Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/Today

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Purge

17 October 2024

Read how to nominate an article for deletion.

Purge server cache

Stanford Super Series (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Not enoungh coverage on independent sources, Fails WP:GNG. Vestrian24Bio (TALK) 03:41, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2008 Stanford Super Series (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

same reason as well. Vestrian24Bio (TALK) 03:43, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2008 Egyptian bus accident (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Lacks sustained coverage and had no lasting effects. Just a WP:News article. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 03:08, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, plicit 03:32, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of Rainbow Rumble episodes (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Problematic list article. An English Wikipedia article should not be an indiscriminate list of episodes that have no lasting impact; as per one editor in this discussion thread I started regarding this list article, there are no dynamic narratives for episodes of game shows that can satisfy a separate article (game shows somehow fall under the WP:ROUTINE category of TV programming). On top of that, much of the sources used for this article are WP:NIS (like ABS-CBN Entertainment) and WP:SOCIALMEDIA (like Instagram, see WP:RSPINSTAGRAM).

List may also lean towards WP:FANCRUFT as the episodes overview section, with very-detailed info on the highest winning bracket of each contestant more fit on Philippine showbiz fandom websites than English Wikipedia. In short, unlikely encyclopedic in nature.

At the very least, it can be merged with Rainbow Rumble#Episodes but focusing on salient details: episode date, team name, contestants (in an inline enumerated list, not a bulleted, vertical list that unnecessarily consumes article page height), and the episode winner. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 02:50, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support per nom. Borgenland (talk) 03:31, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. We've had more than enough cringy fancruft here that needs abridging if not excising. Blake Gripling (talk) 04:16, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Lavangsdalen bus accident (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Lacks sustained coverage and had no lasting effects. Just a WP:News article. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 03:07, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting to see if there is more support for a Merger.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 02:23, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

New Era, Indiana (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Another Indiana rail-spot/post-office with nothing there. Not a notable place. Mangoe (talk) 02:33, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 02:17, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Liz Neeley (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Neeley is an accomplished woman but is not encyclopedically notable. There isn't much secondary coverage of her nor she does not pass WP:NACADEMIC. Mooonswimmer 01:25, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Women, Entertainment, Science, Maryland, and Massachusetts. WCQuidditch 02:15, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak delete. I see little sign of NPROF, with only one highly cited paper that is also very highly coauthored. I am skeptical of GNG -- the NPR piece is somewhat substantial, but the other pieces are either primary (usually authored by the subject) or else do not mention her. The book has gotten some reviews, but these do not list her as an author [1][2]. I considered a redirect to the Story Collider, but as she has moved on from that organization, that doesn't seem to make so much sense. I think this is probably a bit WP:TOOSOON. Watchlisting in case I have missed something. Russ Woodroofe (talk) 10:50, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: Is this the same person: [3]. a citation factor of 10 or 11 doesn't seem that high, but I'm unsure. Oaktree b (talk) 15:28, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak keep: Might pass AUTHOR, with some book reviews for "Escape from the Ivory Tower", [4], [5], [6]. Oaktree b (talk) 15:31, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    But all three of those say that the book is by Nancy Baron, and do not mention Neeley. Baron does thank Neeley in the acknowledgements (alongside a lot of other folks). Russ Woodroofe (talk) 16:06, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I just came to the same conclusion that she did not write the book (and reverted myself when I added one review to Neeley's article) DaffodilOcean (talk) 16:12, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak keep There are at least four sources I found in the article for WP:GNG. I'm listing them up here for ease of access. The first one has the most coverage of the subject; the other three are more than just passing mention but less than significant coverage. Nnev66 (talk) 20:59, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    1. "Your Brain On Storytelling : Short Wave". NPR.org. January 14, 2020.
    2. Wilcox, Christie; Brookshire, Bethany; Goldman, Jason G (2016). Science blogging: the essential guide. Yale University Press. ISBN 978-0300197556. OCLC 920017519.
    3. Achenbach, Joel (2023-04-09). "Opinion | Why science is so hard to believe". Washington Post. ISSN 0190-8286. ProQuest 1655455709.
    4. Renken, Elena (11 April 2020). "How Stories Connect And Persuade Us: Unleashing The Brain Power Of Narrative". NPR.org.
  • Delete. Coverage by the subject themselves, as in the NPR interviews, is not independent or secondary, so does not count towards GNG. She is one of the authors of the science blogging guide so that is not an independent reference either. The WP article has no encyclopedic coverage of her, just quotes and an anecdote about her dad that would be UNDUE. These are not substantial enough for NPROF C7 and definitely not for GNG. JoelleJay (talk) 23:00, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 02:17, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Men Who Lost China (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Similar to the recently deleted article on The World Without US by the same filmmaker, no signs of significant coverage. The article's current sourcing is not independent or significant, and I could not find any signs of further coverage after an online search (given that the film has less than 100,000 views on YouTube, I doubt that coverage exists). RunningTiger123 (talk) 01:40, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

China's Century of Humiliation (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Similar to the recently deleted article on The World Without US by the same filmmaker, no signs of significant coverage. The article's current sourcing is not independent or significant, and the best I found from a Google search is a forum review, which is not significant. RunningTiger123 (talk) 01:28, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Roger Jones (physicist) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Massive conflict of interest issues with a good amount of the edits coming from the subject of the article himself. Some of the sources appear to be dead. Any other sources don't even mention him, focusing more on the actual companies he claimed to have some involvement in. TeapotsOfDoom (talk) 01:11, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Already PROD'd back in 2007 so not eligible for Soft Deletion. I'll just add that I don't see obvious signs that the subject edited this article and would be interested in knowing how the nominator came to this conclusion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 01:14, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

AfDs for this article:
Tasjil (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Not notable. No significant coverage. References only give a paragraph or so mentioning something similar, but only one uses the translation of tasjil. Cuñado ☼ - Talk 01:04, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Religion-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch 02:19, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Agreed no coverage in most all reliable sources. Very obscure term.Smkolins (talk) 06:37, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • I strongly oppose as the creator. In contrast to the nominator's claim, there are three sources in the article that specifically use the word "Tasjil" (Amanat 2009, Naficy 2011 and Pirnazar 2019) and all of them are scholarly. The book Historical Dictionary of the Bahá'í Faith has an entry for the process under the title 'DECLARATION OF BELIEF OR ACCEPTANCE' (translating the word "Tasjil" to Acceptance) and another reliable source (Neusner 2003) dedicates almost two full pages to a detailed description of its stages (titled 'Who is considered a Baháʼí?'), while a certain case in Africa, Samuel Kima of Cameroon, is mentioned in several pages of an academic book published by the renowned Brill Publishers (Lee 2011). These are only a handful of sources and I believe this is a proof that this topic is notable. Khánum Gül (talk) 13:07, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Please note that there is a bahaipedia entry for this topic as well. Khánum Gül (talk) 15:53, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Please see WP:GNG and WP:DICTIONARY. One problem is that you created the title in Arabic for a process that is not known in English by its Arabic name. The content is probably most suited for Baháʼí teaching plans#Baháʼí terminology with a section on "Declaration" or similar. Both of the other sections (Pioneering and Entry by troops) previously has their own articles and were consolidated into that page. Cuñado ☼ - Talk 16:58, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Your first objection concerns naming, which is not the focus of this discussion. I have no issue with a title like "Baháʼí Enrollment Process" (or something similar) and a mention of its name in the original scripture of the faith, "Tasjil," in the article's lead. However, I still disagree with your assertion that this topic is not notable, as it has been significantly covered by multiple academic sources in great detail. I have added another source (van den Hoonaard 1996), which provides an extensive discussion of the practice in Canada, examining various cases. Khánum Gül (talk) 08:00, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. SInce we have a difference of opinion here on the outcome of this AFD, a source review would be helpful to a closer.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 01:09, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Edward Katongole-Mbidde (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:BIO. 1 of the 2 supplied sources is primary. Could not find significant coverage of this individual. LibStar (talk) 01:05, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Centre FORA (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable organization. BEFORE search leads to nothing, failing GNG and NORG. Klinetalkcontribs 00:56, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Felo Barkere (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

there's nothing that mentions Felo Barkere and Baunez Ridge together that isn't Eric Gilbertson related/sourced. This location doesn't appear to meet WP:NGEO. Graywalls (talk) 00:02, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]