Merge: I would say merge into its sister radio station if that page has been created (i.e. "Sister stations – It's up to the editors' judgement or a community consensus whether "sister" radio and TV stations under the same branding should be merged to single articles." The NRADIO has various criteria on how it can be edited. One states a proposed station can be listed if a launch date from a reliable source is listed. I do not see such a source in the article, however, I do see it was acquired by a page in which we do have Audiovisual Communicators. It is already listed under the parent company. PS I do not know the code for voting merge. PotsdamLamb (talk) 04:27, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 13:30, 7 March 2021 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

ACI News Radio TarlacEdit

ACI News Radio Tarlac (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

ImprovedWikiImprovment has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Appears to fail en:WP:NRADIO, given that it has not yet broadcast. Couldn't find coverage that could allow it to meet WP:GNG either. --IWI (talk) 13:00, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

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

DiscussionEdit

Delete In my opinion, it could have been quickly deleted under A4, as it doesn't claim notability, it is just a radio station that has not even started broadcasting yet.
Anyway, when searching up, I can only see social media and Fandom, nothing that shows notability, so fails WP:GNG. —Belwine (talk) 13:10, 28 February 2021 (UTC)
I thought the claim of being a fairly large radio station owned by Audiovisual Communicators made it significant enough that A4 couldn't apply. Just because it hasn't broadcast yet, doesn't mean it isn't notable. If it said something like "will be a pirate station from john doe's basement", that would be closer to A4. Remember, A4 is not about notability, it is about whether it is significant. It might not claim to meet NRADIO, but that is not relevant. --IWI (talk) 13:29, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

A4 is only about saying why something is significant, the claim doesn't actually have to make something notable. This is a common pitfall that unfortunately many people fall into even some admins. Even IWIs example of a pirate station would be a credible claim because many pirate stations are notable. A4 is to delete articles that literally say something like: "Joe is a soccer player." which doesn't at all show any significance as 5 year olds play soccer. An example of a similar sentence that would pass A4 is "Joe is a professional soccer player." because many professional soccer players are notable. -Djsasso (talk) 15:02, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
Yeah like I said it is closer to A4. The bar for passing the criterion is deliberately low to avoid inadvertently deleting a notable topic. --IWI (talk) 11:24, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

Delete Agreed. Since it is listed in the owner's list but no substantial broadcasting history to speak off. PotsdamLamb (talk) 04:31, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 13:00, 7 March 2021 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

Richard DeereEdit

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

37.111.193.207 has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Somone added speedy tag on the article I wrote. Checking if admins keep it or delete. I will accept admin's consideration. I just added him on wiki just because of his book. So hopefully the book will be reviewed by admins. Thank you so much 37.111.193.207 (talk) 18:47, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

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

DiscussionEdit

Delete. No independent sources for notability. Ad-oriented. Macdonald-ross (talk) 18:59, 25 February 2021 (UTC)
but bro he has a book already. I've seen several authors has wiki page --37.111.193.207 (talk) 19:05, 25 February 2021 (UTC)
Delete. The article seems like a hoax to me. There is no article on him on enwiki and no reliable links that gives the article a NPOV. --Cuddles9999 • 💬 • 📜 15:39, 26 February 2021 (UTC)
Having a book in the 21st century does not make you notable. Basically anyone can publish a book nowadays. Also, I can't find any reliable sources that are attached to the article. Absolutely nothing related comes up when I search. This is a pretty easy Delete. —Belwine (talk) 15:44, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 18:47, ~~4 March 2021~~ (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

New end date: 7 March 2021 (Not listed on RfD page)--Eptalon (talk) 17:54, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

NationalmusiqEdit

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

Eptalon has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Article has been created and quick-deleted a few times now. So rather than another round of quick deletions, I propose we discuss this: Suibject in question is in his late teens (17 or so), and seems to have released a few singles. We also get some references. Personally, I think we should delete this (also because of the age of the artist). Other opinions? Eptalon (talk) 20:39, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

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

DiscussionEdit

Hey dear am so excited to talk about this artist i understand what you are saying about Nationalmusiq but i think he deserve the article as a Artist he did give you refences i think you should give him a chances cause he is a musician that is well known he is 16 years of age and have couple hit songs he didnt show any harmful or hateful information i think as a user that love Wikipedia so much i say leave the article on here i read it and its really interesting and deleting his article wont solve any thing this would make some is fans mad at wikipedia cause persons wanna read about him and this article is interesting about Nationalmusiq please as a user and a fan of this kid give him a chance his music are really great please i hope you understand and give him a chance — Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.13.242.207 (talk • contribs) 20:53, 27 February 2021 (UTC)
@204.13.242.207: There are no reliable, secondary sources that even mention the artist, let alone talking about him in detail. —Belwine (talk) 21:08, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

Delete Absolutely not notable, and does not claim to be either. —Belwine (talk) 20:58, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

*Omg I herd this article is gonna get deleted thats so sad cause this is one of my favorite artist i say please give him a chance please dont delete this cause i read this article i i have been on wikipedia over 6 years now and this article about Nationalmusiq is instresting so please dont delete it ill say you let this article slip through for the views and the users of wikipedia — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sammykingstown (talk • contribs) 21:09, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

Strike out as user is a confirmed check user sock puppet PotsdamLamb (talk) 04:39, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

@Sammykingstown: Do you have any connection to Nationalmusiq? Also, you have literally just signed up for an account, so I seriously doubt that you have been on Wikipedia for six years. —Belwine (talk) 21:14, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

*i understand what you are saying about the article the artist is a muisical artist from sant vincent and i check his name on all social media sites to see if this article deserve deletion and i think it doesnt cause he have a pretty good fanbased on tiktok , instagram and audiomack and also . i dont see a reason for deletion of this i understand what you are saying about the article but this songs like facts in the written article — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sammykingstown (talk • contribs) 21:14, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

Strike out as user is a confirmed check user sock puppet PotsdamLamb (talk) 04:39, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

Social media followers don't matter in a request for deletion. Also, please sign your posts using ~~~~ —Belwine (talk) 21:15, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

Delete Per other comments. Not notable --Tsugaru Let's Talk! :) 🍁 21:16, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

okay say your were in Nationalmusiq position and Nationalmusiq was in yours and it was your article he would never delete he would of tell you some more information is need i know him cause he is one of my client that is sign to my label — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sammykingstown (talk • contribs) 21:33, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

Strike out as user is a confirmed check user sock puppet PotsdamLamb (talk) 04:39, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

@Sammykingstown: So basically, you have a conflict of interest? Please read WP:COI.
Also, if I was in Nationalmusiq's position, I wouldn't have created a Wikipedia article in the first place, I would have paid for promotion elsewhere. Also, please sign your messages with ~~~~ —Belwine (talk) 21:36, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

@belwine i have been on wikipedia for 6 years of cource but just mean i didnt sign up for 6 years i now sign up to talk about this situation and this article shouldnt be deleted trust me cause is an artist called Nationalmusiq a 16 years old singer and songwritter from sain vincent if you let him on wikipedia he would be the first artist from saint vincent on wikipedia and that will make his country proud of him — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sammykingstown (talk • contribs) 21:38, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

Strike out as user is a confirmed check user sock puppet PotsdamLamb (talk) 04:39, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

That isn't a reason to keep the article. See WP:GNG - Nationalmusiq fails this. If an article fails the general notability guideline, it can not be on Wikipedia. Again, please sign your messages with ~~~~ - it makes communication much easier. —Belwine (talk) 21:40, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

*okay i understand but can you aleast dont delete it so he can add more information or editiors who know about him fix it up please — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sammykingstown (talk • contribs) 21:47, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

Strike out as user is a confirmed check user sock puppet PotsdamLamb (talk) 04:39, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

If it's not notable, the article gets deleted. It doesn't matter if the article is amazing, or it needs to be improved, subjects need to meet notability requirements if they're going to have a page on Wikipedia. Best, —Belwine (talk) 21:49, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

~~okay so what are your suggestion for him to do to be on wikipedia — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sammykingstown (talk • contribs) 21:56, 27 February 2021 (UTC)~~

Strike out as user is a confirmed check user sock puppet PotsdamLamb (talk) 04:39, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

Reliable, secondary sources would have to publish articles about him for Nationmusiq to meet the general notability guideline. —Belwine (talk) 21:57, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

~~Do you work at wikipedia — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sammykingstown (talk • contribs) 22:03, 27 February 2021 (UTC)~~

Strike out as user is a confirmed check user sock puppet PotsdamLamb (talk) 04:39, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

I already answered this question on my talk page so to put it simply, no, I don't work for the Wikimedia Foundation. —Belwine (talk) 22:08, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

there some great am a new user here i am gonna sign up i saw persons posting this aticle on twitter and ig stories with said emojis wondering what is going on and when i read the article is songs fine but fine is not the thing if any of Nationalmusiq haters come in the descussion chat i guess they would say things just to get it delete

Strike out as user is a confirmed check user sock puppet PotsdamLamb (talk) 04:39, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

Delete Clearly not notable. --Hellothere4 (talk) 23:04, 27 February 2021 (UTC)
Delete fails all points of en:WP:NMUSICBIO with no reliable, independent coverage. I'll also add that "it's not notable/it's notable" (or indeed no comment at all) arguments do not hold much weight, and it would be helpful if it was explained how one came to that conclusion. --IWI (talk) 12:46, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 20:39, 6 March 2021 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

Maka BochorishviliEdit

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

Eptalon has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: A qzuick search on google essentially shows social media, on the first few pages of results. Yes, Mrs Bochorishvili may be a politician, or a member of parliament, or even a diplomat. Given the search results, I do however not see in what way she might be notable. I would therefore propose we delete this. Keep or delete? Eptalon (talk) 19:56, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

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

DiscussionEdit

Keep She is only member since 2020 but you can found 92 100 results in Google if you will search in Georgian--ჯეო (talk) 19:58, 27 February 2021 (UTC)
Keep passes en:WP:NPOL as she has held national office. --IWI (talk) 19:59, 27 February 2021 (UTC)
Keep Passes NPOL. -Djsasso (talk) 14:54, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 19:56, 6 March 2021 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

List of Afghan players playing in Eurasian clubsEdit

List of Afghan players playing in Eurasian clubs (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

ShadowBallX has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Most players on the list fail NFOOTY, with a decent amount of hoax information. Was debating QD, but I think an RfD is better ShadowBallX (talk) 19:50, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

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

DiscussionEdit

Delete. As a list, it cannot be trusted. In the first place, the language is incoherent, so what is meant is not clear. In the second place, the list is unsourced, so the claims are moot. We can't keep unsourced lists. Macdonald-ross (talk) 10:42, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
Delete I took a look at a random one and no it is not true. The rest probably aren't either. --Hellothere4 (talk) 10:48, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 19:50, 5 March 2021 (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. Redirected to duplicate page, no discussion really needed here. --Auntof6 (talk) 20:48, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

Phi Beta Kappa SocietyEdit

Phi Beta Kappa Society (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

5a5ha seven has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: duplicate of Phi Beta Kappa 5a5ha seven (talk) 20:31, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

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

DiscussionEdit

This request is due to close on 20:31, 12 March 2021 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

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

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

The outcome of this request for deletion was to Keep. Speedy kept per SNOW. --IWI (talk) 11:28, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

13Edit

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

Cuddles9999 has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: The content has nothing to do with the title. In addition it does not make sense. Cuddles9999 • 💬 • 📜 16:25, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

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

DiscussionEdit

Speedy Keep - Please check page history before making requests, as the content used to be related, but the page got changed to something completely unrelated. —Belwine (talk) 16:38, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 16:25, 11 March 2021 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

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

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

The outcome of this request for deletion was to Delete. --Auntof6 (talk) 11:26, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

Rob StevenhagenEdit

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

Djsasso has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Does not appear to be a notable animator. Can't find anything in depth on them. Djsasso (talk) 16:17, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

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

DiscussionEdit

Delete I agree with Djsasso and believe that the article is filled with falsehoods, and I don’t think there are reliable sources to back up the information in the article. --Edward (talk) 06:03, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

Comment I can find no detailed biographical information on this person in reliable sources apart from this brief write-up in the entertainment section of Le Figaro. However, he has reasonable body of work listed at the British Film Institute [12]. His directorial debut in The Tale of Despereaux (2008) has received multiple reviews and was nominated for several awards [13]. The Emmy awards listed in the article for some of his other films are not the main Emmys, but those awarded by the New York Regional Chapter of the Academy of Television Arts & Sciences (called "New York Emmys"). Given the scarcity of reliable biographical information, it's hard to make a case for a stand-alone article. Voceditenore (talk) 11:03, 2 March 2021 (UTC)

Delete Cannot find anything that covers him in detail, so fails WP:GNG. —Belwine (talk) 11:15, 2 March 2021 (UTC)
Delete per what I said last time. --IWI (talk) 11:56, 2 March 2021 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 16:17, 4 March 2021 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

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

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

The outcome of this request for deletion was to Delete. --Auntof6 (talk) 11:25, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

Peter HarrisEdit

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

つがる has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Doesn't seem to meet the requirements for a Wikipedia page at this time, We get Some results on Google. also Mentioned on ENWP, but the article does not exist. Tsugaru Let's Talk! :) 🍁 02:10, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

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

DiscussionEdit

Delete Doesn't appear to have the significant contributions required to meet en:WP:NDIRECTOR. It is also untrue that he won two emmys, but he was nominated for one in 1978. --IWI (talk) 11:03, 25 February 2021 (UTC)
Delete Can't find any reliable, related sources. —Belwine (talk) 19:06, 27 February 2021 (UTC)
Comment note that there is now currently a page on enwiki for him (en:Peter Harris (director)). ShadowBallX (talk) 02:01, 28 February 2021 (UTC)
Redirect to The Muppets.--Gordonrox24 | ^Talk 02:25, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 02:10, 4 March 2021 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

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

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

The outcome of this request for deletion was to Delete. --Auntof6 (talk) 11:23, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

Amber MartinezEdit

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

Eptalon has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Contested quick deletion, of this article which also seems to be present in Spanish (here) and Turish language (here) Wikipedias as well. I habven't compared the references, but except for the filmography/works section (which we don't have), the three wiki pages look pretty similar. Searching on google, I essentially find social media. Since this request is contested, I bring it to RfD, and I invite all involved to present their arguments. Thoughts? Eptalon (talk) 23:39, 22 February 2021 (UTC)

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

DiscussionEdit

Keep - Real notable actress, not spam, malformed deletion request. Proof: https://www.wdfxfox34.com/story/43076387/exclusive-interview-with-amber-martinez, https://www.tvovermind.com/amber-martinez-2/, https://ventsmagazine.com/2020/12/15/amber-martinez-river-boyd-and-1onder-to-release-a-new-holiday-music-song-at-christmas-concert/, https://www.wboc.com/story/43141011/amber-martinez-billy-davis-jr-marilyn-mccoo-and-grammy-artists-featured-on-kroj-1015-fm-holiday-concert, https://www.blu-ray.com/Amber-Martinez/833312/, https://cpcnewstoday.com/archives/18505, https://eonlinesrilanka.com/amber-martinez-announced-as-judge-of-the-2021-asian-film-festival/?fbclid=IwAR30T5UBvmHQ3LvC_RVFMNK3lv4tuF-mYlxBDfTAPp9dDSUYgV9kJKfAh1M, https://musiclegends.ca/amber-martinez-interview/, https://ventsmagazine.com/2020/11/29/amber-martinez-josh-moreland-and-rebecca-holden-attend-chinese-billionaire-ma-xiaoqius-book-launch/, https://www.timebulletin.com/amber-martinez-cast-with-nicholas-brendon-carlos-ramirez-and-felissa-rose-in-christmas-slasher/, https://elucidmagazine.com/index.php/feature/amber-martinez, https://nerdalertnews.net/getting-to-know-amber-martinez/, https://www.gruemonkey.com/2021/02/15/gruemonkey-interviews-amber-martinez-wanda-vision/, https://www.stitcher.com/show/be-more-super-the-podcast/episode/amber-martinez-joins-us-to-chat-about-her-latest-role-on-marvels-wandavision-80719895— Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1012:B024:BA1C:8983:1994:4D88:93DE (talk • contribs) 23:31, 22 February 2021 (UTC)
Delete Delete, just googled her all that came up was IMDb and a few other sources and this wiki was the second result. Not notable. --Hellothere4 (talk) 23:46, 22 February 2021 (UTC)
Comment as a creator of this article, firstly thank you from @Eptalon: for removing the speedy deletion tag, however from three of the articles which mentioned I just created two of them and it can't be spam when both have a few weeks delay for creating another one and after reviewed first by patroller on the wiki, secondly better to focus on sources which I added in the article also her career which is fully written in the Turkish version of her Wikipedia, I'm patroller on Turkish Wikipedia and in my opinion, this article was ok to create, finally thank you from all and hope to vote with open eyes. Empire990 (talk) 00:03, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
Delete fails en:WP:NACTOR and WP:GNG. --IWI (talk) 07:57, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
Delete I don’t see any of the references being valued news stories really. I’m sure it also fails en:wp:NACTOR PotsdamLamb (talk) 08:22, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
~~Keep~~ -talk PotsdamLamb user only 1 month old Wikipedia user account, very little experience user and only offers his opinion on valid sources...IWI - User IWI's comment is not supported and invalid, there is no proof offered to contradict the valid news articles/publications and work history of the actress, and other than his opinion. There are valid Wikipedia articles containing the SAG-AFTRA and SCL Union member actress's work, the actress is Notable and is in over 68 confirmed Movie and TV Show Credits on IMDb, is listed by Amazon Prime Actors as an official actress, is listed on Blu-ray.com as an official actress of SONY, has an entire album devoted to her on Getty Images as a celebrity, the news articles and references are all valid. Passes NActor and GNG definitely. Also she has an Google Search Panel under "amber martinez actress" and in other areas. There are also many articles on the full Wikipedia, that the Actress is listed in for having acted in. She is also currently acting in Marvel's WandaVision in Episodes 6&7. Also, from what I can tell, she has been acting on television since 1998 and in films since 2008. Definitely passes GNG and NActor. In addition, full credit listing has been added to the page and additional valid sources have been added too. Also, the various Wikipedia pages referenced above and in the AFD citing are all created by different Wikipedia Users. These articles are not Spam at all. This is truly a Malformed AFD and should be cancelled. The Page Should Stay. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1012:b00b:7370:e433:9c4d:8c1e:b51 (talk • contribs)

Comment IP User: First off, please sign your comments by adding ~~~~ to the end of your statements. Secondly, we are discussing the article, not the editors. This account is new on simple Wikipedia, however, I have been on Wikipedia for almost 1 year. IWI has been here since December 2018 and has patrolling rights. So let's not attack editors, please. When an article is created, especially a WP:BLP we have to use reliable sources. Almost all of the sources you listed above are not reliable sources. IMDB is user-created content (just like Wikipedia); on Amazon, anyone can sell anything on it which means anything can also be said as Amazon does not monitor it's sellers. PotsdamLamb (talk) 19:07, 23 February 2021 (UTC)

Well, they fail NACTOR because they simply do not meet any of the three points. They have not had multiple significant roles. --IWI (talk) 19:23, 23 February 2021 (UTC)

Struck multiple vote. -Djsasso (talk) 18:09, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

Comment PotsdamLamb - She is listed by Amazon (the multibillion dollar company directly as an Actress on their Amazon Prime Movies Database, their Search Engine, Their Digital TV Platform), she doesn't have a separate account to "sell anything" like you referenced. So, I think that should be known. She is listed as a Professional Actress by a Multibillion Dollar Company, on their Professional Company Databases. Not a seller account. You should reference the data. IMDb is not like Wikipedia, not just anyone can make edits (therefore not like Wikipedia). User IWI - IMI - She does pass NActor, she has had multiple lead roles, including Television Hosting, and has done over 60 productions. And she does meet all of the 3 points. She is also a SAG-AFTRA and SCL Union Member and the only one professionally allowed to be known publicly by her Screenname "Amber Martinez". I referenced the entertainemnt and Union laws, and I just looked at the qualifications on Wikipedia. And a film that she acted in, won the 2017 Screamfest LA "BEST Comedy Horror" award for Dead Ant. She has also, from my search, attended the Festival de Cannes for multiple years, as an actress and producer. She has even had films in the Festival de Cannes as well. Definitely passes GNG and NActor. News articles and sources all valid. - Page should stay. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1012:b00b:7370:e433:9c4d:8c1e:b51 (talk • contribs) 20:23, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
Anyone can make edits on IMDb, anyone can make edits if they register for an account.
Also, none of the sources above was reliable. —Belwine (talk) 20:27, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
Delete Fails WP:GNG. Massive en:WP:REFBOMB in the article too. —Belwine (talk) 20:29, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
Comment Belwine - There is no "massive Ref Bomb", like you are emplying in the article. The references all apply to the article and are all valid. The actress is highly well known, therefore there are many supporting valid news sources, that apply to the article. Definitely passes GNG...These are definitely legitimate listed sources in the article. Also, another User (note we have different IP addresses) at the top of this AFD page, lists even more verifiable and valid news sources. To my knowledge, FOX34 News, CBS, NBC, E! News, CPC News, and others listed above qualify as legitimate sources...

None of those sources are listed above, apart from CPC News, which is just a brief mention. All of these references are just mention her, but they are not all about her. —Belwine (talk) 08:15, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

Comment IP user, the definition of significant in this context is a major role within the entertainment industry. Every single one of her roles she was an extra. That does not qualify as significant therefore it fails. This is also not an attempt to short circuit the conversation but I think we should go ahead delete the article and close this discussion as it fails all criteria and the consensus is delete. Also note how they said above “note we have different IP addresses” is a red flag. PotsdamLamb (talk) 21:58, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
@PotsdamLamb: This request is due to close on the 1 March. There is no compelling reason to close this early, and it would be premature to determine consensus after just two days. And yes, the closing admin will take into account that the anonymous comments likely come from the same person. --IWI (talk) 09:00, 24 February 2021 (UTC)
@ImprovedWikiImprovement: Since the IP user has no vote in these per 5.6 above, and the six delete votes (counting the nominator), this is pretty much a Snowball. Plus an admin may close it early at their discretion and I can ask for that to be considered. Thanks! PotsdamLamb (talk) 17:55, 24 February 2021 (UTC)
It is very much possible this will be kept. Perhaps references will be provided. Not a snowball situation. --IWI (talk) 06:56, 25 February 2021 (UTC)
~~Keep~~ ATTN ADMINS Reference: PotsdamLamb PotsdamLamb - Those statements are nonfactual, she has had many lead roles and has even professionally hosted TV Programs. Do you know this actress personally? How can you claim "Every single one of her roles she was an extra."? That's an nonfactual statement. Even looking at her professional IMDb and with other professional accessible references, I can prove and see that is not true. You can't claim that, you have no evidence of that at all. In fact, all the evidence proves completely the opposite, and you are providing deliberate false misinformation, in regards to the AFD and the actress's article. In addition, all the valid sources and news articles, and obvious numerous IMDb credits, and professional database references, prove otherwise. She has already been verified on numerous multiple platforms as being a valid actress and legally attached to all the projects through the professional Actor's Guild of SAG-AFTRA and numerous news sources. In addition, the blatant fact, that you have claimed to have been on Wikipedia for almost a year, but your profile says it was created in Mid-January of this year and your User profile states that it was formed just over 1 month ago. Sounds like you have multiple User profiles and that goes against Wikipedia user policies. The news sources, articles, and the actresses career are valid. Pass both GNG and NActor. I don't agree with anything you say, as there is no evidence to support your allegations to the actress and the article regarding her. The Page Should Stay. It passes GNG and NActor. There seems to be deliberate "bad faith" actions occurring in the AFD discussion. I feel bad for this professional actress, seems like Cyberbullying occurring. I looked at the history of these pages referenced, they were patrolled, approved, and added as verified to Wikipedia some months ago and this one 1 month ago. The page clearly meets GNG and NActor or it wouldn't have been approved in the first place. And it was already approved, passed GNG and NActor. Page Should Stay. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1012:b00b:7370:5568:f09d:8007:a1ae (talk • contribs)

Pages don't get "approved" here. We do not have an RfC process like enwiki do. Also, the page did not get patrolled.
So it was not, in any means, approved in the first place, and the page does not appear to meet notability requirements. That is why the page has been sent to RfD, it does not appear to be notable. —Belwine (talk) 08:15, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

Struck multiple vote. -Djsasso (talk) 18:09, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

Comment IP User - I have placed a warning on your talk page for once again violating WP:CIVIL. Also, if you look at my user page it states very clearly I have another account of which I no longer use and all admins on SEWP are aware of said account. Therefore, I am not doing anything wrong nor violating any policies. PotsdamLamb (talk) 01:42, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

Delete. Let's dig through the references.

Reference 1, from Heraldgoa mentions the subject twice. In passing, it notes that she is an actress, gave out an award, and wore a dress. So this proves she exists, but doesn't say why she is notable.
The 2nd source tells us that the subject has been cast in Madness in the Method. Her role isn't mentioned in the source, however it is listed elsewhere as "Bikini girl". Not exactly a notable role in the film.
The 3rd source is to Metacritic, and basically has no information.
Source 4 is an interview in an odd Wordpress music blog where the subject talks about an upcoming album that I don't see any other info on, and goes onto such topics as "a day in the life of". None of this shows notability.
Source 5 is a magazine. Without buying a subscription, it's hard to say what the subject's involvement in that is. However, it doesn't seem relevant to the sentence in the article it is supposed to be supporting, which is about her acting roles.
Source 6 mentions the subject once in passing, saying she attended an event. That doesn't tell me anything about her, doesn't support the sentence in the article, and doesn't show notability.
Source 7 is once again an interview style of mention, however the topic of the interview the subject gives is somebody else. Once again, not really telling us anything concrete about the subject or why she is notable.
Source 8 dives into her casting in Wandavision. I got a little excited that maybe we had something here, however the interview quickly informs us that the subject was cast as a Hula Hooper. This about seals the deal for me. This isn't a notable role, and an interview about it doesn't display notability. Source 9 is more of the same.
Source 10, another interview. Starting out with the hard hitting question "Q: Do you celebrate Valentine’s Day? A: If I have a date, yes." and not getting much more in depth on any substance.
Source 11 spammed me with popups so I didn't go any further, however I can't be led to believe it is a reputable source after the welcome I received.
Sources 12-14 contain cast lists that simply prove she exists, but don't have any actual content to say why the subject would be notable.
Finally, source 15 is another interview. A podcast in this case. This of course isn't a reliable third party source.

So that's a pretty quick run down of what we've got here, and I'm not seeing anything out there that meaningfully improves that situation. This is a delete.--Gordonrox24 | ^Talk 02:01, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

Gordon, on 11, you could have had a worse welcome. Think malware, viruses, etc. I don't even get to the pop-up pages, once my computer detects it, the page gets frozen and a replacement page pops up :) (PS Your signature is really hard to read) PotsdamLamb (talk) 02:33, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

Comment The first keep and the other keeps with an IPv6 are the same user. Wording, refs, and arguments are nearly identical. Therefore those keep votes (and since they are IP users) are invalid giving us consensus to delete. Possibly salt too.PotsdamLamb (talk) 04:18, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

You are reading that sentence wrong. IPs can have a vote. It is just saying editors using multiple accounts and ips will have the extra votes ignored. They still get their original vote. -Djsasso (talk) 18:54, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

~~Keep~~ The definition of Notability for Actor:1. had significant numbers of roles in multiple notable films, television shows, stage performances, or other productions. 2. Has a large fan base or significant cult following, 3. Has made unique, prolific, or innovative contributions to a field of Entertainment, 4. Significant independent media coverage. Let's break it down: 1. The actress has had significant roles in multiple notable movies and television shows, she has been a TV Host for multiple television channels, she has been on multiple notable television shows, she has been on screen in films/tv shows with Ed Asner, Jason Mewes, kevin Smith, Helen Reddy, Scarlett Johansson, Lucy Liu, Jessica Alba, Malcolm McDowell, Nicholas Hoult, Kristen Ritter, Mark Rydell, and others, 2. Her instagram fan base is over 58k followers, and she has an additional 25k on other platforms, 3. She was made an official judge of the 2021 Asian Film Festival (you can Google that) and a film that she acted in with Sean Astin, "Dead Ant", won the 2017 Screamfest LA "BEST Horror Comedy" Award, she was also Ms. North America United Nations 2015, and Ms.United Nations Globe 2016 (look up "World Class Beauty Queens Magazine Amber Martinez" - https://www.magcloud.com/browse/issue/1315994), she has had films in the Festival de Cannes multiple times, 4. She has over 260 valid media sources and links to articles published located on the external links list connected to her IMDb in addition to the ones provided on here (check this for more source references: https://www.imdb.com/name/nm3276688/externalsites?ref_=nm_pdt_osites_sm#official) she has her own Google knowledge Panel look up "amber martinez actress", has her own celebrity photo gallery in "Entertainment" on Getty Images, She has been in News articles for FOX, CBS, NBC, and other valid outlets, she also has been officially recognized by the press outlets as a celebrity since 7-14-2010 according to celebrity photo hosting sites as well, and she was a special skills circus performer in WandaVision for 2 episodes, and her latest gig is working on Mindy Kaling's new series "The Sex Lives of College Girls"...She more than passes GNG and NActor notability qualifications. - This Page should stay, according to the Notability Qualifications, she's qualified...Instead of deleting a valid page (deletion of a page about a known public figure), why don't you guys just improve the page by adding any number of sources connected to her IMDb? She also has multiple films that she worked on, that have Wikipedia pages (that have been built out, and one even for almost 10 years) and they list her as an actress...This is definitely a malformed AFD...Passes GNG and NActor. Just giving some obvious proof that's the actress is definitely Notable and Passes, according to all the guidelines...Sorry for the long reply, I just don't agree with deletion at all whatsoever, too much proof that she's definitely Notable and has been for years...Signed, a happy Entertainment Librarian... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2603:8000:c103:de53:9d0:352c:e70d:977d (talk • contribs)

Struck multiple vote. -Djsasso (talk) 18:09, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

* Keep - I read all the information on this actress's page and did research. Passes GNG and NActor. Also don't know why most the votes "Keep" are struck...The strikes seem unjustified. Looked and they are different IP users. And earlier it was mentioned that IP users can't vote, but that's not true.- Tom Blocked as using multiple IPs to vote. -Djsasso (talk) 20:45, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

~~Keep~~ - Hey dudes, passes GNG and NActor. Lots of proof in this feed. Keep. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1012:b01e:fa27:d4b9:e756:55f1:920c (talk • contribs)

IP user voting multiple times, please only one vote per editor --Eptalon (talk) 22:01, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

Comment Anonymous editor, Wikipedia articles are about what is reported in reliable sources. We have a neutral point of view. This is a verifiable encyclopedia where articles are published, but need to include reliable sources or citations to back up claims or information you think is true. When published, articles need to be patrolled, but if not patrolled or have no sources included, they will be requested for deletion. EdwardTremethick2 Talk 22:38, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

If the article is not patrolled, it doesn't have to be requested for deletion. It's not like "it doesn't get patrolled so it doesn't get to stay without an RfD", there need to be other reasons for an RfD, like not being notable. —Belwine (talk) 11:18, 2 March 2021 (UTC)

~~Keep~~ - Hi, I vote to keep because the actress is definitely notable and meets the guidelines...User:EdwardTremethick2, his account was created only 2 days ago (around the same time this AFD was created), just pointing that out. And User: PotsdamLamb account was created 1 month ago and has 2 accounts. - Sam — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1012:b01e:fa27:d4b9:e756:55f1:920c (talk • contribs) 23:32, 24 February 2021 (UTC) Struck multiple vote. --IWI (talk) 07:03, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

At the end of the day, it is not really relevant when an account was created. RfDs aren't votes, so it is the argument that counts. So far in this RfD, I have seen nothing to suggest the subject of the article is notable.
I'd recommend focusing on finding reliable sources to prove the subject of this article is notable instead of just using account age as a reason for "voting" keep on multiple IPs. Focus on the content, not the editor. —Belwine (talk) 13:37, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

I know you mentioned the sites she is on, but we need reliable sources added to the article to back up the information you think is true. Wikipedia articles have to include reliable sources in order to back up information an editor thinks is true, not meet the criteria for deletion, meet the page policies and guidelines and be notable enough to be included here. EdwardTremethick2 Talk 06:04, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

Comment Along with this, we are talking about the article and the RfD, not the editors involved or talking about it. Thank you. EdwardTremethick2 Talk 18:36, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

delete per my analysis on the enwiki afd. These are all blackhat SEO sources, unreliable or press releases as a result of a massive PR campaign by the subject. No independent or indepth coverage. Praxidicae (talk) 14:33, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

Comment - Keep page, definitely passes GNG and NActor. Not Spam. Here are the results from my deep search: Actress has Google search engine panel under "amber martinez actress", "amber martinez celebrity", "amber martinez celebrity actress", "amber martinez celeb", "amber martinez actor", and Bing Panel under "amber martinez actress", verified public figure/actress/celebrity...Request for Delete is not supported. Important for Encylopedia.

Actress has over 260 external news and international movie data base source links connected to IMDb, reference here: https://www.imdb.com/name/nm3276688/externalsites?ref_=nm_pdt_osites_sm#official

Actress is also a verified actor in Disney + and Marvel's WandaVision:

https://nerdalertnews.net/getting-to-know-amber-martinez/ https://www.gruemonkey.com/2021/02/15/gruemonkey-interviews-amber-martinez-wanda-vision/ https://elucidmagazine.com/index.php/feature/amber-martinez https://tellusepisode.net/wandavision-season-1-opening-on-disney-at-january-15-2021.html https://www.spielfilm.de/filme/3008548/wandavision/credits https://www.seriez.nl/series/wandavision/seizoen-1/aflevering-6 sources https://ww1.solarmovie.id/tv-series/wandavision-season-1/BwetCXHr/HMuQ3DTC/fKESRe3A-watch-online-free.html https://www.stitcher.com/show/be-more-super-the-podcast/episode/amber-martinez-joins-us-to-chat-about-her-latest-role-on-marvels-wandavision-80719895

Additional Sources to support:

https://musiclegends.ca/amber-martinez-interview/ https://www.magcloud.com/browse/issue/1315994 https://www.dreadcentral.com/news/255832/screamfest-l-2017-exclusive-opening-night-photos-video-interviews-dead-ants-ron-carlson-tom-arnold/ https://eonlinesrilanka.com/chinese-billionaire-ma-xiaoqius-new-book-launch-autumn-dialogues-attracts-celebrities-amber-martinez-rebecca-holden-and-singer-josh-moreland/?fbclid=IwAR2muHRI31Ozts5ZwvsYtQG6rKjb1ACrfobilJysx7gsXa_Z_cjTdIfFtek https://www.tvovermind.com/amber-martinez-2/ https://eonlinesrilanka.com/amber-martinez-announced-as-judge-of-the-2021-asian-film-festival/?fbclid=IwAR30T5UBvmHQ3LvC_RVFMNK3lv4tuF-mYlxBDfTAPp9dDSUYgV9kJKfAh1M https://ventsmagazine.com/2020/11/29/amber-martinez-josh-moreland-and-rebecca-holden-attend-chinese-billionaire-ma-xiaoqius-book-launch/ https://www.timebulletin.com/amber-martinez-cast-with-nicholas-brendon-carlos-ramirez-and-felissa-rose-in-christmas-slasher/ https://eonlinesrilanka.com/amber-martinez-billy-davis-jr-marilyn-mccoo-and-grammy-artists-featured-on-kroj-101-5-fm-holiday-concert/

CPC News - Amber Martinez actress opens up Hollywood Christmas Parade Article: https://cpcnewstoday.com/archives/18505

In addition, she is also verified as a professional actress by the multibillion dollar company Amazon and they made her an official Amazon Prime Video Actress profile.

Also, SONY Pictures Studios/Blue-ray.com have her listed as a verified and professional actress on their official company website too: https://www.blu-ray.com/Amber-Martinez/833312/

And tons of Celebrity Photos Websites list her as a celebrity too: Getty Images US and all International versions of Getty Images (search Entertainment Images then type in "Amber Martinez", Celebzz.com, hawtceleb.com, StarMax, TMZ, OhMyceleb.com, WENN.com, WireImage, PRPhotos, FilmMagic, Alamy, and others...

The actress also is listed as an official recording artist by Spotify (on their website through their Official company database), for her song "Take Me Now" that she did on the album HRX Vixens with HRX Records.

And there are tons of interview videos and podcasts about her all over the internet as well, in regards to her film projects, herself as an actress, and red carpet interviews.

There is no PR Campaign going on, that's no factual. This actress has never paid for anything, she's famous, and extremely well known. Terrible false allegations and not supported at all and zero evidence supporting such baseless allegations. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1012:B019:2159:6CDC:FAE:F607:3C42 (talk • contribs)

IP user voting multiple times, please only one vote per editor PotsdamLamb (talk) 04:24, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

None of these are reliable sources, and these are just mentions, not significant coverage. Please see en:WP:REFBOMB, it is more the quality of the references that counts (how reliable they are, whether they go into detail about the subject, etc.), not the quantity of them. Four reliable sources that cover someone in depth would be much better than 20 unreliable sources that just mention someone when the main focus of the article is on something else. —Belwine (talk) 11:15, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

Nobody on Wikipedia has filed “allegations”. We are not a government, but in order to contest the deletion, you need to add the sources to the article. Please sign your messages with ~~~~ so other editors can see who is talking. --Edward (talk) 21:28, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

~~Keep~~ Keep for sure. There are new sources added to the article (read edit history), I read em, deserves to be on here...Looks like her credits added to article too, so fixed. Sources from FOX34 News, E! News, Magazines, others, & movie databases. Many sources just about her. Plus Googled. Looked at EN Wiki - 4 articles listing her as an actress, The Employer, Maddness in the Method, & others. She is listed on IMDb, Blu-Ray, & databases as being a cast member of those films. So some of her films on EN Wiki, for years. Um, her name was deleted out of 2 of those 4 pgs by User: Praxidicae on 2/26/21 (preventing the admins & others from seeing the actress’s further notability verifications) check the edit history (from Maddness in the Method & The Employer EN Pgs). The actress is fully role credited, as being in those films. - Brad 2603:8000:C101:B340:EC75:EA5A:2E8C:9B78 (talk) 05:12, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

Struck multiple votes - please use one IP per editor. Also, note that the page on enwiki no longer exists as it was deleted as not notable. —Belwine (talk) 09:41, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

Delete. Notability not proven. Macdonald-ross (talk) 10:52, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 23:39, 1 March 2021 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

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

Related pagesEdit

All archives before July 2008 - implementation of new system made archives redundant
Category:Requests for deletion that did not succeed
Category:Requests for deletion that succeeded
Wikipedia:Deletion policy
Wikipedia:Quick deletion
Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion
Category:Deletion requests
Category:Quick deletion requests