Wikipedia:Requests for deletion

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

Before nominating: checks and alternatives

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 deletion

Put the deletion tag on the article.

1. Click "Change source" at the top of the page to be deleted.
2. In the edit box, add this tag: {{rfd|REASON}}. Put it at the top of the page, above the rest of the text. Then, replace the text "REASON" with a short reason why the page should be deleted. Do not be too specific here. You can add more details on the discussion page (see below).
   • It is a good idea to write a change summary to let others know what you are doing. You can say "nominating for deletion", "requesting deletion", or something like that.
3. Click "Save changes" at the bottom to save the page with the deletion tag at the top.
   • You can also check the "Watch this page" check box to add the page to your watchlist. This lets you know if the page for deletion has been changed. If the deletion tag is removed any time before the discussion is closed, it should be put back.

Create a discussion page.

1. If the deletion tag has been added to the page, a box should appear at the top of the article with a link saying "Click here to create a discussion page!" Click that link.
2. You should be taken to a page starting with "Creating Wikipedia:Requests for deletion/Requests/..." along with the current year and the name of the article to be deleted. In the edit box, the following tag should have already been added: {{RfD/Preload/Template}} . Replace the text PLACE REASON HERE with a more detailed reason why the page should be deleted.
   • It is helpful to include links to the various policy pages about Wikipedia (that begin with Wikipedia:). Here are some examples of this: "This article is [[Wikipedia:COMPLEX|not easy to understand]]" or "Not a [[Wikipedia:notable|notable]] topic''. This will make others more aware of why the page is not acceptable under Wikipedia's policies.
3. Click "Save changes" to save the new discussion page when you are done.
   • A change summary you can write for this page is "creating discussion page", "starting deletion discussion", or something like that.
   • As with the page for deletion, you can check the "Watch the page" box. This will let you know if someone else has replied to your discussion.

List it here

1. Copy the title of the discussion page to the clipboard. You can do this by dragging the mouse over the text from "Wikipedia" to the end of the page title to highlight it, then right-clicking and selecting "Copy".
2. Go to the list of deletion requests, and click "change source" beside the words "Current deletion request discussions".
3. At the top of the list of discussions, paste the title from the clipboard (right-click and select "Paste"). Add a pair of curly brackets before and after the title to make a template that will copy the content of the discussion page onto the main deletion page, like this:

   {{Wikipedia:Requests for deletion/Requests/2020/(name of page to be deleted)}}

4. Finally, click "Save changes" to add the discussion to the list. If the page saves successfully, you should see your deletion discussion at the top of the list. And that's it!

If this is too complicated for you, there are some gadgets like Twinkle that you can use. This allows you to do it faster.

Quick deletion

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 user

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.

Discussions

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.
• Requests for deletion is not a war zone. You can click here for more information, although it does not have simple english.

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 discussions

We Can Do It!

We Can Do It! (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Rathfelder has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Should be merged into Rosie the Riveter (or vice versa). Its the same subject. Rathfelder (talk) 22:26, 8 June 2023 (UTC)

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

Discussion

• Quick Keep Yes, Rosie the Reveter is featured on the We Can Do It! poster; however, the poster itself stands on its own notability and Rosie the Reveter is not solely known for the poster. They are closely related, but completely different and independently notable. Operator873 ^connect 22:32, 8 June 2023 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 22:26, 15 June 2023 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

Akash Sharma

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

Lights and freedom has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Some awards may be fake, subject lacks independent coverage. Lights and freedom (talk) 06:54, 8 June 2023 (UTC)

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

Discussion

 Delete per nominator, despite the work done by IP editors it still lacks independent coverage. - FusionSub (Talk page) (Contributions) 08:14, 9 June 2023 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 06:54, 15 June 2023 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

Saurav Kumar

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

Lights and freedom has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: References don't mention the subject. Content is mostly fake. Almost no independent coverage. Lights and freedom (talk) 06:53, 8 June 2023 (UTC)

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

Discussion

This request is due to close on 06:53, 15 June 2023 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

Template:2023 J1 League table

Template:2023 J1 League table (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete)

Template:2022–23 A-League Men table (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete)

Template:2021–23 A-League Men combined table for AFC Champions League (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Lights and freedom has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Unused, out of date, copied from enwiki by now blocked user Lights and freedom (talk) 00:07, 8 June 2023 (UTC)

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

Discussion

This request is due to close on 00:07, 15 June 2023 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

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. G5d by me. Clear pattern of sockpuppetry. Anyone except the sockmaster may contest this deletion— *Fehufangą ♮ ✉ Talk page 00:09, 8 June 2023 (UTC)

Amaro academy

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

Bobherry has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Notability Bobherry Talk My Changes 23:47, 7 June 2023 (UTC)

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

Discussion

This request is due to close on 23:47, 14 June 2023 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

---

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

Garota de Ipanema

Garota de Ipanema (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Bobherry has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Uncommon typo redirect /not in english. QD was denied. Bobherry Talk My Changes 20:24, 7 June 2023 (UTC)

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

• Withdraw Bobherry Talk My Changes 20:42, 7 June 2023 (UTC)

Discussion

This request is due to close on 20:24, 14 June 2023 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

Ghost Book Writers

Ghost Book Writers (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Lights and freedom has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: This company is claimed to have won many awards, but I can't verify them. It could be that employees of this company have been ghostwriters for many award-winning books; personally, I doubt it. Lights and freedom (talk) 19:07, 7 June 2023 (UTC)

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

Discussion

This request is due to close on 19:07, 14 June 2023 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

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

---

The outcome of this request for deletion was to  Delete. Quickly deleted. The page copies from two different sources.— *Fehufangą ♮ ✉ Talk page 13:36, 7 June 2023 (UTC)

Human rights in the Caucasus Emirate

Human rights in the Caucasus Emirate (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Rathfelder has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: This looks like copy lifted from https://www.hrw.org/news/2016/01/28/human-rights-violations-russias-north-caucasus Rathfelder (talk) 12:53, 7 June 2023 (UTC)

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

Discussion

This request is due to close on 12:53, 14 June 2023 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

---

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

Shubhojit Chatterjee

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

Fehufanga has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Bogus references, not notable. — *Fehufangą ♮ ✉ Talk page 12:34, 7 June 2023 (UTC)

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

Discussion

•  Delete per Fehufanga. Lights and freedom (talk) 06:53, 8 June 2023 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 12:34, 14 June 2023 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

Category:Syrian religious people

Category:Syrian religious people (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Rathfelder has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Only content is Category:Syrian Christians. Religious people is really too vague to be a category, and we dont have any other Fooish religious people categories. Rathfelder (talk) 08:43, 7 June 2023 (UTC)

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

Discussion

•  Delete I assume it was created for people like monks, priests, missionaries, etc., but currently it's not useful. Lights and freedom (talk) 00:17, 8 June 2023 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 08:43, 14 June 2023 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

Anna Shay

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

InfernoGaming46 has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Does not appear to meet notability guidelines. Thoughts? InfernoGaming46 (IG46) (talk / changes) 01:13, 7 June 2023 (UTC)

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

Discussion

• Quick Keep Search reveals many sources as well as her recent death. Has been in multiple productions. Social media also reveals she is notable. Sure may not be as notable as some people but I do think that they meet a notability requirement Bobherry Talk My Changes 01:16, 7 June 2023 (UTC)

She has only been in one notable production for a long amount of time, and only three in total it seems. The only reliable sources on her that I can find are about her death, and nothing really about any notable achievements. I don’t see how the social media section (assuming that’s what you mean here) shows notability. InfernoGaming46 (IG46) (talk / changes) 01:21, 7 June 2023 (UTC)

I was referring to how she had over 500k followers. I found other sources than her death but had to dig due to all the recent coverage. Bobherry Talk My Changes 01:26, 7 June 2023 (UTC)

I wouldn’t necessarily consider 500k followers to be a huge fan base. Maybe I’m wrong. But according to the entertainer notability guidelines, she is not notable. InfernoGaming46 (IG46) (talk / changes) 01:27, 7 June 2023 (UTC)

Anna Shay merits staying on Wikipedia. In addition to her thousands of followers she had millions of viewers via Bling Empire on Netflix. Insistence to the contrary by infernogaming46 seems personal and ill-motivated; maybe a rival still holding a grudge. Shay had an interesting life and was beloved by many. Hope you do the right thing, Wikipedia. SoCalAce2028^ (talk) 03:02, 7 June 2023 (UTC)

(Non-administrator observation) This is this user's only edit here. Additionally, making these accusations is against WP:KIND. InfernoGaming46 (IG46) (talk / changes) 16:46, 7 June 2023 (UTC)

I agree. 82.132.234.58 (talk) 08:55, 7 June 2023 (UTC)

• Quick Keep Plenty of sources. Major member of a globally popular series. That's enough. Not everyone has to be a movie star to meet some minimum notability. --Gotanda (talk) 03:54, 8 June 2023 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 01:13, 14 June 2023 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

List of most popular graphics cards

List of most popular graphics cards (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Gotanda has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: News. Not an encyclopedic list. This is also misnamed. Popular and common are different. The source is not objective. Steam is in the industry, not a reporter on it. Just use the main article for Graphics card, or for card series. Gotanda (talk) 21:41, 5 June 2023 (UTC)

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

Discussion

•  Delete per nominator Bobherry Talk My Changes 21:51, 5 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Delete per nominator, doesn't fit in an encyclopedia. FusionSub (talk) 08:29, 6 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Keep I quite like this list. It is informative. Perhaps a rename is in order, but arguably most popular and most common are synonymous in this case since we can tell that they are popular because people are buying them and using them. Blissyu2 (talk) 12:21, 6 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Delete The article does not show wiki-notability and the sources are not notable.2001:2020:327:8F43:8C2B:204A:EBA:4702 (talk) 13:43, 6 June 2023 (UTC)

Administrator note: Striking out: IP !votes are not counted. --Auntof6 (talk) 02:00, 7 June 2023 (UTC)

•  Keep This list is quite informative. Xeverything11 (talk) 15:23, 6 June 2023 (UTC)

  Xeverything11, can you please respond to the messages on your talk page? People have raised concerns with your creation of these pages. Best regards, Vermont 🐿️ (talk) 21:15, 6 June 2023 (UTC)

•  Delete. Whats most popular isnt fit ofr an encylopedia article. Illusion Flame (talk) 00:27, 7 June 2023 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 21:41, 12 June 2023 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

Cailloodles

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

Bobherry has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: We don't need an article for every episode of caillou. Could also be merged to create a list article or with the main caillou article. Bobherry Talk My Changes 20:43, 5 June 2023 (UTC)

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

Discussion

•  Delete Doesn't show notability as to why this particular episode warrants its own article. Blissyu2 (talk) 12:24, 6 June 2023 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 20:43, 12 June 2023 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

The Untidy Classroom

The Untidy Classroom (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Bobherry has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: We don't need an article for every episode of calliou. Could also be merged as a list article or with the main caillou article. Bobherry Talk My Changes 20:42, 5 June 2023 (UTC)

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

Discussion

•  Delete Doesn't show notability as to why this particular episode warrants its own article. Blissyu2 (talk) 12:25, 6 June 2023 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 20:42, 12 June 2023 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

Susbio

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

Bobherry has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Non-notable company Bobherry Talk My Changes 20:46, 4 June 2023 (UTC)

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

Discussion

•  Delete While this is borderline and there is an argument that they are notable enough, I am just not convinced at this stage. Blissyu2 (talk) 12:26, 6 June 2023 (UTC)

  It is relevant and notable as they are doing waste water treatment and recycling from last 11 years 150.107.180.170 (talk) 06:22, 8 June 2023 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 20:46, 11 June 2023 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

Stoke-upon-Trent

Stoke-upon-Trent (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Rathfelder has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: This is the same place as Stoke-on-Trent. Confusingly it is both one of the six towns which make up the city and it is also the name of the city as a whole. But to assert that they are two different things is just misleading. Rathfelder (talk) 20:30, 3 June 2023 (UTC)

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

Discussion

• @Rathfelder: If one is a part of the other, why delete this? Isn't it like having separate articles for London and City of London? Or Los Angeles and Downtown Los Angeles? Lights and freedom (talk) 20:33, 3 June 2023 (UTC)

  People in London would recognise that City of London and London are two different things, with different names. People in Stoke [where I lived for 5 years] certainly do not distinguish between the two using upon and on. They would probably call one the city and the other the town. The town is a physical place. The city is really just a concept. To make it even worse, the part called the city centre is in Hanley, one of the other 6 towns. [1] Perhaps one article should be called City of Stoke-on-Trent. Rathfelder (talk) 20:50, 3 June 2023 (UTC)

  But Stoke-on-Trent is the city. Both London and Stoke-on-Trent are (legal) concepts, but we still have articles on them. A colloquial mistake does not suddenly turn this town into the city of Stone-on-Trent. The two places are different, just Stoke-upon-Trent is located inside Stoke-on-Trent. If we were to make City of Stoke-on-Trent, what would be the purpose of Stoke-on-Trent? I say keep, though the article's tone could use some work. InfernoGaming46 (IG46) (talk / changes) 21:47, 3 June 2023 (UTC)

I'm afraid that Britain is full of inconsistent place-names, of which this is just one example. It is a very old country and the six towns of the potteries were not planned rationally, they just grew up as the pottery business grew, mostly in the 18th to early 20th century. The naming as given in the article is accurate. Macdonald-ross (talk) 06:11, 4 June 2023 (UTC)

Stoke-upon-Trent is not now a recognised name for either the city or the town (except on Wikipedia). It was the name of a parish, which does not correspond to either the city or the town. https://www.british-history.ac.uk/vch/staffs/vol8/p80 Rathfelder (talk) 10:13, 4 June 2023 (UTC)

I believe the En wiki page is accurate when it says "Stoke-upon-Trent, also called Stoke, is one of the six towns that, along with Hanley, Burslem, Fenton, Longton and Tunstall, form the city of Stoke-on-Trent in Staffordshire, England." Macdonald-ross (talk) 10:43, 4 June 2023 (UTC)

On what do you base this belief? I lived there. I visit. I've looked at the publication about its history and those of the local authority. I cant see any sign of contemporary use of the term Stoke-upon-Trent. Rathfelder (talk) 20:01, 4 June 2023 (UTC)

I also know the area fairly well, and I go with En wiki on this one. Macdonald-ross (talk) 06:47, 5 June 2023 (UTC)

• Strong  Keep per the discussion above. Stoke-upon-Trent is a town while Stoke-on-Trent is the city. It is important to have two separate articles when we have confusingly similar names like this for two different places. Otherwise, we may as well have one article for New York City and New York State. Blissyu2 (talk) 14:52, 5 June 2023 (UTC)

•  Keep this isn't an issue with the article, but more with British place names. FusionSub (talk) 08:32, 6 June 2023 (UTC)

  The city article can be called City of Stoke-on-Trent. That is what the local authority is called. Rathfelder (talk) 20:48, 6 June 2023 (UTC)

  Again, I must ask what would happen to Stoke-on-Trent if this change is made. It seems overly unnecessary to me. InfernoGaming46 (IG46) (talk / changes) 20:52, 6 June 2023 (UTC)

  That takes the content of Stoke-upon-Trent. The point is that it is entirely unclear at present what the difference between the two articles is. Rathfelder (talk) 20:59, 6 June 2023 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 20:31, 10 June 2023 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

RJ Rizvi

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

Bobherry has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Search reveals notability issues Bobherry Talk My Changes 12:19, 3 June 2023 (UTC)

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

Discussion

•  Delete It seems that the sources are actually about different people and don't mention this person. Lights and freedom (talk) 20:37, 3 June 2023 (UTC)
• i think sir this page should not be deleted. because the awards and achievements are notable. 157.39.70.251 (talk) 09:57, 4 June 2023 (UTC)

Administrator note: Striking out: IP !votes are not counted. --Auntof6 (talk) 02:03, 7 June 2023 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 12:19, 10 June 2023 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

2022 WhatsApp Outage

2022 WhatsApp Outage (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Griffinofwales has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: This article was undeleted as a result of a DRV discussion. The outcome of the discussion decided that a RFD would be appropriate. The article was deleted at first by an administrator as G2 (Test Page). Griff (talk) 02:48, 3 June 2023 (UTC)

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

Discussion

•  Delete Websites have outages. Not every outage is notable enough to merit an entry. No claim of notability for this outage. --Gotanda (talk) 08:59, 4 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Delete per above. Outages happen all the time. This one isn't notable for its own article. Bobherry Talk My Changes 01:16, 5 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Delete as Wikipedia is not a newspaper. Blissyu2 (talk) 06:33, 5 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Delete. Random website outages arnt notable enough for a seperate article. Wikipedia isnt the news. Illusion Flame (talk) 00:30, 7 June 2023 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 02:48, 10 June 2023 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

C. E. Taylor

C. E. Taylor (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Griffinofwales has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: As a result of a DRV, this article has been restored for further discussion at RFD. The initial administrator deleted this article due to their belief that the article met QD A4 (non-notable). Griff (talk) 02:38, 3 June 2023 (UTC)

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

Discussion

•  Comment: This page confuses me. I am reluctant to delete pages about people who are historical figures, especially from 100 years ago or more, as chances are that they are notable but we might have trouble finding sources on them. I just can't confirm that the claims about them are true. I'd lean towards keep here but need more information to be sure. Blissyu2 (talk) 06:36, 5 June 2023 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 02:38, 10 June 2023 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

Category:Kurds

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

Rathfelder has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: There is no article Kurds. Suggest this should be merged into Category:Kurdish people. I cant see any difference between the two. Rathfelder (talk) 21:23, 1 June 2023 (UTC)

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

Discussion

• I think the idea was to have one category that would only include articles about individual Kurdish people, while Category:Kurds would include broader topics. But I'm neutral on this. Lights and freedom (talk) 21:31, 1 June 2023 (UTC)
  • Another example is Category:Tamils and Category:Tamil people. Lights and freedom (talk) 17:08, 2 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Delete Happy to delete this currently-empty category. If we fill it up in the future then we can re-add this. Blissyu2 (talk) 06:37, 5 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Delete Currently empty, after we get more pages that would fit in this category rather than category:Kurdish People then we should undelete this but it currently serves no purpose. FusionSub (talk) 08:37, 6 June 2023 (UTC)

  @Blissyu2 and FusionSub: It's not empty so I don't know what you mean. Lights and freedom (talk) 17:06, 6 June 2023 (UTC)

  @Lights and freedom pretty much all of the articles in there would fit in category:Kurdish people. FusionSub (talk) 17:09, 6 June 2023 (UTC)

  @FusionSub They would fit in a topic category (topics about Kurdish people), but not a set category (containing all people who are Kurdish). Lights and freedom (talk) 17:10, 6 June 2023 (UTC)

• The only article that is not about Kurdish people is Kurdistan (state) which should be in Kurdistan. It isnt a good idea to have two similar category names when most editors will not see what the difference is. Rathfelder (talk) 20:57, 6 June 2023 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 21:23, 8 June 2023 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

Jewish anarchism

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

FatalFit has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: ZeroGPT shows the article is almost entirely AI-generated content, way to complex for SEWiki Dylan | ✉ | ✓  19:30, 22 May 2023 (UTC)

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

Discussion

•  Comment: Also, these on English Wikipedia: en:WP:FREECOPY & en:WP:AIFAIL. This should be followed as said in WP:ENWIKI. Dylan | ✉ | ✓  19:32, 22 May 2023 (UTC)
•  Comment: I have spent 2-3 edits simplifying the text. I am no expert in he subject, and other than mentioning two names of people woh seem ot have existed, we have little way to know if what's written is correct. In general though: Anarchists were not only opposed to the state, they were also opposed to a religious power (in the case of Eastern Europe/Russia: mostly Eastern Orthodoxy). Now to say: look there are two examples of people who managed to combine Anarchism and religious moral thinking is pretty daring, without actually having a reference...--Eptalon (talk) 20:02, 22 May 2023 (UTC)

  After checking: Both Emma Goldmann and Rudolf Rocker were anarchists. Sadly enough, Goldman was an atheist, and Rocker was only active in the Jewish community, but not a Jew. So, I currently don't see how they contributed to Jewish anarchism, and if that thing really exists Eptalon (talk) 16:36, 23 May 2023 (UTC)

• I think it's essential to have this properly sourced. Anarchists were basically criminals (leaving aside the issue of whether this was justified). We should not have articles about possible criminals which are not sourced in detail. Macdonald-ross (talk) 07:32, 23 May 2023 (UTC)
•  Comment: I think there is an argument either way. Even after Eptalon's efforts, it still doesn't look simple enough for this wiki, and it is unreferenced, but on the other hand it does look like it might be notable enough. I am not sure why the AI writing thing is relevant and didn't realise that was a criteria. Blissyu2 (talk) 09:07, 23 May 2023 (UTC)
•  Delete Not simple enough and unreferenced; it is hard to know if it's pushing a point of view or completely factual, because it was created by AI. Not suitable for this wiki. Lights and freedom (talk) 00:20, 8 June 2023 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 19:30, 29 May 2023 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

64 Zoo Lane

64 Zoo Lane (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Angerxiety has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: 2nd reference is a youtube video... I do not see any claim of notability. Thoughts? – Angerxiety^! 17:50, 22 May 2023 (UTC)

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

Discussion

•  Keep It's clearly notable, and has an article in the American English [2] and 16 other languages. Blissyu2 (talk) 09:09, 23 May 2023 (UTC)
•  Keep I think we just need more sources for the article. FusionSub (FusionSub) 10:33, 23 May 2023
• Weak Keep Per nominator but also above. Article needs major cleanup and more sources. Bobherry Talk My Changes 21:59, 27 May 2023 (UTC)
•  Keep Notable enough. Wumanfinewella (talk) 23:02, 27 May 2023 (UTC)

Blocked by checkuser. Nythar^T.C 12:02, 29 May 2023 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 17:50, 29 May 2023 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

Chetan Rana (Businessman)

Chetan Rana (Businessman) (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Eptalon has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Disputed Quick-deletion, so let's do a regular RfD. Possibly notable Indian businessman (born 1990). As there were disputes over quick deletion, I tjink its best to do aregular RfD. Comments? Eptalon (talk) 14:01, 21 May 2023 (UTC)

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

Discussion

• Quick Delete, the article has been quick deleted before under different names. The only thing I've ever been able to find is a facebook profile where he basically says he's amazing. Dylan | ✉ | ✓  14:39, 21 May 2023 (UTC)

  He is the man with good awards and he is so helping. I don’t think this should be removed 2401:4900:5D84:EB37:1D5:8B09:3868:FE8B (talk) 14:59, 21 May 2023 (UTC)

• Quick Delete Has been deleted before under different name. Bobherry Talk My Changes 21:28, 21 May 2023 (UTC)
• Quick Delete per the 2 comments above. – Angerxiety^! 23:13, 21 May 2023 (UTC)
•  Comment: The previously deleted article was quick deleted twice under the name of Chetan Rana (check deletion log of the article) Dylan | ✉ | ✓  23:39, 21 May 2023 (UTC)

  @FatalFit: Those were quick deletions. If you were thinking we could quick delete because it was previously deleted, WP:QD#G4 applies only when a page was previously deleted at RFD. If you can point out a different name that was deleted through RFD, we could quick delete here. -- Auntof6 (talk) 21:16, 25 May 2023 (UTC)

• Quick Delete per first two comments. FusionSub (talk) 10:37, 23 May 2023 (UTC)
• A reminder that:
  1. Awards are claims of notability and will cause an A4 nomination to fail. WP:QD#A4 doesn't require that the subject be notable, have independent sources, etc etc. That's GNG. A4 requires that the article says why the subject is notable or important.
  2. An article being deleted previously is not a QD reason. Sure, G4 is, but the article needs to have gone through the process of RfD before it can be applied.

This is not my !vote.— *Fehufangą ♮ ✉ Talk page 11:43, 23 May 2023 (UTC)

• Quick Delete The notability portion links to reliable sources, but very few mention Chetan Rana. Therefore he's not notable, notability is a requirement to be listed on Wikipedia. Wekeepwhatwekill  ^Spe_ak! 12:25, 23 May 2023 (UTC)
•  Comment: If this article is kept, it should be renamed so that the word "Businessman" in the title is in lower case. However, it should not be renamed until this RFD is resolved. --Auntof6 (talk) 21:18, 25 May 2023 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 14:01, 28 May 2023 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

Tom Ruegger

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

Rathfelder has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Unreferenced BLP Rathfelder (talk) 20:26, 19 May 2023 (UTC)

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

Discussion

•  Keep and suggest we stop having deletion requests about very notable figures [3] Blissyu2 (talk) 14:28, 20 May 2023 (UTC)

  Dont we have a policy that biographies of living people must have at least one reference? Rathfelder (talk) 18:10, 20 May 2023 (UTC)

  WP:BLP, -- Dylan | ✉ | ✓  18:14, 20 May 2023 (UTC)

  @FatalFit: We have no blanket policy about that, as enwiki does. I think we have a policy that certain kinds of statements about living people must be referenced; those would be things like their religion, sexual orientation, and maybe one or two others. -- Auntof6 (talk) 23:38, 20 May 2023 (UTC)

  I think on this matter we should have the same policy as enwiki, for the same reasons - protection against libel actions. Rathfelder (talk) 15:34, 21 May 2023 (UTC)

  @Rathfelder: Worth discussing, but separately from RFD. -- Auntof6 (talk) 15:47, 21 May 2023 (UTC)

  @Blissyu2: Articles must show notability, not just be about subjects that are notable. For example, if the article about Barack Obama only said that he was born in Hawaii, that would not show notability even if that statement was sourced. Anyone who is interested is more than welcome to improve an article while an RFD is running, for example adding to show notability and providing a source to support it. -- Auntof6 (talk) 23:44, 20 May 2023 (UTC)

•  Delete — Per nominator Dylan | ✉ | ✓  18:14, 20 May 2023 (UTC)
•  Keep According to the instructions at the top of this page, "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." It is quite clear that adequate sources do exist just by glancing at the EnWP page. No need to fill RfD with these. --Gotanda (talk) 22:19, 21 May 2023 (UTC)

  Absolutely. All of these nominations of very notable figures should be withdrawn. It's nonsensical and petty to quibble over such things. Blissyu2 (talk) 23:54, 21 May 2023 (UTC)

  We're not quibbling, we're discussing. When someone supports a different viewpoint from you, that doesn't make it nonsensical or quibbling. Please be respectful of your fellow editors. -- Auntof6 (talk) 23:57, 21 May 2023 (UTC)

  I think different policies apply to articles about living people. Rathfelder (talk) 10:10, 22 May 2023 (UTC)

  Does https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons not apply just as much here? Rathfelder (talk) 10:25, 22 May 2023 (UTC)

  I think I have read the guideline on this page correctly. This is not EnWP. --Gotanda (talk) 11:03, 22 May 2023 (UTC)

  When there is no policy or guideline here, we use enwiki's as guidelines. So even if it's a policy there, it's only a guideline here. -- Auntof6 (talk) 21:16, 22 May 2023 (UTC)

•  Comment: I added a reference, so hopefully that will simplify things. --TheShadowCrow (talk) 12:55, 24 May 2023 (UTC)

  Now there is a reference I am happy to withdraw. Rathfelder (talk) 18:50, 24 May 2023 (UTC)

•  Keep There is now one source. Bobherry Talk My Changes 01:18, 5 June 2023 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 20:26, 26 May 2023 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

Paul Greenberg (voice actor)

Paul Greenberg (voice actor) (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Rathfelder has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Unreferenced BLP Rathfelder (talk) 07:50, 16 May 2023 (UTC)

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

Discussion

•  Comment: I noticed that the enwiki counterpart is also an unreferenced BLP with unverified filmography and notability questioned. There are several known people with this name, and I cannot find reliable sources for this voice actor (The things I found were IMDB and wiki mirrors etc). MathXplore (talk) 07:57, 16 May 2023 (UTC)
•  Keep Clearly notable. In multiple languages. EN-wiki might need a clean-up, and so might this one, but it is fine as is. Blissyu2 (talk) 15:03, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

  I think the policy that articles about living people need references is sensible. If he really is notable it shouldnt be difficult to find references. Rathfelder (talk) 14:00, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

  @Blissyu2: Please be more specific. What is in the article that shows notability? -- Auntof6 (talk) 23:54, 20 May 2023 (UTC)

  In every single word, and you can verify it easily be reverse-checking it. It's a bit silly to be nominating ones like this. Blissyu2 (talk) 14:28, 21 May 2023 (UTC)

  Notability needs to be documented with references. Rathfelder (talk) 15:39, 21 May 2023 (UTC)

•  Delete Notability not shown. --Auntof6 (talk) 15:08, 21 May 2023 (UTC)
•  Delete – per Auntof6. Online sources are also mostly trivial. Nythar^T.C 11:20, 29 May 2023 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 07:50, 23 May 2023 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

OMGG

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

Rathfelder has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Doesnt merit an article. Merge with Oh My God Rathfelder (talk) 07:39, 16 May 2023 (UTC)

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

Discussion

•  Keep While this might not be warranted on EN-wiki, we have to remember that Simple English is here for people who don't always understand the nuances of the English language, and this is one of those things that might be really good for someone stumbling upon it who doesn't know what it means. Its well-referenced and explains it well. Blissyu2 (talk) 15:04, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

Won't this be automatically included when users search for OMG? Seems a candidate for quick closure or adding OMGG to OMG. Macdonald-ross (talk) 10:25, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

It's true that Simple English is here for people whose English isn't good, but it is not intended to be everything such people might need. It is an encyclopedia, not a dictionary, as stated in policy and in this guideline. -- Auntof6 (talk) 00:01, 21 May 2023 (UTC)

•  Merge with OMG. We can just include the meaning of OMGG into a section, or in the lead section. – Angerxiety^! 13:02, 18 May 2023 (UTC)
• Either delete or merge, but I'm leaning towards the former. The sources are unreliable at best.— *Fehufangą ♮ ✉ Talk page 13:05, 18 May 2023 (UTC)
• Redirect to OMG. I would also be fine with deleting as it serves little purpose. Illusion Flame (talk) 12:03, 20 May 2023 (UTC)
• Redirect to OMG Bobherry Talk My Changes 16:31, 27 May 2023 (UTC)
• Redirect to OMG. Nythar^T.C 11:24, 29 May 2023 (UTC)
• Question: @Illusion Flame, Bobherry, and Nythar: are you suggesting redirecting to OMG (a disambiguation page) or Oh My God? Lights and freedom (talk) 00:22, 8 June 2023 (UTC)

  I can’t speak for the others, but I was thinking of redirecting to the disambiguation page, OMG. Illusion Flame (talk) 00:32, 8 June 2023 (UTC)

  Yes, that's what I was thinking. Nythar^T.C 00:39, 8 June 2023 (UTC)

  I agree as well Bobherry Talk My Changes 00:44, 8 June 2023 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 07:39, 23 May 2023 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

Microsoft 365

Microsoft 365 (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Rathfelder has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Information is already included in Microsoft Office. Doesnt merit a seperate article. Rathfelder (talk) 07:24, 16 May 2023 (UTC)

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

Discussion

•  Comment: Why not set as a redirect to Microsoft Office? MathXplore (talk) 07:26, 16 May 2023 (UTC)
•  Redirect as above. --Auntof6 (talk) 07:28, 16 May 2023 (UTC)
•  Keep It's notable enough for 32 pages and is separate to simply Microsoft Office. I think we can keep it. Blissyu2 (talk) 07:36, 16 May 2023 (UTC)

  Redirect is fine. At the moment it just duplicates what is in the main article. Rathfelder (talk) 12:48, 16 May 2023 (UTC)

•  Keep This is separate from normal office I think this should have its own article. Bobherry Talk My Changes 20:26, 16 May 2023 (UTC)
•  Redirect to Microsoft Office. Information already in Microsoft Office, just expand from there. – Angerxiety^! 15:02, 17 May 2023 (UTC)
•  Keep, as it has enough information for an article. It's not a great one but it can be expanded and wikified. As above, it is separate from Microsoft Office. Dylan | ✉ | ✓  01:51, 19 May 2023 (UTC)
•  Comment: Shouldn't we merge the contents of Microsoft Office and Microsoft 365? They are the same in everything but name. FusionSub (talk) 08:29, 24 May 2023 (UTC)
•  Keep Just needs a bit of expansion and wikification. I don't think it should be merged into Office as they are separate things. Maybe transfer some of that info over to this article instead? – InfernoGaming46 (IG46) (talk / changes) 20:46, 24 May 2023 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 07:24, 23 May 2023 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

Joey D'Auria

Joey D'Auria (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Rathfelder has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Unreferenced BLP Rathfelder (talk) 22:08, 14 May 2023 (UTC)

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

Discussion

•  Keep It doesn't need to be referenced at this point as it is clearly notable per the EN version and it has references there. We can add some references from the EN version. Blissyu2 (talk) 15:09, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

  I think the references need to be here. Rathfelder (talk) 14:02, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

  Yes, they do. Articles here need to show notability independent of what is on any other Wikipedia. -- Auntof6 (talk) 00:04, 21 May 2023 (UTC)

  I agree with Rathfelder here. Just because the article from enwiki is notable doesn't mean this article without references is "clearly notable". If you do add the references, I would vote keep. – Angerxiety^! 14:10, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 22:08, 21 May 2023 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

Ciara Janson

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

Rathfelder has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Unreferenced BLP Rathfelder (talk) 21:23, 14 May 2023 (UTC)

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

Discussion

•  Keep Clearly the same person as the EN-wiki version, who is hugely notable. [4] Blissyu2 (talk) 15:11, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

  Notability needs to be shown, and referenced, here/ Rathfelder (talk) 15:35, 21 May 2023 (UTC)

  Not according to the top of this page.  Keep "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." --Gotanda (talk) 22:23, 21 May 2023 (UTC)

  I agree. It seems that some people don't know how to follow instructions. I see a number of recent nominations that should be speedy closed as keep. Blissyu2 (talk) 12:27, 23 May 2023 (UTC)

•  Delete Notability not shown. --Auntof6 (talk) 00:05, 21 May 2023 (UTC)
•  Delete as per above. Bobherry Talk My Changes 16:30, 27 May 2023 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 21:23, 21 May 2023 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

Alicyn Packard

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

Rathfelder has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Unreferenced BLP Rathfelder (talk) 20:57, 14 May 2023 (UTC)

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

Discussion

•  Keep Clearly the same person as the EN-wiki one who is clearly notable. [5] Blissyu2 (talk) 15:13, 17 May 2023 (UTC)
•  Delete Notability not shown. --Auntof6 (talk) 00:07, 21 May 2023 (UTC)
•  Keep Let me ask Auntof6 a question: if American president article was written here without refs, would you delete it cos it has no refs? He is already notable, with or without refs. So keep this article. Wumanfinewella (talk) 23:11, 27 May 2023 (UTC)

Blocked by checkuser. Nythar^T.C 12:00, 29 May 2023 (UTC)

@Wumanfinewella: Being the leader of a country is a notable thing on its own but being an actress is not, so the two aren't the same thing. There are no claims of notability in this article, which is why I !voted to delete. Whether or not there are references is a different question. -- Auntof6 (talk) 04:25, 28 May 2023 (UTC)

•  Delete per Auntof6, this article does not show notability. – InfernoGaming46 (IG46) (talk / changes) 04:31, 28 May 2023 (UTC)
•  Delete – She doesn't appear to be notable. (And her enWP article doesn't help with sources.) Nythar^T.C 12:10, 29 May 2023 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 20:57, 21 May 2023 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

Adrienne Posta

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

Rathfelder has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Unreferenced BLP Rathfelder (talk) 20:50, 14 May 2023 (UTC)

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

Discussion

•  Keep Clearly notable and is clearly the same person as the EN-wiki one, which is linked. [6] Blissyu2 (talk) 15:14, 17 May 2023 (UTC)
•  Delete Notability not shown. --Auntof6 (talk) 00:08, 21 May 2023 (UTC)
•  Keep "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." --Gotanda (talk) 22:21, 21 May 2023 (UTC)

  Do you think its acceptable to have articles about living people with no references? Rathfelder (talk) 10:08, 22 May 2023 (UTC)

  That is the plain meaning of the instruction in Before nominating: checks and alternatives D. 3. If you want to change that. That is a different discussion. --Gotanda (talk) 11:02, 22 May 2023 (UTC)

  I thought we followed policies of English Wikipedia unless there was agreement not to. Rathfelder (talk) 08:45, 23 May 2023 (UTC)

  In cases where we don't have our own policy or guideline, we use enwiki's, but we treat them as guidelines. See Wikipedia:Follow English Wikipedia. -- Auntof6 (talk) 09:09, 23 May 2023 (UTC)

• Weak Keep/Weak Delete Per above. I say to Keep There are sources and they have been in a lot of shows over the years. However, I would say Delete if no one adds sources. Bobherry Talk My Changes 23:15, 1 June 2023 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 20:50, 21 May 2023 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

Finnigan Fox

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

Lights and freedom has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Is this notable? All I see in sources is comments about "upcoming game". Lights and freedom (talk) 03:56, 14 May 2023 (UTC)

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

Discussion

•  Merge with Intellivision Amico. Dylan | ✉ | ✓  16:24 14 May 2023 (UTC)

Merge what? The list of games in Intellivision Amico lists only title, genre, developer, and release date. According to the article here, the game hasn't been released yet. --Auntof6 (talk) 20:27, 3 June 2023 (UTC)

• Rename to Fox N Forests per En-Wiki. Blissyu2 (talk) 14:31, 21 May 2023 (UTC)

No: Finnegan Fox appears to be a specific version of Fox N Forests, but they are not the same thing. --Auntof6 (talk) 20:27, 3 June 2023 (UTC)

•  Delete It's hard for a game to be notable if it's still in development. --Auntof6 (talk) 20:27, 3 June 2023 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 03:56, 21 May 2023 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

Shining with the Sharmas

Shining with the Sharmas (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Bobherry has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Notability issues. Google search turns up very few results. Bobherry Talk My Changes 19:56, 13 May 2023 (UTC)

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

Discussion

•  Keep In 2 other languages, including the native tongue. Definitely seems to meet Simple English notability requirements. Blissyu2 (talk) 15:17, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

  @Blissyu2: Please specify which notability requirements you see being met. Also, the fact that articles exist in other Wikipedias does not affect the decision here. -- Auntof6 (talk) 00:16, 21 May 2023 (UTC)

  See the top of the page. This should be speedy-kept. Blissyu2 (talk) 12:28, 23 May 2023 (UTC)

  There is no policy that states that articles that exist in another language should not be RfDd. — *Fehufangą ♮ ✉ Talk page 21:58, 28 May 2023 (UTC)

•  Keep No doubt about it and references are also good. 2409:4060:2E91:5688:0:0:AD48:8213 (talk) 17:31, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

  Note to closing administrator: This is an IP address who can not !vote in community discussions. Illusion Flame (talk) 02:25, 30 May 2023 (UTC)

•  Delete No claim of notability. --Auntof6 (talk) 00:14, 21 May 2023 (UTC)
•  Delete - Just because it's on another Wikipedia does not mean it's automatically notable. No policy exists. I see some coverage from last year, but I'd like to see more to have this article be kept. As it is, it's not enough.— *Fehufangą ♮ ✉ Talk page 22:00, 28 May 2023 (UTC)
•  Keep Referenced in five in different publications. Article about popular television program. --Gotanda (talk) 23:01, 28 May 2023 (UTC)
•  Comment: We're past the 2-week cut-off here, and I'll just weigh in with my comments. My view is that this is a non-consensus situation, but also I will note that the arguments for deleting it are in one case incorrect (as it most definitely does have claims of notability) and in another case very weak while the claims to keep it are very strong. It is in multiple languages and is clearly very notable, and, per Simple English's policy, the page doesn't need to be complete in order to be kept. This to me tells me that, while technically this could be a non-consensus result, it arguably should be simply a Keep result, as the weight of the argument should be taken into account, not just a pure vote. Blissyu2 (talk)

  Again, per Fehufanga, simply being on another Wikipedia does not make it notable. This is not a policy that we have here. InfernoGaming46 (IG46) (talk / changes) 05:26, 3 June 2023 (UTC)

  Administrator note: Striking out this duplicate opinion. @Blissyu2: I'm not sure what "2-week cut-off" you're referring to, but note that 1) some RFDs take longer to close than others and 2) the closing admin will do the analysis. --Auntof6 (talk) 08:59, 3 June 2023 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 19:56, 20 May 2023 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

The Red Mist

The Red Mist (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

FatalFit has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Not notable enough for an article, creepypastas are too informal for an encyclopedia. Dylan | ✉ | ✓  16:41, 12 May 2023 (UTC)

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

Discussion

• merge with creepypasta, per EN-wiki. Also note that EN-wiki has Red Mist as a disambiguation page so perhaps we should do the same: [7] Blissyu2 (talk) 15:19, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

  o wait that’s smart, oh and I was the one that wrote the article for Red Mist. I was bored at school when writing it (SAME DAY IN MOTHERS DAY) so how do you merge articles? 165.155.136.104 (talk) 23:07, 19 May 2023 (UTC)

  Bored at school suggests that maybe that was a bad reason to write an article. Blissyu2 (talk) 14:21, 21 May 2023 (UTC)

• Merge as per above. Bobherry Talk My Changes 00:29, 20 May 2023 (UTC)
•  Question: What is there to merge? creepypasta doesn't have details about any specific ones, just a few names in a list. --Auntof6 (talk) 02:54, 23 May 2023 (UTC)
•  Delete - Will put undue weight about this specific creepypasta if merged with creepypasta. — *Fehufangą ♮ ✉ Talk page 03:07, 23 May 2023 (UTC)
•  Delete per Fehufanga. Lights and freedom (talk) 21:01, 26 May 2023 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 16:41, 19 May 2023 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

Template:Lang-gsw-FR

Template:Lang-gsw-FR (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Lights and freedom has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Seems like a duplicate of Template:Lang-gsw-als Lights and freedom (talk) 19:14, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

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

Discussion

•  Comment: As you know what is known as 'Alsace' today is a region (today part of France) which changed between France and Germany (or what later became Germany) a few times. Als-Gsw is for the Alemannic dialects there. These are similar in many ways to Swiss German (gsw). The French variants refers to the French dialects spoken for example in the Territoire de Belfort,Franche Comté or in Jura (on both sides of the border). Unlike German, French is more homogeneous. Given that this is Simple English, I don't know how many articles this would apply to, and whether making the distinction actually makes sense. --Eptalon (talk) 05:27, 10 May 2023 (UTC)
• I'm in favor of deleting or redirecting {{lang-gsw-als}} instead of {{lang-gsw-FR}}. Our language tags are based on en:IETF language tag. gsw-als is not a valid IETF language tag (als is not a country).— Preceding unsigned comment added by Fehufanga (talk • contribs) 22:13, 16 May 2023 (UTC)
•  Keep but delete the ALS one. France is a bigger country than Alsace. Alternatively, keep both. The wrong template was nominated for deletion. Need a new VFD discussion on the ALS one.Blissyu2 (talk) 05:20, 17 May 2023 (UTC)
•  Comment: 'gsw' is a valid language code under ISO 639-2 or ISO-639-3 (for 'Swiss German','Alemannic','Alsatian'). As far as I know, there's no code 'als'. Language-wise, there's a huge difference between the Germanic 'Alsatian', and the regional French dialects. We are a small wiki, and the real question is whether these templates are useful. Look at the picture here, the green and blue areas are Germanic ('Alsatian',..-als), the very few pink and orange ones are French (...-FR). --Eptalon (talk) 07:55, 18 May 2023 (UTC)
•  Keep, and redirect Template:Lang-gsw-als to this one. Also need to correct the Wikidata entry. --Auntof6 (talk) 00:47, 21 May 2023 (UTC)
• Keep and redirect Template:Lang-gsw-als to this one per Fehufanga and Auntof6. Lights and freedom (talk) 21:00, 26 May 2023 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 19:14, 16 May 2023 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

Category:Disorders

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

Rathfelder has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: There is no article about disorders, and there is no clear defintion. "A disorder is a functional abnormality or disturbance. Medical disorders can be categorized into mental disorders, physical disorders, genetic disorders, emotional and behavioral disorders, and functional disorders. The term disorder is often considered more value-neutral and less stigmatizing than the terms disease or illness, and therefore is preferred terminology in some circumstances.[13] In mental health, the term mental disorder is used as a way of acknowledging the complex interaction of biological, social, and psychological factors in psychiatric conditions; however, the term disorder is also used in many other areas of medicine, primarily to identify physical disorders that are not caused by infectious organisms, such as metabolic disorders." So it isnt helpful to seperate articles between diseases and disorders. I'm inclined to think that this should be merged either into Category:Diseases and disorders or Category:Diseases. Rathfelder (talk) 08:04, 4 May 2023 (UTC)

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

Discussion

•  Comment: @Rathfelder: Can you tell us where you got that quoted definition? Also, since the subcategories also have the word "disorders" in their names, it might not be as simple as merging them elsewhere, because we'd still be using the questionable term. --Auntof6 (talk) 03:48, 12 May 2023 (UTC)

  That is from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disease#Disorder. en.wikipedia has a Disambiguation page but doesnt use it as a category on its own, and I think that works. Ambiguous terms are not good for categories. Rathfelder (talk) 09:59, 12 May 2023 (UTC)

•  Merge to Category:Diseases and disorders. There is no clear distinction between what is a disease and what is a disorder, but for some particular instances, one is used much more than the other. EnWP says a disease is "any condition that impairs the normal functioning of the body" and a disorder is "a functional abnormality or disturbance" but "the term disorder is often considered more value-neutral and less stigmatizing than the terms disease or illness, and therefore is preferred terminology in some circumstances". If we separate the topics by which is "less stigmatizing", or which is an "impairment" vs. an "abnormality or disturbance", then for each category, such as "Diseases and disorders of the mouth", we will have to split the contents by whether they are a "disease" or a "disorder". It also causes two problems for readers: an extra level to click through in the category hierarchy, and some confusion to where a particular article will be found. Merging will be better and it has worked on enWP since 2008. Lights and freedom (talk) 01:47, 14 May 2023 (UTC)
•  Keep This category has 8 fields, is being used, and there is a clear distinction between diseases and disorders. No reason to delete this. Blissyu2 (talk) 05:16, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

  Can you explain the distinction between diseases and disorders? Rathfelder (talk) 17:50, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

•  Keep per above. Bobherry Talk My Changes 23:08, 1 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Comment: This one is almost a month overdue too and it looks like a clear keep to me. Blissyu2 (talk) 05:19, 3 June 2023 (UTC)

  @Blissyu2: Thanks, but the closing admin will do the analysis. Note that some RFDs take longer than others to close, for various reasons. There is usually no rush to close them. -- Auntof6 (talk) 09:02, 3 June 2023 (UTC)

• I would keep Category:Disorder and use it as nearly possible to its medical usage. Obviously most think think Category:Disease is needed also. So we should use both as nearly as possible to medical authorities. Macdonald-ross (talk) 18:46, 4 June 2023 (UTC)

Yes, that does give us a higher category of Disorders and Diseases (or vice versa). I see that. Macdonald-ross (talk) 18:53, 4 June 2023 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 08:04, 11 May 2023 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

Category:Legislative branch of the United States government

Category:Legislative branch of the United States government (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Lights and freedom has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: I suggest that this is deleted and the contents are moved to Category:United States Congress (except Continental Congress, which can be moved to Category:Government of the United States. United States Congress is the legislative branch - there is no difference between them. Enwiki uses the title en:Category:Legislative branch of the United States government for this category, but I think "United States Congress" is a better title, because it is a singular concept. Lights and freedom (talk) 19:55, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

The relevant discussion on enwiki is from 2006. Lights and freedom (talk) 19:57, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

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

Discussion

•  Delete We should follow EN-Wiki as nom suggests. It was deleted off EN in 2006 so we should do the same. Blissyu2 (talk) 12:57, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

  @Blissyu2 actually, enwiki got rid of the category "United States Congress" and kept this one. Sorry for the confusion. Lights and freedom (talk) 17:26, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

  We certainly dont need both. Congress is easier to understand. Rathfelder (talk) 18:07, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

  I am torn on this one. Not sure if Congress is simplier in this case. We don't need both for sure. But I lean towards keeping the remaining category named this. -Djsasso (talk) 17:30, 24 April 2023 (UTC)

•  Delete I agree with Rathfelder that Congress is simpler and that we dont need both. Illusion Flame (talk) 20:48, 17 April 2023 (UTC)
•  Comment: If either is deleted, all the contents from one should be recategorized into the other, and there should probably be a redirect from one to the other. Lights and freedom (talk) 15:49, 1 May 2023 (UTC)
• Question: Is no one concerned that changing this would make the category title different from the titles of the other branches, Category:Executive branch of the United States government and Category:Judicial branch of the United States government? --Auntof6 (talk) 23:11, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

  That is a good point and it might be better to cat-redirect United States Congress to here. Lights and freedom (talk) 23:20, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

•  Keep - I think consistency with the other branches of the government matters more and keeps things simpler.— *Fehufangą ♮ ✉ Talk page 03:05, 11 May 2023 (UTC)
•  Keep Per above. Bobherry Talk My Changes 03:07, 11 May 2023 (UTC)
• Keep Category:Legislative branch of the United States government, re-categorize everything in Category:United States Congress to this category, and leave a redirect.--Gordonrox24 | ^Talk 00:44, 19 May 2023 (UTC)
• Keep and make Category:United States Congress into a redirect per Gordonrox24. Lights and freedom (talk) 20:59, 26 May 2023 (UTC)
•  Comment: - This is more than a month overdue for closure. I note that I voted delete above and perhaps that is holding this up. I am happy for this to be kept if it helps, though I don't want to change my vote. It looks like a non-consensus to me. Blissyu2 (talk) 05:18, 3 June 2023 (UTC)

  @Blissyu2: If you want to change your !vote, then change it above. Otherwise, comments like this are not helpful. Thanks. -- Auntof6 (talk) 09:01, 3 June 2023 (UTC)

  I agree that your Wikistalking of me is not helpful. Please stop. Blissyu2 (talk) 06:30, 5 June 2023 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 19:55, 22 April 2023 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

Recently closed deletion discussions

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

---

The outcome of this request for deletion was to  Delete. QD'd by Macdonald-ross --Auntof6 (talk) 01:56, 7 June 2023 (UTC)

Chauhan

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

Bobherry has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Unsourced. Unable to find sources. Bobherry Talk My Changes 12:21, 3 June 2023 (UTC)

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

Discussion

• It looks like this has already been deleted. Blissyu2 (talk) 06:31, 5 June 2023 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 12:21, 10 June 2023 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

---

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

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

---

The outcome of this request for deletion was to  Delete. QD'd by Macdonald-ross --Auntof6 (talk) 01:55, 7 June 2023 (UTC)

Yash Paliwal

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

Bobherry has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Notability issues Bobherry Talk My Changes 12:16, 3 June 2023 (UTC)

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

Discussion

• It looks like this is deleted already too. Blissyu2 (talk) 06:32, 5 June 2023 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 12:16, 10 June 2023 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

---

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

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

---

The outcome of this request for deletion was to  Delete. QD'd by Fehufanga --Auntof6 (talk) 01:54, 7 June 2023 (UTC)

Edward Adolphus Sylvan

Edward Adolphus Sylvan (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Bobherry has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Possible notability issues. I see many sources but that is basically every result when you search his name and company. Bobherry Talk My Changes 23:34, 1 June 2023 (UTC)

Withdraw Just saw it had a RFD previously closed as delete. Bobherry Talk My Changes 23:36, 1 June 2023 (UTC)

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

Discussion

• This has been deleted too. Can this be closed? Blissyu2 (talk) 12:27, 6 June 2023 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 23:34, 8 June 2023 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

---

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

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

---

The outcome of this request for deletion was to  Delete. QD'd by Macdonald-ross --Auntof6 (talk) 01:51, 7 June 2023 (UTC)

Kimsa Sok (Volunteer)

Kimsa Sok (Volunteer) (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Bobherry has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Notability issues Bobherry Talk My Changes 23:32, 31 May 2023 (UTC)

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

Discussion

• This page should not be deleted by nominated notable issues Kimsa Kimsa who volunteered to organise International Children’s Book Day 2023.<ref>{{cite news |title=International Children’s Book Day set to return - Khmer Times |url=https://www.khmertimeskh.com/501300042/international-childrens-book-day-set-to-return/ |accessdate=31 May 2023 |publisher=Khmer Times |date=31 May 2023}}</ref> please keep this page for changing some sources to find notable. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ladiprankmak (talk • contribs) 23:39, 31 May 2023 (UTC)

This page should not be deleted by nominated notable issues Kimsa who volunteered to organise International Children’s Book Day 2023.<ref>{{cite news |title=International Children’s Book Day set to return - Khmer Times |url=https://www.khmertimeskh.com/501300042/international-childrens-book-day-set-to-return/ |accessdate=31 May 2023 |publisher=Khmer Times |date=31 May 2023}}</ref> please keep this page for changing some sources to find notable. Ladiprankmak (talk) 23:41, 31 May 2023 (UTC)

If we had an article for every person who volunteered to work at some type of fair, we'd have millions of articles. There's simply nothing notable about this article. InfernoGaming46 (IG46) (talk / changes) 23:47, 31 May 2023 (UTC)

• Quick Delete QDA4 as no claim of notability; not a notable subject. InfernoGaming46 (IG46) (talk / changes) 23:43, 31 May 2023 (UTC)
• Quick Delete QD G4, Wikipedia:Requests for deletion/Requests/2021/Sok Kimsa (2003), Wikipedia:Requests for deletion/Requests/2021/Sok Kimsa. MathXplore (talk) 07:09, 1 June 2023 (UTC)
• It looks like this one has already been deleted, and it looks like it was reasonable to do it. Blissyu2 (talk) 12:28, 6 June 2023 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 23:32, 7 June 2023 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

---

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

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

---

The outcome of this request for deletion was to  Delete.  --Auntof6 (talk) 01:47, 7 June 2023 (UTC)

James Kennedy

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

Eptalon has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: British DJ, enterainer,.. born 1992. Seems to be known as member of a reality TV show. Has nothing to do withn the U.S. media person, or the politician. Likely non-notable, delete? Eptalon (talk) 13:51, 29 May 2023 (UTC)

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

Discussion

•  Delete This could've been deleted per QD G5, but it's also good to establish this name isn't notable along with the rest this editor has been pushing. Operator873 ^connect 20:53, 1 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Delete – Not notable. InfernoGaming46 (IG46) (talk / changes) 03:04, 6 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Delete This looks borderline keep but there are so many redlinks, it is not Simple, and it looks like it is a recreation of a previously-deleted article on EN. There's probably an RFD on EN if someone were to go digging for it. Simple is not the place to put articles that were deleted elsewhere. There are other wikis for that. Blissyu2 (talk) 12:30, 6 June 2023 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 13:51, 5 June 2023 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

---

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

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

---

The outcome of this request for deletion was to  Delete.  --Auntof6 (talk) 01:45, 7 June 2023 (UTC)

Ajeet Joshi

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

Eptalon has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Likely non-notable person born 1990. We get 2-3 sentences and a list of "notable works and achievements". Searching for the name on google, I get SEWP in first place, which is rarely a good sign. So I propose this article be removed. Nominating for deletion, to give everyone a chance to comment; I also don't know how prestigiious the awards are. Astrology has always been hard to place.... Comments? Eptalon (talk) 10:48, 29 May 2023 (UTC)

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

Discussion

• Ajeet Joshi Is reowned Astrologer as per i know, His article is in all major publishing news and News also in television like aaj tak . His instagram is also verified. In the section ofearly life if something more can be added then their id no reason to delete. All the awards given to him by very popular presonalities like Cheif Minister and bollywood starts. He is in media all the time visit his instagram or news section.-Brand Arrange (talk) 10:58, 29 May 2023 (UTC)
• Effectively this is a free advert for a non-notable person. Delete. Macdonald-ross (talk) 13:35, 29 May 2023 (UTC)
•  Delete per Macdonald-ross above. Definitely not notable, and the keep vote above screams COI. Illusion Flame (talk) 15:02, 29 May 2023 (UTC)

  Ajeet Joshi is one of the most popular Celebrity Astrologer in India. I saw him multiple time with many reowned presonalities. I saw him on cover of fortune magazine , which is indias one of the biggest magazine. I saw him taking awards from CM and other ministers. He deserves to be in wikipedia . He is very popular in his field 103.152.158.251 (talk) 06:59, 30 May 2023 (UTC)

  People are not notable because you think they are based on original research. Illusion Flame (talk) 21:52, 30 May 2023 (UTC)

  Ajeet Joshi - Notable Astrologer, Relationship Counselor, and Entrepreneur

  Throughout his career, Ajeet Joshi has achieved notable recognition and received several prestigious awards. As a testament to his expertise and influence in the field, he was invited as a Special Guest to the 2nd edition of the National Fame Awards]. Additionally, he was felicitated by the Deputy Chief Minister at the 2023 Excellence Award Event

  Ajeet Joshi's contributions have been acknowledged through various accolades, including being awarded as the "Best Astrologers in India 2023. He has been recognized as one of "The Top Dynamic 10 CEOs Making Waves in the Business World". Ajeet Joshi was also honored with the "India Prime Icon Awards Winner" and received the "WBR Corp Iconic Achievers Award Mumbai" from Sandeep Patil, a former Indian cricketer.

  Furthermore, Ajeet Joshi's accomplishments have gained significant media attention. He was featured on the cover of Fortune Exchange Magazine. Additionally, he has been acknowledged as the "Youngest Celebrity Astrologer in 2023"

  Considering Ajeet Joshi's extensive experience in astrology, his notable works, and the recognition he has received, it is worth discussing his notability for a separate Wikipedia article. I encourage fellow editors to review the provided sources and contribute their insights to determine the suitability of an article about Ajeet Joshi on Wikipedia. 2409:40E4:33:27AF:B96D:157A:D23E:E88B (talk) 09:14, 3 June 2023 (UTC)

  I am very happy to see Ajeet Joshi on Wikipedia, He is very well known personality in India. The Cm of Goa has given him the best astrologer award for his contribution to the humanity 2409:4064:2D93:C4E9:0:0:EBCA:B408 (talk) 05:26, 5 June 2023 (UTC)

•  Delete This is about as clear as you can get for advertising. Borderline Quick Delete except that there is a small chance that it is a genuine mistake. Blissyu2 (talk) 12:32, 6 June 2023 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 10:48, 5 June 2023 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

---

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

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

---

The outcome of this request for deletion was to  Keep. --Auntof6 (talk) 01:42, 7 June 2023 (UTC)

Solar rotation

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

Bobherry has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Page is written in a Q&A style. Also, the references are odd and seem to be not reliable. Page needs a full rewrite. The article could also just get Merged to Sun Bobherry Talk My Changes 22:54, 28 May 2023 (UTC)

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

Discussion

•  Keep The nominator has correctly tagged it for clean up. That is what is required. Not deletion of this notable subject. --Gotanda (talk) 22:57, 28 May 2023 (UTC)
• Might be a bit on the short side, and definitely needs some cleanup. On the upside: Explain in simple terms, but needs expansion. Cites sources, exists in other Wikipedias. In all of this, where's the deletion reason? - so keep--Eptalon (talk) 15:36, 29 May 2023 (UTC)
•  Merge to sun. I think this, in its current state, only qualifies for a section in the sun article, not a whole page. I would also be fine with keeping. Illusion Flame (talk) 21:54, 30 May 2023 (UTC)
•  Merge We can't have a separate page for every aspect of the Sun. Macdonald-ross (talk) 12:59, 1 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Merge to Sun. Lights and freedom (talk) 16:36, 1 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Keep agree with Gotanda. It's a bit messy but clearly notable separate to the sun. Blissyu2 (talk) 06:38, 5 June 2023 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 22:54, 4 June 2023 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

---

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

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

---

The outcome of this request for deletion was to  Delete.  --Auntof6 (talk) 01:38, 7 June 2023 (UTC)

Kagangal (2023 movie)

Kagangal (2023 movie) (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

InfernoGaming46 has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Contested QD; not notable per movie notability guidelines; no significant coverage. InfernoGaming46 (IG46) (talk / changes) 20:53, 25 May 2023 (UTC)

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

Discussion

•  Comment: The list of awards might show notability if it indicated what organization(s) the awards came from. Just saying "Best Screenplay Award" doesn't mean anything by itself. --Auntof6 (talk) 21:08, 25 May 2023 (UTC)
•  Delete Not notable. I checked all the English-language sources in the awards section, and they don't even mention the word "Kagangal". Lights and freedom (talk) 21:38, 25 May 2023 (UTC)
•  Delete The awards seem to be dishonest. Probably should be Quick Delete really unless there is some evidence that the awards are real. Blissyu2 (talk) 12:34, 6 June 2023 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 20:53, 1 June 2023 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

---

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

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

---

The outcome of this request for deletion was to  Delete.  --Auntof6 (talk) 01:33, 7 June 2023 (UTC)

Chima Joseph Ugo

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

FatalFit has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Way too promotional to actually give any real information Dylan | ✉ | ✓  17:30, 19 May 2023 (UTC)

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

Discussion

•  Keep as founder and CEO of Prime 9ja Online. That's notable enough. Blissyu2 (talk) 14:29, 20 May 2023 (UTC)

  He's notable but the article is too promotional, practically an advertisement. Dylan | ✉ | ✓  20:28, 20 May 2023 (UTC)

  Rewrite instead of delete.197.210.79.9 (talk) 11:06, 29 May 2023 (UTC)

•  Delete - Being CEO of a company is not an automatic ticket of notability. I see little to no significant coverage of the subject. Delete.— *Fehufangą ♮ ✉ Talk page 23:44, 29 May 2023 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 17:30, 26 May 2023 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

---

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

Related pages

• 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