Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/Today

Purge
Shortcut WP:AFD/T

5 October 2024

Read how to nominate an article for deletion.

Recent AfDs: Today Yesterday

Media Organisations Biography Society Web Games Science Arts Places Indiscern. Not-Sorted

< October 04	October 06 >

Guide to deletion

Purge server cache

Triangle and Robert

AfDs for this article:

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I'm not sure if this webcomic is notable. The single reference that's in the article brings up Triangle and Robert a few times ([1]), though Google Books only lets me see snippets, so I can't tell if it's significant coverage or not. It has also been mentioned ([2]) in The Comics Journal, where it even says "This [...] strip is virtually never talked about when Web comics are discussed". The article was previously kept at an AfD, but that was back in 2005 when standards were very different. toweli (talk) 12:17, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Webcomics, Internet, and Websites. toweli (talk) 12:17, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Nothing in my literature either, and a google is giving me nothing reliable. There's not much for us to work with here. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 15:41, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Not eligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, RL0919 (talk) 13:16, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:11, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Cradlepoint

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Scope creep previously PRODded this article, but it was procedurally dePRODded. The rationale was "Company article that fails WP:NCORP. References are routine business news. Fails WP:SIRS." Indeed, the coverage is routine and WP:ORGTRIV, and most of the sources are WP:TRADES. Janhrach (talk) 14:08, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Business, Companies, Computing, and Idaho. Janhrach (talk) 14:08, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Freestyle fixed gear

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I don't think this article in its current state meets WP:NSPORT. Yes we have fixed-gear bicycle, as well as fixed gear racing, but it doesn't seem clear what this one is all about. As they say, two heads are better than one, and here I am to find the community's assessment. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 05:35, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sports and Cycling. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 05:39, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I believe the sport of freestyle fixed gear meets notability. Aside from being featured in Hollywood motion pictures (cited), the very first cycling trick done on film was done on a fixed gear bicycle (this is cited in the article). A fixed gear bike was used in the X Games (in 2001 Trevor Meyer) the premier showcase of Extreme sport. Fixed-gear bicycle article doesn't contain the details or background on the community of people doing tricks on fixed gear bikes. Racing on a fixed gear isn't really related to freestyle (tricks) on a fixed gear; similar to how speed skating isn't related to figure skating. FixedGearFreeStyle (talk) 23:59, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 13:57, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of Indian podcasts

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Promotional article fails WP:NLIST. Almost all items are non-notable. Ratnahastin (talk) 08:41, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Lists and India. Shellwood (talk) 11:53, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Leaning towards Weak Keep. I don't see how the article is promotional and its a well sourced list. It serve as a informational list per WP:LISTPURP. The problem is it needed more expansion. Warm Regards, Miminity (talk) (contribs) 15:18, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Radio-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:24, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per WP:NLIST because Indian podcasts have been discussed as a group or set by independent reliable sources, which is demonstrated by the cited sources. TipsyElephant (talk) 18:34, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete At best only 3 items can be preserved. Don't need a standalone article for that. REDISCOVERBHARAT (talk) 08:59, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 12:39, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Simon Crosby

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:SIGCOV, WP:BIO. scope_creep^Talk 08:35, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators and Businesspeople. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 12:37, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Significant coverage for this person exists. Wired [3], The Register [4], eWeek [5], Computerwoche [6], InfoWorld [7], CRN [8], TechTarget [9], Csoonline.com [10] Frost 16:33, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Computing, South Africa, and England. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:24, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Almost everyone of these references are interviews of one sort or another and can't be used to prove notability. Gbooks is probably the best bet for establishing it. There is a couple of profiles there that are no good either. scope_creep^Talk 07:33, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I agree, these sources don't establish GNG notability, and subject is nowhere near WP:NPROF. Qflib (talk) 13:56, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 12:39, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2000 Tehran airport collision

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Per WP:NOTNEWS and WP:EVENTCRIT. Per WP:GNG, "sources should be secondary sources, as those provide the most objective evidence of notability". From what I've been able to find, only primary sources exist on the event with no secondary sources existing on the event. The event does not have in-depth nor sustained continued coverage with coverage only briefly occurring in the aftermath of the crash. No lasting effects or long-term impacts on a significant region have been demonstrated. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 10:14, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Aviation, Transportation, and Iran. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 10:14, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Maybe you are in a region where access to the BBC is blocked: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/628749.stm Thincat (talk) 13:06, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I do have access to the BBC but as noted above, these sources aren't secondary due to there being no analysis, evaluation, interpretation, or synthesis. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 13:43, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
We don't know the source of some of the BBC's information: I doubt whether they had a reporter on the spot. Where they tell us what Mazaheri said they are giving us his secondary account surely? But, apart from the secondary aspect, the event may well not be too notable. I found the other claims in your nomination more persuasive. Thincat (talk) 14:44, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

•Merge into Runway Incursion and Tehran Airport Accidents and incidents sufficently covered there. Notable but doesnt warrant its own article as shown by nom @Aviationwikiflight Lolzer3k 18:18, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Correction, * ground collision there is no accident description there, needs to be created. Lolzer3k 18:20, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 12:37, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

National liberation struggle of the Ingush people

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This article is a POVFORK and we already have a decent article at Ingush people. There may be some elements of this article that can be merged there, but I don’t think this article as a whole should be retained. Mccapra (talk) 06:10, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Military and Russia. Mccapra (talk) 06:10, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events and History. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 12:42, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Any content worth merging?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 12:34, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Spring Financial

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Run-of-the-mill predatory/payday lender. "Reviews" are indiscriminate WP:SPIP with no meaningful content. Wikipedia is not the place to host brochures. No indication of any independent coverage, in-depth in reliable sources, in fact there's barely anything beyond the SPIP and the routine "I got predatory loaned to" that all of these have, which, while sad, are not great sources for encyclopedic content. Alpha3031 (t • c) 11:58, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Finance, Companies, and Canada. Alpha3031 (t • c) 11:58, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2028 New South Wales local elections

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This feels like it's WP:TOOSOON for this election to have an article. The election is four years from now. Warm Regards, Miminity (Talk? | contribs) 10:35, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politics and Australia. Warm Regards, Miminity (Talk? | contribs) 10:35, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I understand why you say that but I'm going off the sorta-precedent of the 2026 Victorian state election, 2027 New South Wales state election, etc pages being created right after the previous one ended

There's already coverage in multiple reliable sources about the 2028 elections and the changes that'll occur then, I think that meets enough coverage to keep the page

Otherwise if it was to be deleted, I would argue it should instead redirect to Local government in New South Wales Totallynotarandomalt69 (talk) 10:39, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Night Begins to Shine (Teen Titans Go!)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No evidence of notability for these episodes together, better covered at main articles Indagate (talk) 09:29, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Comics and animation and Entertainment. Indagate (talk) 09:29, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 12:34, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Presumed security

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

A term seemingly coined by a single blog post. The post does not appear to have received secondary coverage and Wikipedia now seems to be primary source of the term. Brandon (talk) 08:23, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. Brandon (talk) 08:23, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Embassy of Turkey, Rome

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:ORG. Article based on primary sources and a directory listing. LibStar (talk) 08:15, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: There are no reliable and independent sources to establish WP:CORP
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bilateral relations, Italy, and Turkey. LibStar (talk) 08:15, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Baldwin Class 12-32 ¼ E

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The only source I could find which discusses the subject in depth is https://locomotive.fandom.com/wiki/Baldwin_Class_12-32_%C2%BC_E which is not a reliable source. References in the article do not discuss the subject in depth. TarnishedPath^talk 08:12, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. TarnishedPath^talk 08:12, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. TarnishedPath^talk 08:57, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the discussion was: Withdrawn‎ per the recent findings of multiple sources by @Cunard. (non-admin closure) Aviationwikiflight (talk) 10:25, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

TransAsia Airways Flight 510A

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Per WP:EVENTCRIT. Per WP:GNG, "sources should be secondary sources, as those provide the most objective evidence of notability". From what I've been able to find, none of the sources were secondary in nature since none of them contained analysis, evaluation, interpretation, or synthesis. The event does not have in-depth nor sustained continued coverage with coverage only briefly occurring in the aftermath of the accident. No lasting effects or long-term impacts on a significant region have been demonstrated. Additionally, none of the sources found provided significant coverage of the event. WP:EVENTCRIT#4 states that routine kinds of news events including most accidents – whether or not tragic or widely reported at the time – are usually not notable unless something further gives them additional enduring significance, which this event lacks. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 07:48, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Aviation, Transportation, and Taiwan. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 07:48, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. The event meets Wikipedia:Notability (events)#Duration of coverage in that it has received significant coverage in a 2016 book published 21 years after it took place on 30 January 1995.
The event is notable since the Routledge book The Dragon in the Cockpit: How Western Aviation Concepts Conflict with Chinese Value Systems noted, "From the CAA report, we can infer some cultural factors in the accident. Although these inferences are not part of the original report, they are consistent with the events of that night and with what we know about Chinese culture. In the accident report from the CAA, the conversation between crewmembers, the radio communication between crewmembers and traffic controllers, together with all kinds of sounds, were disclosed." If the event were non-notable, it would not continue to receive significant coverage in a book published 21 years later.
Sources
1. Jing, Hung-Sying; Batteau, Allen (2016). The Dragon in the Cockpit: How Western Aviation Concepts Conflict with Chinese Value Systems. Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge. pp. 25–31. ISBN 978-1-4724-1030-6. Retrieved 2024-10-05 – via Google Books.
  The book notes on page 25: "At 7:16pm, Flight 510A departed from Magong Airport without any passengers on board, scheduled to land in Taipei at 8:20pm. Sixteen minutes later the crew called Taipei approach, said the plane was 16 n.m. from Miaoli Houlong, and would descend and maintain an altitude of 9,000 feet. The approach tower directed the crew to pass Houlong and descend to 4,000 feet, and prepare to land on runway 10 of Taipei Songshan Airport. When the plane passed through Houlong, the crew asked to fly directly to Linkou, and proceed with visual approach. The approach tower agreed and directed the plane to lower the altitude to 4,000 feet."
  The book notes on page 26: "Two years later, the CAA published the accident report (Civil Aeronautics Administration 1997). In the report, there were no primary causes revealed. Only the conclusions of the investigation were listed. Among them, several main points were given as below."
  The book notes on page 27:
  Why and how did this happen? From the report of the CAA, it can be found that the CAA again attributed the cause to lack of training. Therefore, reinforcing crew training can prevent such tragedies from happening again. However, after every single plane crash, accident reports always suggest to reinforce training. "Reinforcing training" is almost a cliché in flight safety of Taiwan. Yet, plane crashes continue to happen. Why is that? Is it because the training is still not enough? Or, is it because that reinforcing training is very hard? Is it possible that training is not the real cause? Or were there some more profound explanations other than training? What is the truth?
  From the CAA report, we can infer some cultural factors in the accident. Although these inferences are not part of the original report, they are consistent with the events of that night and with what we know about Chinese culture. In the accident report from the CAA, the conversation between crewmembers, the radio communication between crewmembers and traffic controllers, together with all kinds of sounds, were disclosed. From 13:23 after 7:00pm when the flight was approved by Magong for take-off, until 43:57, the total length is 30 minutes and 34 seconds. From the moment when the plane was still on the ground, there was the voice of a flight attendant (F/A) in the cockpit.
  The book notes on page 30: "Why didn't the crewmembers stop the flight attendant when she interfered with their communication to the controller? In Chinese culture, who would treat a good friend like this given such a relaxed atmosphere? Again, relationship favor played a very important role in the behavior of the crew. As for the reason why the crewmember replied to the flight attendant first, in Chinese culture, the relationship favor is hierarchical. If there are two people, one is a good friend, the other is a stranger, the two stand at quite different psychological distances in our mind. Every Chinese person would be inclined by instinct to attend to a friend first, not the stranger."
2. 1995 sources:
  1. "Taiwan plane flew too low when it crashed". Honolulu Star-Bulletin. 1995-02-01. Archived from the original on 2024-10-05. Retrieved 2024-10-05 – via Newspapers.com.
    The article notes: "A Taiwanese airliner was flying too low when it hit a mountain on a wet night this week, killing all four people aboard, aviation officials said on today. They said the Foshing Airlines twin turboprop ATR-72 was flying at about 1,000 feet through a rainy night when it crashed less than 15 minutes before it was due to land in Taipei on Monday. ... Foshing is also called TransAsia Airways."
  2. Cai, Zhenyuan 蔡振源 (1995-02-08). "復興空難黑盒子解讀發現'有不正常訊號'" [TransAsia Crash: Black Box Analysis Reveals 'Abnormal Signals']. United Evening News [zh] (in Chinese). p. 3.
    The article notes: "民航局副局長張國政上午表示，從座艙通話紀錄器的解讀資料中發現，除夕夜失事的復興航空510A班機，在失事前「飛行可能有偏，而且有不正常訊號出現」，但細節張國政不願多說，只表示還要再對座艙通話紀錄資料詳加研讀後，在下午4時公布。"
    From Google Translate: "Zhang Guozheng, deputy director of the Civil Aviation Administration, said in the morning that from the interpretation of the cockpit call recorder, it was found that TransAsia Flight 510A, which crashed on New Year's Eve, "may have been deviated in flight and had abnormal signals" before the crash, but Zhang Guozheng had no details. He did not want to say more, but said that he would make a detailed study of the cockpit call record data before announcing it at 4 p.m."
    The article notes: "今天上午，失事調查小組人員，包括民航局、復興航空、法國民航局及ATR公司代表已就黑盒子資料作過初步意見交換，但張國政說「大家都沒辦法解釋清楚」。在開完記者會後，調查小組人員繼續開會判讀。"
    From Google Translate: "This morning, members of the crash investigation team, including representatives from the Civil Aviation Administration of China, TransAsia Airways, the French Civil Aviation Authority and ATR, had a preliminary exchange of opinions on the black box information, but Zhang Guozheng said that "no one could explain it clearly." After the press conference, the investigation team members continued their meeting for interpretation."
  3. "復興失事客機黑盒子通話內容公布最後廿秒出現異常隨後撞山" [TransAsia Crash: Black Box Communication Contents Released; Abnormalities Detected in the Last 20 Seconds Before the Crash]. Min Sheng Bao (in Chinese). 1995-02-09. p. 18.
    The article notes: "民航局昨天公布除夕夜復興航空失事客機上座艙通話器(俗稱黑盒子)錄音帶內容判讀結果，顯示失事飛機在飛行途中一切正常，只有最後廿秒出現異常，即失事撞山。"
    From Google Translate: "The Civil Aviation Administration of China yesterday announced the results of the interpretation of the audio tape of the cockpit intercom (commonly known as the black box) on the TransAsia Airways plane that crashed on New Year's Eve. It showed that everything was normal during the flight. Only the last 20 seconds caused an abnormality, when the plane crashed and hit a mountain."
  4. "復興班機墜毀龜山四組員罹難機上無乘客兔坑村山區火光可見松山機場還關閉跑道等候降落另兩班機因此改降中正機場" [TransAsia Flight Crashes in Guishan; Four Crew Members Killed, No Passengers on Board. Flames Visible in the Mountain Area of Tuku Village. Songshan Airport Closed Runway Awaiting Landings; Two Other Flights Diverted to Taoyuan Airport]. United Daily News (in Chinese). 1995-01-31. p. 1.
    The article notes: "大年夜發生大不幸，復興航空公司昨由馬公空機飛回台北，編號B二二七一七的五一○A春節加班機在桃園縣龜山鄉兔坑村附近山區失事墜毀，機上四名組員罹難。罹難者屍體及飛機殘骸均已找到。罹難者是：機長王洪佳，副駕駛李光志，空服員劉慧卿、林子雅。 "
    From Google Translate: "A big tragedy occurred on New Year's Eve. Yesterday, TransAsia Airways flew a Malaysia Airlines flight back to Taipei. The 510A Spring Festival overtime flight numbered B22717 crashed in the mountains near Tukeng Village, Guishan Township, Taoyuan County. Four people on board were on board. A team member died. The bodies of the victims and the wreckage of the plane have been found. The victims were: Captain Wang Hongjia, co-pilot Li Guangzhi, and flight attendants Liu Emily and Lin Ziya."
  5. "上月購進飛行時數僅兩百餘小時失事客機昨天飛行11趟" [Purchased Last Month, the Crashed Aircraft Had Only Flown Just Over 200 Hours and Made 11 Flights Yesterday]. United Daily News (in Chinese). 1995-01-31. p. 4.
    The article notes: "昨天失事墜毀的復興航空公司客機，上個月才購進，飛行時數僅兩百六十五小時，落地三百九十四次，但昨天一天已飛行十一趟，單日飛行密度很高。復興航空目前有十三架ATR七十二型飛機，昨天失事的這架是最新購進。機長王洪佳已有一萬七千一百三十小時的飛行時數，其中飛行ATR為一九八七小時；副駕駛李光志的飛行時數為六千九百廿六小時。 "
    From Google Translate: "The TransAsia Airlines passenger plane that crashed yesterday was purchased only last month. It had only flown for 265 hours and landed 394 times. However, it had flown 11 times yesterday, and the flight density in a single day was very high. . TransAsia Airways currently has 13 ATR 72 aircraft, and the one that crashed yesterday was its latest purchase. Captain Wang Hongjia has 17,130 flying hours, including 1,987 ATR flying hours; co-pilot Li Guangzhi has 6,926 flying hours."
There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow TransAsia Airways Flight 510A to pass Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline, which requires "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject".
Cunard (talk) 10:03, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I had just found the mentioned book above, The Dragon in the Cockpit, and was planning on withdrawing the nomination. Also, good job on finding the multiple sources above. I agree that these do indeed establish the event's notability. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 10:11, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

Ferdinand Oliver Porsche

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Lacking in sources and no indication of claimed entrepreneurship. Sits on Porsche and Volkswagen boards, most likely due to his family connections as the great-grandson of Ferdinand Porsche. Clarityfiend (talk) 07:32, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Austria, and Germany. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 08:34, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

AppShield

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

AppShield the product does not appear to independently establish notability beyond Sanctum, the company that created it. As a testament to that the version of the article prior to my edits describes three different products or research projects entitled AppShield, all erroneously presented as a single topic. Brandon (talk) 07:30, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Technology and Israel. Brandon (talk) 07:30, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 08:37, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
keep - Although it seems very likely that WP:COI editors are meddling with this and related articles, I think this passes notability. Doing a little more digging I found a couple more decent-quality sources, including a ZDNet article attesting to adoption in 2002. IMO this is a good example of how COI editors can actually make it less likely that their subjects get articles, when left alone they don't raise as many eyebrows. StereoFolic (talk) 13:42, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Aeroflot Flight A-53

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Per WP:GNG and WP:EVENTCRIT: There exists no reliable independent (significant) news coverage of the event, no secondary sources, no in-depth coverage, no (sustained) continued coverage, no demonstrated lasting effects nor long-term impacts on a significant region of the world that would make this event notable enough for a stand-alone article. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 07:27, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Aviation, Transportation, and Turkmenistan. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 07:27, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Darius Yuen

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

BLP of a successful businessman and philanthropist lacking in depth independent coverage. Non-notable awards, Forbes and routine coverage of career moves. Does not seem notable. Mccapra (talk) 07:24, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and Hong Kong. Mccapra (talk) 07:24, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete a reasonable search for sources turns up nothing substantial. Yes, he got a 1-paragraph mention in a Forbes Asia list, but I can't see how WP:BLP is met, and no other applicable category Oblivy (talk) 09:37, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Startup Britain

AfDs for this article:

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:ORGCRIT. Created as promo. AfD a decade ago closed as no consensus and there's been no improvement since. A campaign which appears to have had little lasting impact after initial routine news coverage. Website is now dead. Huge sections of unverifiable text. AusLondonder (talk) 07:14, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Business, Companies, and United Kingdom. AusLondonder (talk) 07:14, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Aliheydar İbragimov

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I’m not sure this military commander is notable, though much decorated. The Azerbaijani site has no sources at all, and the sources in the Russian article are very scanty. If nobody can find anything else more solid I think deleting would be appropriate. Mccapra (talk) 07:11, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Military, Azerbaijan, and Russia. Mccapra (talk) 07:11, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tony Schaller

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I can't find any trace of meeting WP:GNG. The lyrical competition of the Olympics is probably not the venue that would make a writer notable. It can be confirmed that Antoine Schaller wrote lyrics based on Hippolyte Ackermans [fr], being one of 30 names - with surnames starting with S, that is - mentioned in a large list. I can find nothing but WP:PASSING mentions elsewhere; both Google and Google Books throw around a lot of namesakes from our time. Geschichte (talk) 06:58, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Olympics, and Belgium. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 08:35, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Morrison Hashii

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Having played 2 minutes in Singapore, for a community college and in the English non-league, this player has not picked up significant, independent coverage to meet WP:GNG and WP:SPORTCRIT. Geschichte (talk) 07:01, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Japan. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 08:36, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yogananth Andiappan

AfDs for this article:

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

There's no more indication of notability this time than there was last time, as far as I can tell. The SCMP article doesn't even seem to mention the article subject. I can't see any indication of how it might meet BASIC. Alpha3031 (t • c) 04:24, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Health and fitness, Hong Kong, and India. Alpha3031 (t • c) 04:24, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors and Tamil Nadu. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:35, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lecture room (disambiguation)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Unnecessary per WP:DIFFCAPS and WP:SMALLDETAILS, none of the disambiguated titles overlap or conflict with each other. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 04:15, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Disambiguations-related deletion discussions. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 04:15, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. WP:DIFFCAPS and WP:SMALLDETAILS are guidelines of Wikipedia:Article titles, not of Wikipedia:Disambiguation. Even WP:DIFFCAPS and WP:SMALLDETAILS clearly state that readers are guided as swiftly as possible to the topic they might reasonably be expected to be looking for, by such disambiguation techniques as hatnotes or disambiguation pages (italic added). Lecture room (disambiguation) has three disambiguation entries, lecture room, Lecture Room, and The Lecture Room, which only differ in capitalization and the definite article (the) and should be included on the disambiguation page. --Neo-Jay (talk) 06:57, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per Neo-Jay's argument and the "See also" to near-synonym lecture hall. The reader will be helped by this dab page. PamD 07:35, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. This will avoid a clumsy hatnote. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 08:19, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Neo-Jay's argument and on how it is clear on how they differ 79lives (talk) 09:32, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Maybe my reasoning was not obvious to people, but a hatnote would not be "clumsy" and would fall under WP:ONEOTHER for Lecture Room. The other link is so minor it does not even have a page of its own. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 11:11, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"The other link" that you mentioned above refers to The Lecture Room, which is a redirect page to AKB48 Show!#The Lecture Room. It is acceptable because, according to Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Disambiguation pages#Where redirecting may be appropriate, [a] redirect should be used to link to a specific section of an article if only that section discusses the disambiguated topic. --Neo-Jay (talk) 11:45, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Embassy of South Korea, Ankara

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:ORG. Only 2 primary sources provided. A search for sources found incidents like this which don't really add to notability. https://www.turkiyetoday.com/turkiye/south-korean-ambassador-jeong-yeondoo-prefers-yht-for-ankara-trip-539/ LibStar (talk) 03:50, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bilateral relations, South Korea, and Turkey. LibStar (talk) 03:50, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Embassy of Algeria, London

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:ORG. 2 directory listings provided as sources. A search for sources only came up with this incident which doesn't really add to notability. https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c977qndxndxo LibStar (talk) 03:46, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bilateral relations, Algeria, and United Kingdom. LibStar (talk) 03:46, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Magnet Man

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

promotional..notability in doubt SINGS09 (talk) 03:11, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Barbados. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:36, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Disagree with this nomination, particularly no evidence of a WP:BEFORE. The article does need some cleanup but that's no reason for deletion. There is enough coverage, including of awards and platinum sales, from independent sources to meet WP:MUSICBIO. ResonantDis_tortion 09:43, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was Withdrawn by nominator‎. Additional entries were added following the nomination to the point where the DAB page does seem needed. (non-admin closure) ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 13:05, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Letter of the law (disambiguation)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Unnecessary DAB page - see WP:PTM for why. None of the disambiguated pages are solely called "Letter of the law" or even "Letter of the Law". ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 02:28, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Law and Disambiguations. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 02:28, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. WP:PTM does not indicate that this disambiguation page should be deleted. Letter of the law (disambiguation) has three disambiguation entries, each of them is legitimate. 1. Letter of the law redirects letter and spirit of the law, which should be a disambiguation entry at Letter of the law (disambiguation). 2. The Letter of the Law has article "The", and "The plus disambiguation term" should usually be included on the disambiguation page for the disambiguation term (see Wikipedia:Disambiguation#Partial title matches ( WP:PTM): For instance, the Mississippi River article [...] is included at Mississippi (disambiguation) because its subject is often called "the Mississippi"). 3. Takeru: Letter of the Law's subtitle is Letter of the Law, and a work may often be referred to by its subtitle. Furthermore, I have added a link to Wiktionary:en:letter of the law into this disambiguation page. --Neo-Jay (talk) 06:40, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"May be"? Is there evidence that Takeru: Letter of the Law is referred to by only its subtitle without its actual title? It appears to only be referred to as "Takeru" or "Takeru: Letter of the Law" in reliable sources. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 11:15, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. This page is helpful, and avoids a clumsy hatnote. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 08:23, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The hatnote would not be clumsy as it would likely only contain one entry. Takeru is dubious to include here at all. I'm not convinced people would search for it by "letter of the law" rather than "Takeru". ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 11:23, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have added four more disambiguation entries to the disambiguation page. --Neo-Jay (talk) 12:31, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I think there's enough DABMENTIONs here to merit withdrawing the AfD. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 13:04, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

Wright Investors' Service Holdings, Inc.

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails GNG. There’s a news article about them donating some dam properties but that’s it. Northern Moonlight 03:20, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Finance, Companies, and New York. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:51, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete : The nominator is right.--Gabriel (……?) 11:58, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 03:35, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: There is a very detailed article about this company's history at Cengage / encyclopedia.com under its previous National Patent Development Corporation name. The end of that article also includes a list of sources (on paper). AllyD (talk) 08:55, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 02:25, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep as National Patent Development Corporation meets WP:GNG and WP:NCORP. The NPDC's role in the history of the development of soft contact lens, as well as its IP, is very well documented (though it is tricky to untangle the "real" story with all its legal twist and turns and international intrigue). A few examples include this 2022 article in Hindsight: Journal of Optometry History; the 1989 book Communist Entrepreneurs: Unknown Innovators in the Global Economy; and this 1997 Business Week article, "Ready to Rise from the Dead?" which explains the company's poor financial performance in the late 1980s and 1990s. It's to the point that I did wonder if this article should be renamed to its historical name, but given that there is more recent coverage about the company as Wright Investors Service Holdings, particularly with regard to the dams in Connecticut as the nominator pointed out, it's fine as is for now. Sources have been added, but the article still needs more citations and clean up, which can take place over the normal course of editing. Cielquiparle (talk) 09:06, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]