Comment: the nominator and second seem to be conflating the population of Barboursville with the notability of this list. The word "village" doesn't determine notability; populated places have generally been deemed notable, irrespective of their size. Additionally Barboursville is an incorporated municipality under the laws of West Virginia, and under West Virginia Code § 8-1-3 Barboursville has been a "class III city" since 1960, and would have been a "class IV town or village" before that. It was also the county seat from 1813 to 1888. As an incorporated municipality, a list of Barboursville's mayors is appropriate, and could be included in the article about Barboursville, without having to demonstrate their individual notability; here, the list has been split out into its own article, because it is fairly long, covering over two hundred years. As a separate issue, the city's own official publications are not independent, and therefore do not count toward establishing the significance, and thus notability of its individual mayors; but as official government publications they may be considered authoritative as to the names of the persons who held that position and at what points in time. I believe that better sources are available for most or all of the mayors, and will visit the library today to find out. P Aculeius (talk) 13:44, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I am not suggesting Barboursville itself is non-notable. I do on the other hand believe a list of all mayors of a relatively small locality is not notable. AusLondonder (talk) 14:28, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The list itself meets WP:LISTCRITERIA, the question is whether it should be a separate page or back in the city article. I view these pages as a valid page split (WP:SPLIT) as the content is verifiable, and could be included in the parent article, but because of the size of the content, does not always belong in the parent article. If the information was in the parent article, we would not be having this discussion about notablilty. --Enos733 (talk) 21:43, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Update: I thought the list went back to the beginning, but it only seems to go back to the late 19th century. I did find some materials supporting this list at the public library in Barboursville, but only going back as far as this list does. They're not great sources, but they're published and available for review—anyone can go and check them. At least one was based on the same source listed here: the Barboursville monument with a list of mayors. That's not ideal, but public monuments should probably be treated as official statements by the city, subject to correction using better sources. I'll see about whether any of the other sources make sense to incorporate here. At worst, the list could perhaps be incorporated back into the article about Barboursville, but deletion does not make sense. P Aculeius (talk) 22:21, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. What reason would we ever need a standalone list of utterly non-notable people, regardless of whether it's verifiable? That's stuff for a town website or directory, not a global encyclopedia. JoelleJay (talk) 05:56, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Barboursville under a newly created heading (mayors or politics). The article isn't too long, should it become too long: the list can always be collapsed. It is sourced information. Rolluik (talk) 18:17, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Any further support for that merge? Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 20:12, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
WP:NLIST requires the subjects being listed to be discussed as a group in any significant depth by reliable sources. Although some sources have discussed Kick's channels collectively, those are all about the controversies and publicity stunts those creators have caused, not about their number of followers [1][2][3]. The abundance of coverage of WP:SENSATIONAL events that were designed by online celebrities for the exact purpose of gathering media attention is rarely a good argument for notability, and I doubt that this topic needs a stand-alone list considering that Kick (service) is already an article (which meets WP:NCORP mostly because of the coverage of said controversies to begin with). Badbluebus (talk) 19:48, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Some sources here do focus on talking about the numbers of followers of specific big channels of this website (e.g. Amouranth, xQc and Adin Ross), but NLIST requires those creators to be discussed as a group, not individually. And needless to say, celebrity gossip websites and online databases are rarely reliable sources. Badbluebus (talk) 19:51, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Failure of WP:SPORTCRIT and WP:GNG. Modest career with 63 minutes in Austria’s second highest league, as well as some games in Albania’s second tier, Austria’s third tier and Germany’s fourth tier. I can't find any significant coverage, only articles about an accused criminal of the same name. Geschichte (talk) 19:25, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I am relatively new to wiki-editting, but happy to make any proper edits to avoid deletion. Just message me with some guided assistance and I will be happy to make changes. StepToMyLeft123 (talk) 19:29, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Page appears to fail WP:N, WP:SPORTSPERSON, WP:BIO for equestrians, not notable, few RS on this individual to warrant encyclopedic entry, listing existence could be seen as promotional for this person's business. The events that are described in this person's bio: FEI North American Continental Championships in 2014, 2015 and 2017,silver medal during the Championships in 2017 and won all U25 classes --are not the highest level of international competition and many individuals could have listings here. Maybe this competitor will become an international level performer but is not currently. Nayyn (talk) 18:38, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Neither reliable nor notable for the purposes of Wikipedia. Regarding reliability, the list is sourced to a single article on what's essentially a blog, and the author's source is "This is the most comprehensive list of Tiger Electronics Handheld games that I could assemble from scouring the internet." This is fine for a blog, but this is absolutely not in any way acceptable as the sole source for a Wikipedia list article. Regarding notability, there's no evidence that these handhelds have notability as a group per WP:NLIST, let alone that any of them are individually notable.
Commment. When I was patrolling this page, I couldn't find any pieces on him — nothing close to WP:SIGCOV — in a quality British national WP:RS, and zero outside of the UK. As a west-end actor, he is going to get mentions in the media from shows, but I can't see that the media find him particularly notable as a standalone subject? thanks. Aszx5000 (talk) 10:44, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I couldn't find either anything in previews nor any mention of him in the play reviews. It a complete mystery to me how they can jump to a keep !vote almost immediately without presenting any evidence per WP:THREE. I did a search using reliable sources search which covers the major Canadian newspapers and not a thing came up, on him. There is reviews of the plays. You would think there would be some mention outwith passing mentions. scope_creepTalk14:25, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Thewikizoomer: What sources exactly. You seem to flit from Afd to Afd without providing any evidence for you keep !votes. WP:THREE is considered best practice for proving the person is notable. Do you have any reference that prove this person is notable? scope_creepTalk16:49, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: keep !votes would benefit from specifying which sources establish Notability here. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Eddie891TalkWork17:38, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep clearly a notable subject, she had a lead role in Taufan (1952) and a few supporting roles in notable Indonesian and Singapore films. The obstacle of this article it's just the source that must be translated to English and also a little extra work on searching Dorothy Schnapp (talk) 17:49, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I believe the page merits retention due to several key factors demonstrating Ruiz's significance and notability.
Comparable Wikipedia Entries: Many individuals who have held comparable or similar positions as Chief of Staff, including Allie Bones and Jack LaSota, maintain active Wikipedia pages.
Both of these individuals have pages with far less detail regarding their accomplishments or their impact on public policy. This sets a clear precedent for retaining the page for Ruiz, who has had an equally, if not more, significant role in Arizona's political landscape.
Historical and Cultural Significance: Daniel Ruiz II holds the distinction of being the first Latino to serve as Chief of Staff to an Arizona Governor. This alone represents a noteworthy milestone in Arizona’s political history, reflecting the increasing diversity in state leadership roles and making Ruiz a pioneering figure in the Latino community. His tenure in this high-profile position is emblematic of broader societal changes and deserves recognition for its historic value.
Impact and Influence: As noted on the page and in news sources, during his tenure, Ruiz oversaw critical initiatives under Governor Doug Ducey’s administration, playing a central role in shaping policy decisions and managing key aspects of state governance. His influence extended beyond the day-to-day operations of the Governor's office, as Chief of Staff is a role vital to executing state policy and managing crisis responses. His leadership, particularly in a state as politically dynamic as Arizona, underscores the importance of documenting his contributions.
Broader Media Recognition: As noted in the specific citations from reliable sources provided, Daniel Ruiz II has been the subject of media coverage related to his role in shaping Arizona's policies. His involvement in major state initiatives, including economic development and crisis management, has brought him into the public eye.
Daniel Ruiz II is a notable figure both historically and politically. His role as the first Latino Chief of Staff in Arizona and his comparability with other individuals in similar roles who have retained Wikipedia pages underscore his notability. I respectfully request that his page be maintained and preserved as an important documentation of Arizona’s political history. ArizonaArt (talk) 17:59, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Article creator has been indef blocked for repeatedly creating non-notable articles; PROD removed by an IP now blocked as a sock. This is another example of a well-written but ultimately non-notable article - semi-pro footballer who fails WP:GNG. GiantSnowman17:31, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Article creator has been indef blocked for repeatedly creating non-notable articles; PROD removed by an IP now blocked as a sock. This is another example of a well-written but ultimately non-notable article - young footballer who fails WP:GNG. GiantSnowman17:29, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, the election is uncontested (Green Party didn't field a nominee) and less than a month away. The position of Shadow Senator is a federal position, equivalent to a senator. There's also a decent amount of coverage already [6][7][8]Microplastic Consumer (talk) 17:10, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not denying they would meet NPOL if elected, but they don't right now. Routine election coverage of candidates is expected and doesn't really count towards anything. I would support a draftification that can be reverted if they win, but right now they are not notable. CFA💬17:24, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think the coverage is decent as is, what reason is there to get rid of the article of a person who has a 99.9999% chance of being elected into office just before an election? Microplastic Consumer (talk) 18:19, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or draftify per nom (lean draftify IMO). I've talked with the page creator about WP:NPOL already, including a bit about how a candidate's article was not put into mainspace until he actually won the election. Right now, on the page, there are four sources, two are routine coverage, one is an endorsement, and one is Wikipedia:BALLOTPEDIA. Searching on Google doesn't yield much that can be added. They don't seem to pass NPOL or WP:GNG until he actually wins the election. reppoptalk19:05, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: We have arguments to Delete, Draftify, Keep and Redirect this article which, at this point, means that there is no consensus to do any of those actions. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, LizRead!Talk!17:20, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Does not meet WP:NORG: the article is entirely a list of acquisitions and funding rounds, referenced to trivial coverage ("inclusion in lists of similar organizations" and "of the expansions, acquisitions, mergers, sale, or closure of the business"). No significant coverage. Dan • ✉22:13, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The company is a notable player in the cybersecurity industry, particularly in cloud-native security. Aqua Security has significant media coverage from reputable sources like Bloomberg, TechCrunch, and The Wall Street Journal --Loewstisch (talk) 10:53, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The citations to Bloomberg are directory information. They do not indicate a WP:CORP that is distinguishable from all other cyber security firms worldwide. Being a financially successful corporation does not a notable one maketh. Ventric (talk) 13:39, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
As to the other references you mentioned - the Techcrunch articles are regurgitated PR on funding rounds with no "Independent Content" as required by ORGIND. The WSJ articles - one has a quote from a company exec, no in-depth information about the company as required by CORPDEPTH, the other is another rehash of a funding announcement, fails ORGIND. None meet GNG/WP:NCORP criteria for establishing notability.
Keep as the company is well-covered in specific business and security literature (per my additional WP before search), such as books on DevOps, Kubernetes, containerized applications, and cloud security. The page and its sources are also about software. Some security-industry guidebooks also heavily analyze various Aqua software tools, including Trivy and Kube-hunter. --美しい歌 (talk) 10:01, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Your edit simply added three book titles to a new section, and did not connect these references to the prose or explain their relevance. Of the three, Rice (2020) is partially written by company representatives and is not a reliable source: "this work is part of a collaboration between O'Reilly and Aqua Security" (p. ii), Binnie & McCune (2021) is unavailable on Google Books so I can't confirm a reference to the article subject, and Aversa (2023) simply makes passing references for how to use Aqua Security products, but does not demonstrate any notability whatsoever. Dan • ✉12:42, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! I was not solely referring to those books, as there are many more. I agree that Rice (2020) is not an independent source. However, Cloud Native Security devotes a significant portion to the software, while Aversa's book covers the software side of Aqua Security in depth, including descriptions of various software structures, acquisitions, and principles. 美しい歌 (talk) 15:22, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete because the majority of coverage is comprised of trivial mentions. If it were kept, it would require a sharp reduction in content because it reads as WP:ADS - it is largely self-promo content. However, the lack of specific coverage and the inclusion in "who-to-watch" lists and whatnot does not comprise notability. CapnPhantasm (talk) 15:18, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep the sources are mainly about routine investment rounds, but not all of them. Some Hebrew sources, as well as a few U.S. ones, offer sufficient and independent coverage. The company passes ORG notability threshold ג'ימיהחיה (talk) 11:42, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Which sources specifically? Also, the *content* has to be in-depth and Independent, it isn't just the fact that the publisher is independent of the company. HighKing++ 13:05, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Can you give an example? The only non-trivial reference in the article appears to be that of the The New Stack article; the rest of the references are completely trivial funding drivel. A Google News search likewise finds no relevant reliable sources. Dan • ✉00:30, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as meeting NCORP. All deletes claim that the article is imperfect: this is true however AFDISNOTCLEANUP. So weak arguments for deletion. gidonb (talk) 22:59, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete/move to draft space, the article was almost certainly created by the company itself and is almost entirely based on poor quality sources. I've removed the most egregious claims/sources and what remains is "a list of acquisitions and funding rounds" as stated by the nominator. While a stub article could probably be created from reliable sources, it does not seem fair to allow a "$1 billion dollar" company's marketing department to create work for volunteers. The article should be created via the WP:AFC process instead of allowing a COI article to be created directly in mainspace without repercussions. Brandon (talk) 14:20, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I'll spare everyone the meta-commentary so as to avoid sounding like a paranoiac but the sources available is truly the trivial-ist of WP:ORGTRIV it is possible to get. By design, a pain to get through. Got up to page 10, nothing that contributes to NCORP in the slightest. Binnie and McCune (2021) does briefly mention Aqua in the context of how to use some software, but there is insufficient content about the software for it to contribute to the notability of even the software. Aversa (2023) is published by BPB Publishing which is a predatory publisher, so unless someone gives me a good reason, I am inclined to decline to review it beyond that. Best, Alpha3031 (t • c) 11:50, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. An Israeli unicorn with multiple reliable sources and a minimum but significant level of coverage in reputable independent media. In addition, the topic of the discussion is also a set of various software apps that have also received significant media attention even in the industry focused papers and books.
Keep I see the sources in Hebrew, some books, and at least Calcalistech have required deep coverage with analysis, brief overivew, etc that allows for anyone to "to write more than a very brief, incomplete stub about the organization" - as WP:ORGDEPTH says --Jiaoriballisse (talk) 10:53, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: I'll relist this for a few more days to allow editors arguing to Keep this article to rebut the source review which identifies the existing sources as inadequate. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, LizRead!Talk!17:18, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Definition of a "semt" can be informal, but Hatay in İzmir as a city center is well-recognized even if it does not have official boundaries. The Konak municipality has a center there, public transit stations, events, etc... Within the "semt", there are lots of officially recognized "mahalle"s, each of which can have their own articles, according to WP:NTOWN. TheJoyfulTentmaker (talk) 06:57, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete - Only two sources have been found so far, and as these are both the same publication, they count as one. A moot point as the second source is a passing mention. The first is a little better, suggesting the subject is a large district, but the discussion above suggests that the description is an informal one. Yet if we had multiple independent reliable secondary sources with significant coverage of the locality, the legal status would be irrelevant. I would move to keep if more and better sourcing could be found. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 18:17, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
We already have an article for the university. This article tells the reader mostly just what they would find more reliably on the uni website Chidgk1 (talk) 16:34, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
“D&R” is a shop (which sells records among other things) so I am not sure that source in the Turkish article is enough to show notability Chidgk1 (talk) 16:28, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete - Searches not showing anything, but I am loathe to trust English language searches for schools in non English speaking localities. It may be there are Turkish language resources here. Searching on the Turkish name, I find a book [23] but I speak no Turkish, and looking at it with Google Translate, it doesn't appear relevant, but I am beyond my competence here. What I do note is that this is quite a young school (established 1990) and not particularly big (c. 500 students). As a rule of thumb, I would not expect this one to meet GNG unless there were something significant that happened regarding its founding, its school life, or its achievements. I am not seeing anything at present so I cannot see how an article can be written. If a closer interpreted this as a !vote for soft delete (as an expired PROD), that would be fine with me. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 17:27, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Tagged 8 years ago as unsourced it would be too time consuming for a reader to check if this is correct or not. I checked a couple of things and found them wrong (2 shows mentioned as still running have apparently ended). Chidgk1 (talk) 16:03, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:N. The Soviet Union was notoriously tight-lipped about aviation accidents that occurred in that era, and many domestic accidents were never widely reported. This article is based entirely on what appears on the airdisaster.ru website, which was briefly discussed at Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard/Archive_446#airdisaster.ru a couple of months ago. I found that discussion by searching for such a discussion, as my gut feeling was already telling me that this isn't a reliable source, and the "sources of information" field on the entry on that site has been left blank. I've spent some time trying to find even a brief mention of this accident in reliable sources, and have failed. While Wikipedia's notability guideline is based on the existence of suitable sources, not on the current state of sourcing in an article, the policy does state that information on Wikipedia must be verifiable; if no reliable, independent sources can be found on a topic, then it should not have a separate article. RecycledPixels (talk) 17:57, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Clearly, the case of WP:BLP1E involves sources that are based on a single event, his death. If significant sources from before his death can be found, then the article can be kept. GrabUp - Talk06:31, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. But the nominator indicated the afd for WP:BLP1E policy, I don’t think that this is applicable in this case, article subject isn’t a living person. However, the matter is WP:BIO1E.–TANBIRUZZAMAN (💬) 22:11, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to List of people who died in the July massacre. Yamin was not notable before his death in the 2024 Bangladesh quota reform movement. Tanbiruzzaman is correct that the relevant guideline is WP:BIO1E. No doubt that's what GrabUp meant, people frequently confuse it with the similar WP:BLP1E. The reform movement is a highly significant event, but how important was Yamin's death in it? Hundreds died, was Yamin's death special, did it change the course of the movement? Nothing in the pseudo-biography suggests his death was pivotal. Perhaps in years to come, as secondary sources analyze the movement they will conclude that his role in it (dying) was large, but unless and until they do so, a separate article about him is inappropriate. The other biographies that Bruno pnm ars brought up deserve scrutiny, but at least make a credible claim that their deaths were in some way instrumental. --Worldbruce (talk) 06:20, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Is there more support for a Redirect? Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, LizRead!Talk!16:01, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Fail WP:NSINGER. There is literally nothing to inherently confer that here, and no source to establish WP:GNG. I looked through the sources and all I could find is unreliable PRs and advertorials for a more or less up-and-coming singer-songwriter. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 15:56, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I have no opinion on this particular event but the notion that school athletics competitions are not considered notable is simply not true, see the various NCAA competitions in the United States. Alvaldi (talk) 16:00, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have a few technical pages in my watch list and noticed that the user who created that page has edited adjacent pages, adding links to ThorVG in the see also sections.
@Miminity@CoderThomasB Hello, thank you for reviewing. This is one of the free open-source graphics projects run by a non-profit organization, made possible entirely through dedicated contributions from people around the world. I believe their efforts are well-deserved, just want to clarify the development history. I only added it to Skia/Cairo pages because it is good to know by people because it is closely aligned with the projects from a technical perspective. If you think it seems inappropriate by wiki policy, please let me know removing it again.
I'm having a hard time identifying the specific inappropriate points since I'm not fully enough familiar with wiki, I would appreciate it if you could point out the issues in the content. I just really hope to make it work. Thanks. Wuming421 (talk) 06:08, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
To be honest, this is really the hardest part to understand, in addition a new page. Because In that same manner, I also couldn't find any reliable sources from Skia/Cairo pages and links in See Also sections. They really don't have any information about relationship each other in both pages. (though I know, they are fully related/comparative each others including thorvg, so makes sense to me.) Wuming421 (talk) 07:45, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above, regrettably and with no potential merge target I could find. Google Books only yielded a self-published book that dedicates a single sentence. Aaron Liu (talk) 16:01, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Another example of a well-written but ultimately non-notable article - young footballer who fails WP:GNG. Creator has been indef blocked for repeatedly creating non-notable articles. GiantSnowman14:33, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Another example of a well-written but ultimately non-notable article - young footballer who fails WP:GNG. Creator has been indef blocked for repeatedly creating non-notable articles. GiantSnowman14:31, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Reviewed during NPP. No evidence of wp:notability under SNG or GNG. The sources and material are essentially all resume/CV type factoids. Previously deleted as an AFD result at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gene Hallman. The closest possibilities for SNG are some local specialized awards which have been put into the lead. North8000 (talk) 14:07, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The article of this young Slovak men's footballer has been tagged for notability for two years. He played a total of 378 minutes in the Slovakia's highest league to date. In terms of reliable secondary sources, I only found passing mentions from squad list, such as Ref 1 and Ref 2). Consider that almost no Slovak clubs are well-known outside their countries, I don't see this article as a potential draft. ⋆｡˚꒰ঌClara A. Djalim໒꒱˚｡⋆12:37, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Appears to be a non-notable dish. Sources are all recipes and blogs. The sprouted garden source is about the sweet potato, not the pie. The book is just a single sentence+recipe. The U Hawaii is a recipe. Google search only found recipes (and very few of those). Recipes for Haupia pie -- some referring to it as a Hawaiian classic, which is at least a claim to notability and may be a possible place to move instead of delete -- came up more often, but that was usually pies of just haupia or haupia with chocolate or other flavors. I see this was converted to a redirect to Sweet potato pie once, but reverted. I think it could possibly be redirected to Haupia. Valereee (talk) 12:14, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Minimal article on a state branch. The Australian Democrats were never significant in state level politics in Queensland and this article is little more than excess detail about the foundation of the branch, a list of federal Senators from the state and obscure points of Queensland company law. State & territory branches of Australian parties should only exist when the party was a significant force at that level. Timrollpickering (talk) 12:11, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
While the webcomics that are part of the alliance are notable, the alliance itself doesn't appear to have received significant coverage in reliable sources; I was only able to find mentions. The article was previously kept at an AfD (well, VfD), but that was back in 2004 when standards were very different. toweli (talk) 10:47, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This company churns out many dubious "statistics" with questionable sourcing. As the tags indicate, the article itself fails WP:NPOV and reads like an advertisement. There is little evidence of notability. LinkLightRailFan (talk) 09:41, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Dear @Timtrent, Thank you for your review. I would like to highlight that Nima Asgari is a well-known documentary filmmaker in Iran, recognized for his significant contributions to environmental and wildlife documentaries. He has won several prestigious awards at international festivals, such as the Jackson Hole Wildlife Film Festival in the USA and the Green Screen Film Festival in Germany. Additionally, he has served as a jury member at events like the Matsalu Nature Film Festival in Estonia. I have updated the article with reliable sources and references that showcase his notable achievements and contributions to the field.
I cannot find any mention of this newspaper in any source. While obviously it did exist at one time (their website is archived on the Wayback Machine), the lack of any third-party coverage means that it clearly fails GNG. Pinguinn🐧13:23, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I am still at a delete stance. Citation 1 is just a list of a whole bunch of temples. Citation 2 dedicates exactly seventeen words to the temple and just says its location. The legend of the temple is not going to help contribute to notability much. I don't know about citation four but it's a census which does not give me hope for the amount of SIGCOV it has. Citation 5 is just a list of temples, I have questions about the reliability of citations 6 and 7, and I don't know about citation 8. Relativity ⚡️02:21, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
retain this article because this article deals with the temple among the 108 Shiva Temples in India and as per Wikipedia guidelines it is enough for an article with three lines and subsequent wikipedians improve it. பொதுஉதவி (talk) 12:55, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Just added a few references and more info to the article. More seems to be available since there are published works containing this topic. The article now passes WP:GNG. Rasnaboy (talk) 19:07, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Noting that non of the sources added are considered RS. Most of them are listicals or travel guides that provide little to no reliable information. Sohom (talk) 20:22, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Relisting as there is a difference of opinion on the quality of sources. They need to be reliable sources that provide SIGCOV, not passing mentions. Also, User:பொதுஉதவி, I'd like to now what "Wikipedia guidelines" you are referring to in your Keep opinion, Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, LizRead!Talk!03:40, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: sorry but without any reliable sources available, this temple is not notable. The pleas for keep unfortunately do not relate to any of Wikipedia's standards. Chiswick Chap (talk) 13:34, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I did a WP:BEFORE on "Velappaya Shiva Temple" and "Velappaya Mahadevar Temple", but there are no hits on google books or scholars. I believe the temple may have had a different name in earlier times or it is known by another keyword. This could be improved if we can identify the correct term to search for. User:Spworld2, User:Rasnaboy, User:பொதுஉதவிJeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 05:41, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. As per Google books, a book titled 'The Mahabharta : A Summary For Beginners' written by the author Madhavan Kutty Manikath and published by 'Author's Ink Publications', at the footnote on page number 130, it is mentioned about Velappaya Mahadevar Temple, at Thrissur, in Kerala.
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Relisting, still no consensus or agreement on sourcing. At this point, it would be helpful to get a source assessment table (or a less formal review) to see where the truth lies. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, LizRead!Talk!03:10, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete unless someone adds sources: how has a BLP article survived since 2007 with no sources except the non-RS Discogs? PamD08:12, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
OK, sources have been added ... but they seem mostly to be listings showing that her albums exist, rather than anything about her beyond the brief paragraph in the Time Out ref. Have struck my "Delete", but I don't feel confident to give a "Keep". PamD20:37, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Relisting so that new sources can be assessed. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, LizRead!Talk!02:46, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Nasib Piriyev is a notable entrepreneur and business leader whose contributions have been recognized by multiple independent sources. He has significant projects in the fields of Energy, Lifestyle, Capital financing, Culture and Philanthropy, which have been covered by major national and international outlets, including Azertac,HELLO! Magazine, and The New York Times.
His ventures, including AzMeCo, Buta Arts Centre, and Woodford Finance, have had measurable impact on countries including Azerbaijan, United Kingdom and Malta, as reflected in multiple sources. Nasib has also linked to recognitions including the film awards emerged by SONUNCU (The Last One), the work he co-directed. 12eeWikiUser (talk) 17:28, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: The article reads like an advertisement. Maybe you should have tried G11 first. The sources do not meet WP:SIGCOV, and the subject fails to meet WP:GNG or WP:NCORP. The article includes the company’s products in a way that is entirely promotional. GrabUp - Talk06:53, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@GrabUp I am a bit cautious with CSD nowadays, as I have made mistakes in the past and my NPP training is not yet over. It's better to put this page through AfD. Let's hope this page gets updated and qualifies for WP:HEYMAN. Charlie (talk) 07:49, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Relisting. This was incorrectly nominated, this could be eligible for a procedural close. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, LizRead!Talk!04:03, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Relisting. This nomination was not correctly formatted, the nominator didn't tag the article or inforrm the article creator. This might be eligible for a procedural close. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, LizRead!Talk!04:02, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: I'm underwhelmed by the participant's comments. If you are suggesting a Redirect or Merge, take 60 seconds to find an appropriate target article. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, LizRead!Talk!03:34, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Final relist. Does the redirect option have any support? Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, LizRead!Talk!03:59, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
season article for second tier austrian side. has not been updated since before the season started and is clearly unfit for mainspace. I find no evidence that such an article could pass WP:GNG but should others disagree, moving to draftspace may be more appropriate. Microwave Anarchist (talk) 13:00, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Procedural close We've been through this before, different football clubs seasons can't be bundled and should not be bundled. You have to nominated them individually. Govvy (talk) 19:34, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The articles have been largely updated. Bayern Munich themselves loan players to these clubs so they can be considered to meet the criteria for significant coverage. EpicAdventurer (talk) 15:33, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@EpicAdventurer I don't see how Konate playing for Liefering would consist of GNG-worthy coverage of their season or any content on the season article that wouldn't instead belong on Konate's. The league doesnt even get regular match reports on [kicker.at] or [skysportaustria.at], theres just not enough coverage of the 2. Liga to get close to justifying club season articles at this level. Microwave Anarchist (talk) 22:48, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This does not determine whether the article deserves to stay or not. If there are yellow cards and coverage like the statistics on SofaScore, it means that the league is as important as the Italian third division league or any lower league in a European country. EpicAdventurer (talk) 23:26, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
yellow cards being recorded on SofaScore does not contribute towards GNG lol. to demonstrate that these articles are worthy of keeping you'll have to show meaningful secondary coverage of these club's seasons actually exists. Microwave Anarchist (talk) 23:32, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Relisting. We have arguments for a procedural close, draftification, deletion and keep. It's also unclear when an editor just offers a "per nom" comment whether that is also support for moving to draftspace which the nominator also proposed. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, LizRead!Talk!03:33, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No questioning the notability of the series. Trivial mentions and characterizations in low-quality pop culture websites as your Google News search supplies does not indicate stand-alone notability outside of the context of the show. The character, despite being a lead, does not inherit notability from the show. I fail to see the encyclopedic value of the Looper article of recycled Reddit comments or the simple plot synopses found in the Collider article. I'm not even sure how to address the The Seymour Tribune piece. Mbdfar (talk) 03:39, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If you're not sure how to address an article that ran in a print newspaper, then perhaps you should consider dropping it. Here's another source from near the very beginning of the series: "From New Kid to tough cop", David Hiltbrand, The Hackensack Record (November 11, 2011), p. G35. By the way, Newspapers.com returns over 800 hits for "Danny Reagan" "Blue Bloods", so I can do this all day. BD2412T03:43, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I only say that because it is a fluff article relating the character to biblical proverbs which does not seem encyclopedic, though it at least is relating the character to something outside of the show. That Hackensack article is about the actor, and I do not question the notability of Donnie Wahlberg. This is a very unimpressive WP:THREE. Mbdfar (talk) 03:48, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The Hackensack article is about the actor being the portrayer of the character, even as early as 2011. There are also over a dozen Google Scholar returns for "Danny Reagan" "Blue Bloods", which indicate that there is also some degree of scholarly examination of the character, beyond the pop culture coverage. BD2412T03:52, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, a popular actor playing in a popular show will get coverage. Did you click on any of those Scholar links? I see undergraduate papers, theses, and trivial mentions. There were a couple I could not access, perhaps you can take some time to find out if there is anything usable. Mbdfar (talk) 04:02, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge. from the history, was created by removing content from the list, follows that if creation is undone, removal of that content from the list must be undone. New sourced material should be merged as well. Same should go for Jamie Reagan, can be done bold/speedy. Hyperbolick (talk) 07:27, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I found some secondary sources and have added them to the article. I was surprised to see this character used as an example of police officers and masculinity and again in police and Muslim experiences on TV. Dr vulpes(Talk)05:15, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominated by IP 218.189.35.59. The subject of this article does not meet notability guidelines in WP:BIO. The entire article lacks sources to support Dawson's notibility. Many of the links provided show events Dawson has been part of but fail to establish that Dawson himself is of note. None of those sources are significant coverage of Dawson; he merely plays a minor part (such as moderating a conference or event) in those events. The only source that actually provide coverage of Dawson is the PRWeek article, however, as it is a one-to-one interview of Dawson himself, the source is a primary source and therefore does not support notability of the subject itself, per WP:BASIC. ClaudineChionh (she/her · talk · contribs · email) 03:11, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - "mostly unnotable local politicians" is not defined, because most of them are still red links. Please see WP:REDLINKS. I think if you look through "Category:Lists of mayors of places in Georgia (U.S. state)" you will find the same un-sourced situation on all of them. And for that matter, it seems to be a trend for most mayoral lists. These are the kinds of lists that are works in progress, and therefore should not be deleted. — Maile (talk) 01:12, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redlinks "indicate that a page will be created soon or that an article should be created for the topic because the subject is notable and verifiable" - few of those mayors seem notable, to be honest. AusLondonder (talk) 07:15, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It's generally uncommon for mayors of smaller cities to be notable, per WP:NPOL which states that "Just being an elected local official, or an unelected candidate for political office, does not guarantee notability." Mayors are frequently deleted at AfD. AusLondonder (talk) 12:16, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The list itself meets WP:LISTCRITERIA, the question is whether it should be a separate page or back in the city article. I view these pages as a valid page split (WP:SPLIT) as the content is verifiable, and could be included in the parent article, but because of the size of the content, does not always belong in the parent article. If the information was in the parent article, we would not be having this discussion about notablilty. --Enos733 (talk) 21:42, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Relisting as there is no consensus yet. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, LizRead!Talk!02:44, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. There are zero sources, so WP:V is not here. Looks like zero notable entries, too (blue links look temporary). What exactly is the value of this standalone list? If merged into the article, at least more eyes would be looking at it. --Викидим (talk) 03:00, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Relisting. Still no consensus and disagreement over whether or not this article satisfies list criteria. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, LizRead!Talk!01:39, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Relisting. I think there is an unbolded Keep here so Soft Deletion would not be appropriate. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, LizRead!Talk!01:35, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Fails notability, the whole article is about trying to sell his achievements as something important. never won a major senior medal. never even participated in a major event. his medal (if true) is just in youth level. Sports2021 (talk) 01:29, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Fails notability, never achieved anything important. the article tries to show him as a two time Asian Championship medalist but that's not in senior level. Sports2021 (talk) 01:26, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Fails notability, never won a major medal. the article shows he won 2 Asian Championships bronze medals but they were in youth and junior level, no senior medal yet. Sports2021 (talk) 01:21, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Again, after some research, I'm just finding out that 160 episodes were filmed with the actor "Swapnil Joshi" but then they were deleted and refilmed from episode 73, Tilak has also wiped some articles too just because they contained some footage. and while deleted by some user, It also did air on ZEE TV, it has many indecisive things, for exmaple some sources say it aired from '93 to '96 while others say it's aired from '93 to '96 but later shifted to DD1, some other say that it was aired in '99 on ZEE TV for the first time and some that it aired on DD2-Metro and shifted to ZEETV and/or DD, It's very hard to find truthful sources, as all talk about the same thing but say it differently. for say the example mentioned above. Auspiciouswastaken (talk) 20:59, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Two mentions that verify it exists is hardly enough to establish notability. If that were the case, pretty much every television show would be notable. --CNMall41 (talk) 22:32, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
All articles talk about the same thing, just their matter is different, even with some or for say a lot of digging can be done but it results to the repetitive articles. Though for me deletion is not okay. Auspiciouswastaken (talk) 05:57, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Page has been up since 2009, and by now we all realize after quite some digging that no reliable sources with indepth significant coverage is to be found. Redirect is better than to keep. Right? RangersRus (talk) 12:46, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Not worth entertaining a discussion when the first reference you supplied falls squarely under WP:NEWSORGINDIA. Won't waste time looking at the rest as it seems to be a misunderstanding of what constitutes a reliable source. A redirect is acceptable as we can verify it exists, but nothing that shows it is notable. --CNMall41 (talk) 23:32, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"I think, you're actually right. I think deletion would be ok, as there's no adequate source to find" - This is written as if you are. At least, it does agree there is no adequate sourcing so without it I am wondering your policy-based reasoning for keeping it. --CNMall41 (talk) 00:57, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If you're talking about cast, I just corrected some errors, and if you're talking about the above para, It's common knowledge to know DD didn't stream it in '97 and hence it was handed to ZEE TV, and Sony & Star did stream it following 2001. Auspiciouswastaken (talk) 07:56, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Common knowledge? I certainly didn't know about it. In Wikipedia we are allowed to state the obvious (e.g., the sky is blue), but what you added would be WP:OR at best. --CNMall41 (talk) 20:00, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Not sure your assessment is completely correct. Taking just one example, source 5 offers very significant coverage beside an interview, in a bylined article in a very reliable newspaper. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank)07:38, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sourve 5 says "Krishna made Swapnil Joshi a star overnight; co-director Moti Sagar talks about the TV show." This source is not independent of the claim by the makers themselves. Source needs to be completely secondary independent. RangersRus (talk) 15:20, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I cannot make it any more clearer than what the journalist himself said on the top of his article about the maker talking about the show and anything that journalist wrote in that article is the outcome of the interview. It is not an indepedent source at all. I am leaving at that. RangersRus (talk) 16:10, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The following parts can be attributed Kavita Awaasthi, journalist for The Hindustan Times, based on her interview with Sagar; the media outlet being considered generally reliable, they can be used to verify a number of facts that contribute to the notability of the program, such as, at least:
After making the successful TV show Ramayan, producer Ramanand Sagar wanted to tap into another epic show — the Bhagavat Puran. Produced by Ramanand, Subhash Sagar and Prem Sagar, and directed by Ramanand, Anand Sagar and Moti Sagar, Shri Krishna was one of the biggest grossers for Doordarshan during the seven years it was on air. The national broadcaster had a limit on the number of episodes it could air in the ’80s, but the ’90s brought about a change in these rules. A producer could now make a show for a longer duration.
Music composer Ravindra Jain composed the music for this serial. The title song, ‘Shree Krishna Govind Hare Murari’, became popular in India and abroad. The show ran for more than seven years, and had over 200 episodes. The show covered Krishna’s life, from his birth to the time of his grandchildren.
The show was shot in Gujarat’s Umbergaon and Vadodara, where they put up huge sets.
Swapnil had a huge fan following because of the show. People thought he was Krishna.
This, in my opinion, in a 2016 article about a 1993 program, can be given a certain credit and at least contributes to the apparent notability of the show (that had, as I am sure you have noticed, 221 episodes and originally aired during 6 years.....) and I think that the material, if the page was redirected, would be lost, which would be detrimental to the encyclopaedia. (And that's just one source). Thank you. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank)16:41, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
omg finally for goodness' sake someone mentions this, I'm not trying to be rude but why can't someone just read the sources and watch the show for 2 whole minutes to get some fruit out of it. GOD! (replied to mushy yank)Auspiciouswastaken (talk) 18:43, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Relisting for additional and more thorough source analysis. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, voorts (talk/contributions) 01:10, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This article was recently redirected, which was reverted, then redirected again and reverted again. I agree that the redirect should be restored (but obviously not with the edit warring). I have been unable to find significant coverage of this character. There are some descriptions of scenes involving her (for example, this chapter), but otherwise there are only brief descriptions. Additionally, this article is entirely written in an in-universe style and cited to individual episodes (except for a one-sentence section about how the actress who portrayed the character left the show to spend time with her daughter). voorts (talk/contributions) 00:06, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
