Wikipedia:Requests for deletion

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

Before nominating: checks and alternatives Edit

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

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

Discussed deletionEdit

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

Quick deletionEdit

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

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

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

Notifying the userEdit

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

DiscussionsEdit

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

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

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

Current deletion request discussionsEdit

Katherine B. HoffmanEdit

Katherine B. Hoffman (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Only has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Does not appear to be notable. Her "highest" title that I can see was "Dean of Women" at FSU. Nothing provided that suggests she passes WP:GNG or specific guidelines for academic. While her obituary appears in the New York Times, it seems to be more of a "human interest" type piece in a series of NYT articles on people who have died due to COVID-19. Only (talk) 10:50, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

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

DiscussionEdit

This request is due to close on 10:50, 10 August 2020 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.


Resurreccion BorraEdit

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

Eptalon has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: I find very litlle reliable information, when searching for his name. One of the two links i the article is dead link. Given that English is one of the two official languges of the Philippines, and that Spanish, Chinese and Arabic may be common, I would expect at least some form of biography in one of these language wikipedias, or a news source, reporting on his carreer, or political views (he was a politician). So, the very basic question: Even if he was a civil servant at the commission for elections, where are (ideally independent) sources that show his notability? - I would porpose we delete this article, unless more (ideally, independent) sources can be found. Eptalon (talk) 10:38, 2 August 2020 (UTC)

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

DiscussionEdit

  • Comment @Eptalon: I have extended the article and used other news sourced (non-obit related) and even found some interesting source material via Google Books. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 11:07, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
  • 'Comment - Thank you looks much better now. --Eptalon (talk) 11:36, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
  •   Keep per TDKR’s additions. Good work as usual :) IWI (chat) 11:40, 2 August 2020 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 10:38, 9 August 2020 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.


Christabel FinchEdit

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

Only has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Had one role as a child actress on a soap opera and has not acted since; does not seem to be notable. English Wikipedia treats this as a redirect to the character's page. Only (talk) 12:22, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

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

DiscussionEdit

This request is due to close on 12:22, 8 August 2020 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.


Holly ChamaretteEdit

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

Only has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: She played one role in a series as a child actor for a few years and has had no roles since. English Wikipedia treats this as a redirect to the character page. Only (talk) 12:21, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

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

DiscussionEdit

  •   Delete - nowhere near enough coverage to be considered notable. Furthermore, there is no claim in the article to suggest they have played any major roles in anything. IWI (chat) 18:44, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 12:21, 8 August 2020 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.


Nitin Patkar (singer)Edit

Nitin Patkar (singer) (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Chenzw has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Fails NMUSIC, sources are either self-published or merely listings on streaming services etc. Chenzw  Talk  16:22, 31 July 2020 (UTC)

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

DiscussionEdit

  •   Delete per nom. Not notable. IWI (chat) 14:42, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
  •   Keep per TDKR’s additions. Good work as usual :) User: Donald j. Dk

This request is due to close on 16:22, 7 August 2020 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.


Ilse Arts (2nd nomination)Edit

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

ImprovedWikiImprovment has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Bringing this back to RfD follwing a deletion review here. That discussion followed the previous request, where the outcome was decided by an admin as keep, despite no "keep" votes. There were two comments that leaned towards "keep" that both pointed out that the article meets NATHLETES. Nobody has yet demonstrated that the subject has enough in depth coverage in reliable sources to be considered notable. The article does meet NATHLETES, but this is only a guide to see whether an article is likely to have enough coverage to meet WP:GNG. At the moment, I'm not seeing enough coverage. IWI (chat) 19:32, 30 July 2020 (UTC)

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

DiscussionEdit

  • Keep Bronze medalist Paralympian who was a member of the Netherland Women's Wheelchair Basketball Team during to 2016 Paralympics. Operator873talkconnect 19:43, 30 July 2020 (UTC)
  • comment i am not opposed to deleting the Nathletes, and going back to GNG for everybody. after all we saw a contracting in pokemon, iron cross holders, and astronomical objects. however, you need to be consistent in the notability application. selectively deleting women paralympians, when there are many male footballers is not a good look. start here Category:German_footballers. Slowking4 (talk) 19:43, 30 July 2020 (UTC)
@Slowking4: I am not selectively choosing to delete articles about women paralympians. Please do not suggest such a thing. I do not discriminate against women or the disabled. IWI (chat) 19:47, 30 July 2020 (UTC)
i observe that women athletes get a deletion nomination, while male athletes do not. (plus one male author) are you denying that fact? Slowking4 (talk) 19:49, 30 July 2020 (UTC)
To be fair Wikipedia doesn't exist to right great wrongs. For better or worse notability on Wikipedia is based on coverage in reliable sources. It is an unfortunate fact of the world that both women and paralympians in general are covered in the media less than male footballers. -Djsasso (talk) 19:51, 30 July 2020 (UTC)
i'm not writing wrongs, i'm suggesting you might want to be consistent in your application of notability. you realize how many gender gap news stories have been written? look at the male footballer articles, their references are just as bad. for example Helmut_Haller -- Slowking4 (talk) 19:55, 30 July 2020 (UTC)
It isn't about whether the sources are in the article, its whether they exist at all that is the issue. In the case of your example, only have to go to the English version of the article to see there are a bunch of better sources of him there. -Djsasso (talk) 19:58, 30 July 2020 (UTC)
 (change conflict) Well I can see straight away from the enwiki article that this person has enough coverage to establish notability. In the case of Ilse Arts, I haven't been able to find any independent coverage. If you find a German footballer article that doesn't have enough coverage, feel free to nominate it at RfD. IWI (chat) 20:00, 30 July 2020 (UTC)
yeah, it has been here ten years, and no one has included the obituaries. sorry, i don't do tit for tat deletion; rather, i do user:keilana tit for tat creation: you delete one women biography, i create ten. cheers. - Slowking4 (talk) 20:48, 30 July 2020 (UTC)
You shouldn't create articles to make a point, especially if they're not notable. See en:WP:POINT. IWI (chat) 20:50, 30 July 2020 (UTC)
i'm not writing to make a point: writing to fill content gaps. your process of deletion of recent articles held to a higher standard, than a large body of existing articles, contributes to content gaps, whether you intend to or not. Slowking4 (talk) 15:06, 31 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Keep Bronze medalist Paralympian is almost 99.9999% guaranteed to have been talked about in their local media. Being that they are from the Netherland's the sources are likely in Dutch and thus harder to find. NSPORTS exists to give time to exactly these kinds of articles to find sources so they aren't deleted due to systemic bias. -Djsasso (talk) 19:45, 30 July 2020 (UTC)
The number one google result is actually this article. I've tried google news as well but there is nothing there about her at all. If there are sources about her, I highly doubt they are on the internet. IWI (chat) 19:53, 30 July 2020 (UTC)
Well that was my point, along with the fact the sources are likely in Dutch and google is poor at showing results for languages other than your default unless you tell it specifically to. -Djsasso (talk) 19:57, 30 July 2020 (UTC)
I changed my google language to Dutch to see if it could find anything in Google news. Didn't see anything. If you have a google account you can try this for yourself. IWI (chat) 20:03, 30 July 2020 (UTC)
Right but the main point I was making in the other discussion is often the sources exist off the internet or are not easily googleable and you need to use one of the many news paper archiving services to get to the information, that is the reason it often takes time. -Djsasso (talk) 20:04, 30 July 2020 (UTC)
Yes true. Like I said, if there are sources they are likely from physical newspapers or magazines. IWI (chat) 20:05, 30 July 2020 (UTC)
Thank you. Yes notability is clear with sources now. Passes GNG :) IWI (chat) 22:00, 30 July 2020 (UTC)
Is there any relationship between the first linked source and the third linked source? Article content is the same, even the website design is similar. Chenzw  Talk  02:00, 31 July 2020 (UTC)
My bad, they are definitely related - DPG Media [en] owns both of them. The only other source I could find was this article by Omroep Gelderland [en]. It only mentions her name once, but at least shows she participated in the Paralympics. – Aranya (talk) 03:18, 31 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Weak keep - I think this is difficult, because it is not an individual sport. She won her medal at the paralympics as part of a team. It would be more straightforward in an individual sport sportswoman's case. Having said that, there does appear to be some media coverage in Dutch (as pointed out above), and going back to Eptalon's original close, if the Paralympics (the highest level of sport) are to be considered on the same level as the Olympics, then surely winning a bronze medal, backed up with sources about that fact and coverage specifically about the person, is sufficient for inclusion. --Yottie =talk= 07:11, 31 July 2020 (UTC)
  •   Delete. Not for me. A third in a parolympic team sport is no way as notable as the main events. Some are looking round corners to do a decent thing, but if you say the paraolympics are as notable as the real thing you are losing all perspective. If you say they are as worthwhile as the real thing, then I have nothing to say. Macdonald-ross (talk) 13:02, 31 July 2020 (UTC)
Don't support the phrase "real thing" nor referring to the Olympics as the "main event" here. Paralympians are just as much real athletes as Olympians. The article does meet NATHLETES and thus is considered notable if enough coverage is provided.. IWI (chat) 13:36, 31 July 2020 (UTC)
  •   Delete - while I don't dispute the fact that the subject of this article meets WP:NOLYMPICS due to her medal win in the 2016 Paralympics, the subject-specific notability guidelines ultimately are a proxy for an article's eligibility according to GNG (i.e. if it meets subject-specific notability criteria, it is likely to meet GNG as well). I searched for this person in Factiva, a research database which indexes newspapers all over the world, and only 17 entries appeared for this person; all of those entries are passing mentions, or mentions of her name in player rosters without further elaboration. This is in stark contrast to Mareike Miller, a member of the Germany basketball Paralympics team (and which took the silver medal), which has at least 300 entries in the database (and dated after 1 September 2016 to weed out coverage for the 2012 Paralympics). Even Arts' teammate, Inge Huitzing, has 100+ entries in Factiva (no comment about whether coverage was indeed significant). I agree with what Yottie said about a team sport posing challenges when it comes to media coverage, but in this case I simply can't see any evidence of significant coverage about the person specifically. The subject-specific notability guideline is careful to qualify that meeting NSPORTS is not equivalent to automatic inclusion in Wikipedia: ...conversely, meeting of any of these criteria does not mean that an article must be kept. Chenzw  Talk  04:39, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 19:32, 6 August 2020 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.


Category:Subdivision of the United KingdomEdit

Category:Subdivision of the United Kingdom (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Prahlad balaji has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Almost zero pageviews. Unneeded category. Wrong title too. ~Prahlad balaji (t / c) 18:16, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

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

DiscussionEdit

  • Note: For those who haven't looked at the category, what Prahlad balaji didn't mention is that this is a redirected category. --Auntof6 (talk) 22:12, 29 July 2020 (UTC)
  •   Keep - Well that's the whole point. In case the wrong name is used, it would redirect. Redirects can have the wrong name. I don't see any harm in keeping. IWI (chat) 22:17, 29 July 2020 (UTC)
ImprovedWikiImprovement and Auntof6, I know it's a catredirect, but what's the point of it if it has next to zero pageviews? ~Prahlad balaji (t / c) 18:00, 30 July 2020 (UTC)
The response to that of course is, what is improved by removing it? -Djsasso (talk) 19:28, 30 July 2020 (UTC)
Redirects of any kind are less likely to have pageviews. That shouldn't be the criterion for deleting them. --Auntof6 (talk) 20:31, 30 July 2020 (UTC)
Yeah I don't think anything is gained by deleting. IWI (chat) 05:40, 31 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Generally I am only really a fan of Category redirects when they are absolutely necessary. There is no harm in keeping it of course. But I personally would delete it. -Djsasso (talk) 00:58, 30 July 2020 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 18:16, 5 August 2020 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.


Gary ConcepcionEdit

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

ImprovedWikiImprovment has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Not notable. IWI (chat) 15:55, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

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


DiscussionEdit

  • Keep Speedy deletion tag was reverted by Bureaucrat. An element at least of notability. User:TheRealThing2016 (chat) 17:04, 29 July 2020 (UTC)
  • The speedy deletion was removed because there was a claim of notability. That does not mean there is notability. Just that the author claimed the person was notable. -Djsasso (talk) 00:36, 30 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Delete - mentions in provided sources are not substantive to prove notability. Only (talk) 17:25, 29 July 2020 (UTC)
  •   Delete Cannot pass a Google search, no results --Thegooduser Let's Talk! :) 🍁 02:09, 31 July 2020 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 15:55, 5 August 2020 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.


White lieEdit

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

ImprovedWikiImprovment has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Doesn't warrant its own article. The current article is complex and unsourced. Some information could be merged into Lie. IWI (chat) 14:42, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

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

DiscussionEdit

I would be happy to explore other options. 1. I can simplify the language if that is the main issue 2. I can provide references is that is important. For new articles, I typically add those once I see if the article itself is deemed important. 3. I would be happy to see the page merged into the "lie" page. I wrote it because there was a red link in the 10 Commandments page. Is there a way for that page to link to a sub-topic in another page? I would be happy to find out how to do that. 4. Perhaps we need an article on "Situational Ethics". This could be a sub-topic in that.

JNRSTANLEY (talk) 15:10, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

@JNRSTANLEY: thank you. The topic "white lie" doesn’t need its own article in my opinion and should be part of the Lie article. The English Wikipedia has "white lie" redirecting to "lie". IWI (chat) 15:16, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

I have greatly simplified the English. I hope this solves that problem. Putting this into the "lie" article is something I can do, but I don't know how to make a link to a sub-section. Help with that appreciated. By the way, JNRSTANLEY is my old name. I made that comment from my old computer. Sorry for any confusion. Jonahson (talk) 16:38, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

@Jonahson: While you are allowed to have alternate accounts, it would be helpful if you put them on your user page so we know. IWI (chat) 16:44, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

Done. Jonahson (talk) 18:41, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

  • I have edited Lie to be mergable (this can be redirected to Lie#White lie however basically all information in the currently article is unsourced stuff like "An example is telling Nazi soldiers that there are no Jews hiding in a house. This is a lie, but it stops the bad thing of the Jews being killed." that would need to go. So essentially the merge would be just a redirect. Naleksuh (talk) 07:56, 2 August 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for all of the good suggestions. How about this. I will make the original link to White lie which is in the Ten Commandments page go to the Lie#White lie as suggested. The existing "White lies" page can can be deleted. At some future time when I have time and unless someone tells me not to, I may write up something about situational ethics, along with ample sources, that covers cases such as the Nazi/Jews example and the case of spies. These are better called "justifiable lies" rather than "white lies" which I agree pertains more to trivial things like, "Do you like my new hat?". I will do the article deletion tomorrow, unless someone else does.

This request is due to close on 14:42, 3 August 2020 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.


Trading as a Service (TaaS)Edit

Trading as a Service (TaaS) (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Eptalon has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Software as a service, Infrasdtructure/Platform as a service are common terms, where there's a concept behind it. If I am a broker, then my business model is to offer trading (goods, or services); in that context, a term such as 'trading as a service' is devoid of meaning. So, I think it is best we deleted this. Eptalon (talk) 19:58, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

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

DiscussionEdit

  •   Keep. Appreciate your editor comments (Eptalon). However, the argument of “not having a concept” and “devoid of meaning” for the term “Trading As A Service” seems unreasonable. Seeing as there are solid concepts behind specifically introducing a disruptive but advantageous mindset of enabling all participants in a business ecosystem to participate with transparency, equality, and with as little cost as possible added to the business operation or products sold. If this wasn’t apparent, then we’ll edit the page and make this clear.

So basically, TaaS may be a very new concept to people at this point, specifically because it is "very new", but that does not merit the article’s deletion but instead its promotion so that more and more trading as a service providers can build better and broader and more inclusive platforms that can truly help economies (both the developing economies and the already developed ones) grow faster and include more of their non-participating SMB counterparts.

This phenomena is significantly more apparent in many developing countries like India, Vietnam, and the Philippines to name a few, where there are platforms that “enable” the small businessman (such as disenfranchised farmers, or fisherman) to “trade equally” like big businesses and tap the same markets and consumers to level the playing field across the two very diverse producers. This is the unique essence of “Trading As A Service” and why the article is important to relay this increasingly growing practice.

So I vote not to delete this article.

Stockspex (talk) 02:32, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

  • Delete as neologism, especially given the above comment about how the concept is "very new". I also don't see significant coverage in reliable, independent sources. Chenzw  Talk  13:33, 27 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Delete. 100-plus words in second sentence, obviously copied. Not simple, not sourced, and not reliable as to facts. Macdonald-ross (talk) 13:49, 27 July 2020 (UTC)
  •   Delete - neologism. Will likely be forgotten in the future. Also not sourced or simple. IWI (chat) 14:51, 27 July 2020 (UTC)
  •   Keep Comment: Very interesting comments above. How is the relationship of over "100-plus words in the second sentence" attributed to "obviously copied"? Please justify this gross assumption Macdonald-ross(talk). Its interesting to see how very little fact-checking actually happened on this comment since there are over a dozen trading as a service references established over the web today, albeit most of which are "stock trading" instead of actual only inclusive commodities platforms. Stockspex (talk) 07:41, 28 July 2020 (UTC)
Note - Struck duplicate vote. IWI (chat) 17:45, 28 July 2020 (UTC)
Strike reversed and above vote downgraded to a comment. It would be appreciated if such work is left to sysops in future. Chenzw  Talk  11:43, 29 July 2020 (UTC)
Certainly. Will keep that in mind. IWI (chat) 14:10, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 19:58, 2 August 2020 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.


Recently closed deletion discussionsEdit

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

The outcome of this request for deletion was to   DeleteChenzw  Talk  07:48, 2 August 2020 (UTC).

Africa’s Business HeroesEdit

Africa’s Business Heroes (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Eptalon has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Even though it has notable people supporting, I don't think this programme has reached a level of notability which would make it notable for inclusion. Helping startup companies and support programs where people with good ideas can find business angels who support them are probably common. So, what makes this programme notable? Eptalon (talk) 09:26, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

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

DiscussionEdit

  •   Comment I found it notable not for a common helping of startup companies, but as startup competition (Not common) and its target in African Continent (Not common). I think there is no other notable competition for startup companies in Africa--Hamid (talk) 14:01, 25 July 2020 (UTC)
  •   Delete - Despite the interest by notable people, there is not enough coverage in sources to pass WP:GNG from what I see. IWI (chat) 14:46, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 09:26, 1 August 2020 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.


The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.
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   DeleteChenzw  Talk  07:47, 2 August 2020 (UTC).

Madison Taylor BaezEdit

Madison Taylor Baez (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Eptalon has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Contested quick dletion, so we are going through a regular RfD. Given that the person we are talking aobut is just 9 years old, I'd opt for deletion though. This is supposed to be an enyclopedia; not a social media site to collect likes, or to share friends on. In short: doubtful notability, likely self-promotion (or promotion by parents and relatices). Eptalon (talk) 09:19, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

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

DiscussionEdit

This request is due to close on 09:19, 1 August 2020 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

  • Delete as Copyright violation of http://madisonbaezmusic.com This is a word for word copy of material that appears there. The site declares "©2017 by MadisonBaezMusic" For clarity the splash page on the site holds the full text that has been copied and pasted Timtrent (talk) 09:29, 25 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Comment The copyright violation has been removed by the creating editor. I have struck my prior opinion. The discussion has been created with a rationale other than copyvio (my original Quick Delete rationale) and I make no recommendation whatsoever on that element. Timtrent (talk) 12:46, 25 July 2020 (UTC)
    Note to closing admin: The copyvio should be revdelled if the result of this RfD is keep. IWI (chat) 14:38, 25 July 2020 (UTC)
  •   Delete Also worth noting, the user(s) are suspected socks with a history of creating promotional pages on various projects. Quakewoody (talk) 15:15, 25 July 2020 (UTC)
Do you mind providing us the name of the involved puppet accounts? @Quakewoody:--Trade (talk) 15:36, 25 July 2020 (UTC)
  • I found these three Madonna1992, Nithya1988, and Rashmika Rashmika, all fairly quickly based on files/items/articles still in existence. I don't know accounts that may have already been deleted. Quakewoody (talk) 17:04, 25 July 2020 (UTC)
Why do you think these accounts are the same person?--Trade (talk) 18:41, 25 July 2020 (UTC)
At this point, I believe they are all blocked. But now I wonder if we should add Blogwriter66 to this list. Quakewoody (talk) 15:56, 27 July 2020 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Arshifakhan61 is likely to be of interest here. Rashmika Rashmika is a known sock Timtrent (talk) 16:10, 27 July 2020 (UTC)
Of note, but not really relevant. We don't delete articles created by banned or blocked users here. IWI (chat) 16:11, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

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   DeleteChenzw  Talk  07:44, 2 August 2020 (UTC).

Mujtaba kamalEdit

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

Yottie has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Not notable. Limited media coverage. Never fought as a professional. Yottie =talk= 18:54, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

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

DiscussionEdit

This request is due to close on 18:54, 31 July 2020 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.


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

The outcome of this request for deletion was to   Delete. --Eptalon (talk) 16:25, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

A Sony Pictures Entertainment CompanyEdit

A Sony Pictures Entertainment Company (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Yottie has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: At best this could be a mention in an article about Sony Pictures, but does not need an article of its own. Yottie =talk= 18:54, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

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

DiscussionEdit

  •   Delete - agreed. Doesn't need its own article. IWI (chat) 20:36, 24 July 2020 (UTC)
  • This article has been redirected multiple times, but the redirect is always removed. If the consensus is to redirect, it may be semi-protected on the redirect. Naleksuh (talk) 20:38, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 18:54, 31 July 2020 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.


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

The outcome of this request for deletion was to   Delete. --Eptalon (talk) 16:23, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

A Sony CompanyEdit

A Sony Company (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Yottie has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: At best this could be a mention in an article about Sony Pictures, but does not need an article of its own. Yottie =talk= 18:54, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

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

DiscussionEdit

  •   Delete - doesn’t need its own article. IWI (chat) 11:11, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 18:54, 31 July 2020 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.


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

The outcome of this request for deletion was to   Delete. --Eptalon (talk) 16:21, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

Amit DevanshiEdit

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

Yottie has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: I do not believe the player meets the notability criteria. Limited press coverage. Yottie =talk= 18:54, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

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

DiscussionEdit

  •   Delete - fails GNG. Nothing of note found in a Google search. IWI (chat) 14:54, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 18:54, 31 July 2020 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.


The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.
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   DeleteChenzw  Talk  14:04, 1 August 2020 (UTC).

Nivedita ChandelEdit

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

Yottie has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: The subject does not appear to be notable. A quick Google search seems to confirm this. Yottie =talk= 21:12, 23 July 2020 (UTC)

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

DiscussionEdit

  • Comment - I'm seeing [1], [2], [3], so I'd vote weak keep. — Infogapp1 (talk) 20:31, 27 July 2020 (UTC)
  •   Delete. The music videos are a form of advertising, and would not count unless some special claim was being made about them. I don't see sources from professional film critics talking about her limited film career. Just another bright spark making a living... Macdonald-ross (talk) 11:03, 31 July 2020 (UTC)
  •   Keep I vote keep.Pranveer98 (talk)
  •   Delete per Macdonald-ross. IWI (chat) 09:20, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 21:12, 30 July 2020 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.


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

The outcome of this request for deletion was to   Delete. --Eptalon (talk) 09:27, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

Cole heiseyEdit

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

Yottie has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: The nominator's reason for doing this is: Not notable, minor political figure. No track record of ever being in office. Yottie =talk= 18:54, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

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

DiscussionEdit

  • Note to closing admin. If this article is kept, please rename to give it correct capitalization. --Auntof6 (talk) 09:06, 27 July 2020 (UTC)
  •   Delete. Fails notability for politicians by quite a margin. Macdonald-ross (talk) 10:32, 27 July 2020 (UTC)
  •   Delete not notable. Blatantly promoting the politician. IWI (chat) 14:53, 27 July 2020 (UTC)
  •   Delete Appear to fail WP:NPOLInfogapp1 (talk) 20:22, 27 July 2020 (UTC)


This request is due to close on 18:54, 31 July 2020 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

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

The outcome of this request for deletion was to   Delete. --Eptalon (talk) 09:49, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

Amjad TadrosEdit

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

Yottie has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: The person in question does not meet the notability criteria. The vast majority of the coverage is from CBS, where he works. Yottie =talk= 18:54, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

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

DiscussionEdit

  • Weak keep - Has won awards that could indicate notability. Covered in many sources other than CBS. IWI (chat) 14:44, 25 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Comment - I'm unable to locate the Emmy Awards source except for mentions from sites in what appear to be self-initiated bios. As for CBS, he's labeled as 'contributor', so unless we can locate better sources for the award, I'm leaning towards voting Delete. — Infogapp1 (talk) 20:28, 27 July 2020 (UTC)
  •   Delete - struck my keep vote per Infogapp1's comment above, as well as from my own second search. Emmy claim not substantiated. IWI (chat) 23:48, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 18:54, 31 July 2020 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.


The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.
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. 'Upcoming, unreleased movie', Wikipedia is not a crystal ball....--Eptalon (talk) 09:06, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

Coat (movie)Edit

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

Naleksuh has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: thought to be innotable, created by sock Naleksuh (talk) 18:58, 23 July 2020 (UTC)

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

DiscussionEdit

  •   Delete Regardless of who created it, this article hasn't got enough independent coverage for GNG in my opinion. IWI (chat) 14:53, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 18:58, 30 July 2020 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.


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


Related pagesEdit