Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/People

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to People. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.

Note: In most cases there is another, more specific category than this one.

If possible, please use one of these instead:

Note: The following pages are transcluded onto the Biography Deletion sorting page

Note: the following pages are not transcluded onto the Biography Deletion sorting page

Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Bands and musicians
Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Fashion (e.g. models)
Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Fictional elements
Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Women
Wikipedia:WikiProject Pornography/Deletion for adult film actors and actresses

Adding a new AfD discussion

Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:

Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary, it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|People|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.

Note that there are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.

Removing a closed AfD discussion

Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.

Other types of discussions

You can also add and remove links to other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to People.

Further information

For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.

Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at:

Purge page cache

watch

People

Keith (gamer)

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

Fails WP:BIO. The sources cited are reliable but limited to routine coverage of the seasons. This player did not achieve any significant results during his career; no individual titles nor top-three finishes with a team he played the majority of the season's games with (he contributed a few losses to Cloud9's second-place regular season finish in 2019). My argument for deletion is therefore: the coverage in independent sources is trivial and the player has not done anything notable. Yue🌙 07:15, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Video games, and United States of America. Yue🌙 07:15, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

INGEK

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

I didn't find any coverage by independent sources about the subject. Svartner (talk) 18:18, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Bands and musicians, and Brazil. Svartner (talk) 18:18, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Akanksha Sharma

AfDs for this article:

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

The subject is a non-notable actress and model who has made only minor appearances in films and music videos. The "Filmography" section is misleading, as she did not have a lead role in Kesari Veer. The article relies mainly on primary sources, mentions, interviews, and WP:NEWSORGINDIA and lacks WP:SIGCOV coverage.

Concerns include potential manipulation of her date of birth, with primary source citations (e.g., Instagram) contradicting verifiable information, such as her being 20 in 2016 during India's Next Top Model season 2. The article may be affected by COI/UPE and violates WP:TOOSOON.

I have made some edits but seek other editors’ expert opinions on its encyclopedic value and sourcing. Zuck28 (talk) 06:26, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, Artists, Dance, Music, and India. Zuck28 (talk) 06:26, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Has very significant roles in Laila (2025 film), Kesari Veer and Trivikrama (film). Please see WP:NACTOR.--Eva UX (talk) 11:28, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
What about significant coverage in secondary and reliable sources?

Zuck28 (talk) 16:14, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
What about it? I've added a few secondary sources to the page. Also 1) I've added a source indicating she plays one of the four main characters in Kesari Veer (and see Leading actor) and the filmography can hardly be described as "misleading". 2) A page cannot "violate" WP:TOOSOON, which is an essay, not a policy but, most of all, citing that essay may have been useful back in 2017 but certainly not today, as she has now an already notable acting career 3) Stating that she has "made only minor appearances in films" is totally inaccurate, for that matter. I have no idea about potential conflicts of interest regarding the page but in its current state, it does not strike me as an issue. Eva UX (talk) 16:58, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There’s no Wp:SIGCOV in Wp:RS. Only passing mentions, wp:NEWSORGINDIA, and interviews.Zuck28 (talk) 08:52, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Shane Jacobsen

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

Not notable actor. Should be restored as a redirect to Shane Jacobson, whose name is very frequently misspelled this way - there are more hits for him with his name misspelled this way than for this guy. PARAKANYAA (talk) 04:10, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Actors and filmmakers. PARAKANYAA (talk) 04:10, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Louisiana-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:14, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
keep as a stub or delete the redirect. I am of course familiar with Shane Jacobson, and have several of his films in my library, so when I stumbled on the name "Shane Jacobsen", unlinked, in an article on an unfamiliar film I was surprised. I linked it without saving, to see where it would lead, and found to my surprise that it led to the Australian actor. Not impossible, as many Aussie actors have found their way into American films. Off to IMDb, where Shane Jacobsen of New Orleans is mentioned as appearing in three or four movies, two having WP listings and, quite properly, neither one linked. How much time did I waste? Two minutes tops. Had it confused anyone else? Maybe not. Would someone turning those unlinked "Shane Jacobsen"s blue reduce Wikipedia's usefulness ? Absolutely. The beauty of this solution is the hatnote. Anyone looking for either person by that name gets what they want.
- We cannot keep it because he is not notable. The notable actor's name is regularly misspelled this way by sources, so it is just as likely someone would be searching for him - sen/son are regularly confused in names and this mistake is in many news articles referring to him. Sometimes, people have similar names. PARAKANYAA (talk) 06:08, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect per nom. This particular actor doesn't have a body of work that satisfies WP:NACTOR. Two seasons of American Crime as two different recurring characters hasn't gotten him much media recognition. Clarityfiend (talk) 09:37, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect: To Shane Jacobson. The person who made the existing redirect into a stub first initially made a stub worthy of BLPPROD. Took me two reverts explaining in the edit summary why this is a bad thing to prompt them to make an actual stub, albeit still unsourced for the time being. This was good enough for me. Now that the stub is in AFD now, I'll be truly honest. Even after a source got added by another editor, I just don't see how this actor meets NACTOR, he's just too obscure of an actor. Plus that Shane Jacobsen is a valid misspelling of Shane Jacobson. Yelps ᘛ⁠⁐̤⁠ᕐ⁠ᐷ critique me 15:31, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
no contest re notability of actor Shane Jacobsen, and I have reverted the links I made in those two film articles. I maintain, however, that the original redirect was not useful, and because there is a real life person of that name in WP articles, counterproductive. Doug butler (talk) 22:12, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Not useful? The Sydney Morning Herald, Radio National Breakfast, Mediaweek, even the Missionaries of the Sacred Heart all spell his name with an "e". Clarityfiend (talk) 22:48, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Courier Mail has Angry Andersen and the National Library of Australia has Dick Bently. Is it Wikipedia's job to anticipate every likely misspelling? Doug butler (talk) 23:36, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Just the frequent ones in (otherwise) reliable sources, especially when they're (soon) not in use. Clarityfiend (talk) 09:22, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Alexa Valentino

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

Not meeting the notability. WP:TOOSOON - The9Man ^Talk 19:36, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Artists. - The9Man ^Talk 19:36, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: PROMO, when the lead sentence mentions her talent agency... This [1] is about all I can find. Coverage now in the article is primary, or databases. I don't see that any musical notability has been met. Oaktree b (talk) 19:43, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Women, and New York. Shellwood (talk) 19:51, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - The sources do not support the notability of this "up and coming" actress; an online source does not provide the kind of significant coverage to establish notability. Seems like WP:PROMO. Fails [[WP:NACTOR] and WP:NMUSICIAN. Netherzone (talk) 22:55, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Jin Nengchou

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

This article doesn't clearly establish the subject's notability. Most of the positions listed are regional and there’s only one reference, which doesn't fully back up all the claims. Without stronger sources or a clearer reason why this person is notable on a broader scale, this is not strong enough for an article. Idoghor Melody (talk) 13:07, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and China. Idoghor Melody (talk) 13:07, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Owen× ☎ 13:17, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A substantial number of sources have been incorporated into this article, and this particular one has garnered sufficient attention. The Chinese Wikipedia contains a relevant article as well. This politician previously served as the mayor of Fuzhou City, the provincial capital of Fujian. The GDP of Fuzhou City is presently 180 billion USD in 2023, comparable to the yearly GDP of half of Nigeria. TinaLees-Jones (talk) 14:09, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That’s one type of a comparison. Best, Reading Beans, Duke of Rivia 13:02, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Strong keep: Agree with User:TinaLees-Jones in toto. Additionally; Jin Nengchou was the mayor of Fuzhou. Fuzhou has a Prefecture-level city population of 8,291,268. This would be like saying the governor of Virginia isn't inherently notable— its population exceeds 43 U.S. States and Territories, and 93 U.N. member states. I would argue that any leader of a population that size in the past fifty years is inherently notable. Yes, the page needs significant improvement and expansion, no that does not justify its deletion. Foxtrot620 (talk) 16:30, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per TinaLees-Jones and Foxtrot620. Not just notable: Jin Nengchou's a big deal. --A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 17:45, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

John Chizoba Vincent

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

Fails WP:NFILM and WP:NPOET as some of the sources cited are his own writing and the bunch of other are non WP:RS. Ednabrenze (talk) 07:09, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, Poetry, and Nigeria. Ednabrenze (talk) 07:09, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Joshua Oyeniyi

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

Fails WP:NBUSINESS as sources cited are not WP:RS. While some are primary, the rest are covertly sponsored pieces. Ednabrenze (talk) 07:03, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Businesspeople, and Nigeria. Ednabrenze (talk) 07:03, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Journalism-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:54, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: I am currently working to improve the article by adding reliable, independent third-party sources, including reports from *The Guardian Nigeria*, *The Nation*, *Punch*, *Voice of America*, *Vanguard*, and coverage of the National Student Entrepreneur Awards. I also plan to add inline citations and expand the article’s coverage to better meet WP:GNG and WP:N. I respectfully request that the nomination be kept open to allow for these additions. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nnamdi93 (talk • contribs) 08:43, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ken Etete

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

Fails WP:NBUSINESS as sources are trivial mentions of the subject. Only one source from a WP:RS is in the article, the rest are primary sources and trivial mentions as CEO of a company. Ednabrenze (talk) 06:19, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Businesspeople, and Nigeria. Ednabrenze (talk) 06:19, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- ThisDay profiled him in an interview, praising Century Group’s “capacity building” and Local Content impactprnewswire.com+15thisdaylive.com+15kenetete.com+15.
- Nigeria NewsDirect ran a feature titled “Ken Etete: The dependable Oil and Gas CEO”, detailing his acquisition of an FPSO and his leadership of one of Nigeria’s largest indigenous oil‑service firmsthisdaylive.com+2nigeriannewsdirect.com+2businessworld.africa+2.
- Business World Africa covered Century Group’s $15 million acquisition of the FPSO Sendje Berge, noting that Etete’s firm is “one of Nigeria’s biggest oil servicing company” and “the first domestic energy infrastructure provider to fully own and manage two FPSOs” kenetete.com+15businessworld.africa+15nigeriannewsdirect.com+15.
- BusinessDay interviewed him on how Century Group champions local content in Nigeria’s energy sectorsowshea.org+11businessday.ng+11thisdaylive.com+11.
- Africa Oil & Gas Report spotlighted his organic expansion over 20 years, highlighting his problem-solving leadershipafricaoilgasreport.com+1sowshea.org+1.
- Africa Intelligence examined his strategic handling of Erin Energy's OML 120 fallout, showcasing his negotiation skills in complex deals africaintelligence.com These are feature-level coverage from independent outlets
Aris1601 (talk) 07:16, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The sources are just PR releases disguised as legit sources. Fails WP:N. Angryapathy (talk) 15:24, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Léo Legrand

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

Fails WP:NACTOR, only fewer sources added. Absolutiva (talk) 00:26, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, and France. Absolutiva (talk) 00:26, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Peter New

AfDs for this article:

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

Nominating per request here by IP editor show states - "The last AfD for this subject was closed as soft delete which was treated as an expired PROD. recently the soft delete was challenged by user User:124.104.175.128 and was accepted and moved back into mainspace by an administrator despite there being zero usable sources. The IP user then removed the notability tag without a reason and made no improvements to the article. This leads me to believe WP:COI as the request for undeletion was the first edit the user ever made. Requesting an AfD. 2600:1011:B037:C57F:2834:79AD:326B:D5B6 (talk) 22:47, 24 June 2025 (UTC)" CNMall41 (talk) 22:59, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, Television, Comics and animation, and Canada. CNMall41 (talk) 23:01, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Sources in the article don't cut it and I was unable to find anything demonstrating WP:GNG or meeting WP:NACTOR in searches. TarnishedPath^talk 04:31, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Pinging @Toadspike and @Madeleine961 as participants in the previous AFD. TarnishedPath^talk 04:34, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. The only real source cited, the Celluloid Social Club, doesn't say more about him than his name and some past roles. A sentence fragment. This is not sigcov. Toadspike [Talk] 06:08, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: as per TarnishedPath and Toadspike. Emily.Owl ( she/her • talk) 06:40, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Emily.Owl 124.104.175.128 (talk) 06:48, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

THis IP requested the undelete and is now blocked. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 05:44, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: All minor roles, no WP:SIGCOV in refs, fails WP:NACTOR and WP:GNG. - UtherSRG (talk) 10:44, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per last AfD. I believe this can be closed per WP:SNOW. Madeleine (talk) 16:26, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per all of the above. If you find evidence that he's a cult figure amongst the Brony crowd, ping me. Bearian (talk) 00:54, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I did a few hours of independent research and was unable to find any WP:SIGCOV to satisfy WP:NACTOR and WP:GNG. Claim to notability would be stronger if there was evidence of RS SIGCOV to meet notability requirements. ZachH007 (talk) 03:51, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ben Driebergen

AfDs for this article:

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

My concerns about this person's notability still hasn't eased since the previous AFD discussion, which resulted in "kept". Re-reading the discussion, the "keep" votes aren't without caution if not suspicion.

One promised to improve the article or something (to further verify this person's notability), but I still don't see logs of edits made by that voter. Another is now blocked for abusing multiple accounts. Another cited WP:NACTOR, which is what I was unwilling to challenge then due to lack of votes favoring either deletion or redirection.

I re-raised my concerns recently not too long ago:

Transcluding from Talk:Ben Driebergen

I'm concerned again about this person's notability. The following I cannot use to verify because they are just interviews, i.e. primary sources, which neither WP:GNG nor WP:NBASIC would allow such sources to be counted: Ent Weekly (another), Pajiba. Screen Rant (source) is discouraged per WP:RSP#Screen Rant. Reality Tea displays just his brief profile. I was able to listen to the Idaho Statesman article; it just previews his then-upcoming The Challenge appearance. Maybe I'm doubtful again about this person, but the reliable sources verifying his general/basic notability have become scarce. George Ho (talk) 17:58, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

Since then, I've yet to see my concerns readdressed. To challenge the past assumption that WP:NACTORS suffices, this person must also comply with WP:NBASIC per WP:BIOSPECIAL. I've still yet to see reliable independent sources verify his notability in Survivor: Winners at War and/or The Challenge and/or any other non-television field even as a war veteran.

To make either WP:BLP1E or WP:BIO1E applicable (or WP:PAGEDECIDE/WP:WHYN/WP:FAILN if neither), this article should be preferably redirected to Survivor: Heroes vs. Healers vs. Hustlers, his winning season at his Survivor debut. George Ho (talk) 16:56, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Military, and Idaho. Shellwood (talk) 17:03, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:12, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Abu Yasir

AfDs for this article:

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

Some mentions, Searches did not turn up enough in-depth coverage from independent, reliable sources to support meeting WP:GNG. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 15:35, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Terrorism, and Iraq. Shellwood (talk) 16:02, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Saudi Arabia. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:16, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, no independent source found agree with nom--Unclethepoter (talk) 21:34, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - a munshi, like a cantor or chancellor in other Abrahamic religions, is not automatically notable, and there's a lack of reliable sources. Bearian (talk) 01:35, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Barthold Rudolf Hast

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

The sources are not reliable and with required depth of the biography coverage; not notable. Maladano (talk) 14:46, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Maladano (talk) 14:46, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Finland-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 15:04, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The first and third sources appear to be biographical dictionaries of some kind. I can't find a way to access them, but assuming he legitimately has entries in those that's probably enough to establish notability. There are also plenty of hits on Google Books - I'm relying on machine translation and can only access snippets, but these books and others appear to contain SIGCOV or potential SIGCOV: [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9]. Someone who speaks the language would have a much easier time properly searching for sources, but there's enough there that I think he's quite easily notable. MCE89 (talk) 15:13, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. He is included in the National Biography of Finland under the name Rudolf Hast: [10]. Biografisk lexikon för Finland includes a Swedish translation of the same article: [11]. There's also a short entry in Uppslagsverket Finland: [12] Jähmefyysikko (talk) 15:38, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. The existing and newly found sources (as noted above by MCE89 and Jähmefyysikko) give solid, non-trivial coverage of Hast’s work and historical role. Being the first Finn to earn a Doctor of Medicine in Sweden and a pioneer of smallpox vaccination in Finland clearly passes GNG. I’ll also add those additional references to make this even stronger.Uni44hossiq (talk) 17:34, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Strongly disagree with the source assessment. I don't understand what's wrong with the listed sources at the time, and would like the nominator to explain their reasoning. /Julle (talk) 18:19, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: The National Biography of Finland is enough for ANYBIO 3, also appears to pass GNG through sources listed above. Somebodyidkfkdt (talk) 15:23, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per above discussion and assuming the foreign language sources are correctly translated. Bearian (talk) 01:46, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Rico Gulda

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

Not notable, failing WP GNG, not sourced with reliable third party links Maladano (talk) 14:39, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Maladano (talk) 14:39, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Austria. Shellwood (talk) 14:52, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Strong oppose: All these sources I used, are reliable third party sources. None of these sources promote him, nor is there an issue of conflict of interest in them. (The German-language sources can be translated via Google Translate.) This pianist is prominent enough on his own to warrant a Wikipedia article, not because he is the son of a famous pianist, who already has his own Wikipedia article. That is why, I created this article. The article should not be construed in any way as a promotional article, because it is not. It is a biographical article and I made sure that it conforms to Wikipedia guidelines. Oratas (talk) 15:11, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. It's not true that all of the sources in the article are third party sources, but this review of a performance and the paragraph he gets in this entry about his family are, and together they just about satisfy WP:GNG. There's also other coverage of his work, including this review in American Record Guide (which describes one of his early releases as "without a doubt one of the worst Schumann recordings I have heard in a long time"), this piece in The Washington Post, and these additional reviews [13] [14] [15] [16] [17]. I think there's enough to pass WP:NCREATIVE and WP:GNG. MCE89 (talk) 15:36, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - we've seen that in science fiction, in off-Broadway, and in classical music, that sometimes scathing criticism is the best evidence of notability. Bearian (talk) 01:49, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

JasonTheWeen

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

Fails WP:GNG. No reliable and significant coverage to show that this streamer is notable. Fancy Refrigerator ^(talk) 13:48, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and United States of America. Fancy Refrigerator ^(talk) 13:48, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note - The page has a history of people removing the redirect to FaZe Clan. Fancy Refrigerator ^(talk) 13:49, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to FaZe Clan. Does not meet WP:BIO; the Times of India article is authored by "TOI Sports Desk" which does not meet RS criteria. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 14:54, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Not enough secondary coverage. Angryapathy (talk) 15:58, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Entertainment, Internet, and Texas. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:09, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect and protect per above. Aaron Liu (talk) 20:36, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Joey Pearson

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

Does not meet WP:NMUSIC, all coverage found in WP:BEFORE was either WP:ROUTINE or from primary sources. I am also bundling the singer's albums, all of which have been unreferenced since creation more than 15 years ago:

Coeusin (talk) 13:26, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Artists, Bands and musicians, Music, and California Coeusin (talk) 13:27, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 14:19, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Non-notable singer. No sourcing found outside of social media. Doesn't appear to have had a charted single, or any other MUSIC requirements to show notability. Sourcing now in the article isn't helpful. Oaktree b (talk) 13:37, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete All - He had a couple of minor TV appearances as a budding child star in the early 2000s and got a record deal, but he never achieved any reliable media coverage of his singing career and I can find no pro reviews for any of his teenage albums. Then he faded back into normal life. The musician article and album articles have been sitting here with no references since that era and could have been deleted 17 years ago. Better late than never. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 14:26, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - I'm less willing to assume that "sources must exist" for child stars. The current unreliable links include one to MySpace. Bearian (talk) 01:53, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Bear-girl of Krupina

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

Very few sources, very likely a hoax. Should be redirected to Feral child. Newklear007 (talk) 09:21, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Women. Newklear007 (talk) 09:21, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Hungary-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:49, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge with Feral child. The German version seems to have more reliability. 🟥⭐ ^{talk to me!} 14:28, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: historic possible myth, but with sufficient sourcing for notability. Worth having an article to explain that her status. Article sourcing can probably be improved from the German article. PamD 08:04, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Kimberly Megan

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

The subject of this article is only talked about in terms of her husband and her late son (who is primarily mentioned because of his dad). As notability is not inherited this subject does not have any sources of her own. In my before search I couldn't find anything else. I would be okay with a redirect to Aidonia Moritoriko (talk) 02:26, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Music, Internet, and Jamaica. Moritoriko (talk) 02:26, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Aidonia. 🟥⭐ ^{talk to me!} 03:50, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:40, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Adonia: no independent notability, but some of the content re son might be worth adding. PamD 08:32, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect per above. REDISCOVERBHARAT (talk) 16:06, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Drinah Nyirenda

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

Subject fails WP:GNG and WP:PROF. No evidence of significant coverage in reliable, independent sources. Article is based on sparse and trivial references with no clear demonstration of notability. THE ONE PEOPLE (talk) 18:52, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Academics and educators, and Africa. THE ONE PEOPLE (talk) 18:52, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Food and drink, and Animal. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:24, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately, the PROF test works against administrators rather than researchers. Bearian (talk) 14:02, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Femi Akinkuebi

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

Non-notable state appointee with trivial mentions in routine press coverage Ednabrenze (talk) 18:38, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Nigeria. Ednabrenze (talk) 18:38, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Previously draftified at Draft:Femi_Akinkuebi but nothing salvageable there either. Insufficient coverage from reliable sources. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 19:03, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:25, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Bozo Ratliff

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

I tried looking for any information about this musician, whose article just says he wrote one song, and I couldn't even find anything about him. Not even the BBC interview at the bottom of the article was archived, assuming it ever existed. GamerPro64 17:21, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Bands and musicians. GamerPro64 17:21, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Missouri-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:27, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, per nom, a search on Newspapers.com returns zero results pertaining to this person (who may not have even existed.) Thetreesarespeakingtome (talk) 20:32, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'd be interesting if this turns out to be a hoax. GamerPro64 21:49, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

James Hastings (model ship maker)

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

A biography that only has 2 different sources (different pages from the same website are still 1 source). One of which is a non-independent obituary. The most useful of the other source is primarily just a self written article which basically makes this a WP:AUTOBIO. This issue was noted during the AFC process by Cactusisme but the article was moved to the mainspace anyways. Searching for James Hastings brings up numerous unrelated individuals and modifying the search with terms like ship models brings up nothing. Moritoriko (talk) 06:09, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and United States of America. Moritoriko (talk) 06:09, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Military and New Jersey. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:48, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: He won the prestigious Craftsman of the Year award. The article that the nominator says was self-written is the article where the award is announced by the craftsmanship museum, which is why it is usable. Wikipedia considers different articles from the same source to be usable. Orlando Davis (talk) 15:43, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

He also qualifies based on WP:NCREATIVE. Orlando Davis (talk) 18:04, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Under the section WP:WHYN of the general Notability guideline there is a sentence that says ...multiple publications by the same person or organization are considered to be a single source for the purpose of complying with the "multiple" requirement. So yes, we can use them but when considering a subject for notability they still count as 1. Moritoriko (talk) 05:19, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I see that you are following the WP:WHYN rule correctly. I missed that one. But don't you think he qualifies based on WP:NCREATIVE? Orlando Davis (talk) 14:38, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Which of the 4 guidelines under creative do you think applies to him? I (and correct me if I am wrong) think we both agree that its not 2. But no, I don't think he does, or at least not according to the sources on the article at present. Moritoriko (talk) 14:51, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

4) The person's work (or works) has: (a) become a significant monument, (b) been a substantial part of a significant exhibition, (c) won significant critical attention, or (d) been represented within the permanent collections of several notable galleries or museums.

Winning the craftsman of the year award means significant critical attention and it matters that his work is exhibited at the Craftsmanship Museum. Orlando Davis (talk) 15:09, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate your responses. Under another section of WP:WHYN, it also states that "There is no fixed number of sources required since sources vary in quality and depth of coverage." The articles give the subject significant coverage since they are entirely about him, and are also reliable as the craftsmanship museum is a reliable source, and are secondary including the article that is an autobiography since the introduction is written by the craftsmanship museum (As I explain above). Thank you. Orlando Davis (talk) 06:19, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed, Delete I looked on the internet and couldn’t find any sources on him besides ship crafting sources and half the results weren’t even about him. I don’t think this is fit to be an article with little outside sources on him besides the ones in his profession. This also doesn’t feel written well like a Wikipedia article. The main biography passage doesn’t even have his death as a part of it. 8bit12man (talk) 03:50, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that there is a scarcity of sources. But Wikipedia notability guidelines don't include whether an article is or isn't well written. I agree, I'm not the best writer. Having a bachelors degree and graduating magna cum laude and I'm still not a very good writer. However, it's a discussion about notability. Orlando Davis (talk) 14:49, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It might be on for the guidelines on notability. But this has a lot of issues and doesn’t fit the criteria that much outside of notability. This article isn’t very salvageable as it still mainly relies on a single source from the same website. Another thing was this used to be a draft and despite it being declined and not nessacarily ready you still moved it into main space and removed the draft comments.Then when this was nominated for deletion you said this was a personal attack. Despite not having any evidence for that.

I believe this article has little chance at surviving as it was moved even though it wasn’t ready.

It does also not have parts in the manual of style for biographies which talks about how it should be written. It will need a lot of rewriting as it has a lot of issues. The reason im talking about the articles history is because it should be deleted or moved to draftspace for further work because it wasn’t ready but it was still moved. I also feel like you are taking this personally since your the only one defending this article and you alleged it was a personal attack when it was nominated for deletion. 8bit12man (talk) 18:49, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I personally think it's relevant that the only reason the article was noticed by the nominator is because he may have taken my words personally in a different conversation. However, I have no problem with the nomination. Orlando Davis (talk) 19:33, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

What about the fact that you moved the article into main space despite it being declined for Articles for creation? 8bit12man (talk) 20:20, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate your response. The Articles for creation process is not perfect. It can occasionally result in good articles not passing through. I believe that is why extended confirmed users such as myself have the option to move articles up themselves. In this case, I believed that was the best course of action. However, I usually use the Articles for creation process since I believe that a collaborative effort is the best way to produce a high-quality article. Thank you. Orlando Davis (talk) 06:31, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: This was flagged for me on my talk page so I'm not going to cast a bolded !vote. But I don't see a case for notability here. WP:NCREATIVE does not appear to apply here because these models (regardless of the excellence of the craft) are not contributing to a notable work nor are they notable works themselves. WP:ANYBIO doesn't apply since the Craftsman of the Year award does not appear to be an independently notable and significant award. There's only one independent source that I can see so WP:GNG is not in play either. Dclemens1971 (talk) 17:29, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If the craftsmanship museum is a significant institution, isn't their award significant? And there are independent articles that I can show you that mention the award being handed out. Is that what you need? Isn't the craftsmanship museum a significant exhibition? And doesn't the fact that Hasting's model is part of that exhibition qualify as part b of part 4 (been a substantial part of a significant exhibition) in WP:NCREATIVE. Isn't an award by a notable institution (The craftsmanship museum) count as significant critical attention (part c of part 4 of WP:NCREATIVE) And couldn't you say that if his work is exhibited by a notable institution, that you could say it is (a) become a significant monument in 4 in WP:NCREATIVE.

Here are a couple of independent articles that mention the craftsmanship museum award Cherry Hill, model engineeringand California museum to honor Red Wing man as craftsman of the year.

A subject doesn't need to be widely known to be notable if we can demonstrate that his peers see him as notable within his or her field. Orlando Davis (talk) 19:29, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom the "Craftsman of the Year award" is neither "prestigious" or notable. Topic fails WP:NCREATIVE despite desperate pleading from involved editor. Theroadislong (talk) 19:55, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Could you provide a policy based reason for your opinion sir? It seems that all but one of the deletes come from editors whom I have offended in a previous heated conversation, as they believe that their status as either page reviewers or administrators makes them akin to kings or noblemen who can bully the surfs (i.e., regular editors). Now, that is fine with me. I've got a thick skin. But I do think that it has gotten to the point where their anger at me has altered their judgment. Orlando Davis (talk) 20:10, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe we all need to take a break and cool off? Orlando Davis (talk) 20:13, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Another thing. It's not a vote, it's whoever the administrator decides made the best argument. And it shouldn't be an administrator who is potentially biased by a previous perceived slight. Orlando Davis (talk) 20:21, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Even though I did this before, I corrected myself later in the debate; it doesn't mean it is a good argument. One of the Wikipedia arguments to avoid is not just pointing at a policy or guideline without elaborating as the Theroadisloong just did. See: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions Orlando Davis (talk) 20:39, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I still keep my opinion as Delete.. It’s not that because we hold a grudge against you. if you have proof for that please present it. It’s just that this article fails many criteria and has many issues and requires a ton of rewriting. We don’t have any anger against you at all. I am a “Surf” by your standards. For the record I have never encountered you before this deletion discussion. I feel like you are twisting this against us. 8bit12man (talk) 20:24, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I was not talking to you. I just met you. However, "even very poor writing and referencing within a Wikipedia article will not decrease the topic's notability." See: Wikipedia:Notability Orlando Davis (talk) 20:42, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It's all in the history logs. But I don't think that's necessary. We can turn this around and be civil from now on. Orlando Davis (talk) 20:50, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

it still fails many categories in Wikipedia:Notability

It

WP:NSUSTAINED requires attention over a sufficient time. Most of the sources are just about his ships or just on his backstory becuase he won his 2019 award. Since most of these are from when he got his award it seems there hasn’t been any sufficient attention or coverage since then. It also fails WP:SBST for the same reason because there isn’t any coverage outside of these events.

It fails WP:SIGCOV because there is no secondary sources outside of the museum and event and it needs independent sources not affiliated with the topic which it doesn’t have.

The topic of the article or the article itself isn’t notable because it lacks sources outside of the affiliated topic and most of the sources and coverage come from one event which was the 2019 award. You can’t find any sources covering the topic on the internet outside the craftsmanship museum either.

Again as mentioned before this article isn’t well written either missing components and it’s hard to add that without notable independent sources to reference from.

The article has little chance at surviving as it is poorly written and lack’s notability outside the topic and lacks sources. 8bit12man (talk) 22:53, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
"While references are always needed for verifiability, references are not always needed to establish a presumption of notability. Examples of additional criteria include WP:NCREATIVE, which establishes criteria for presumed notability for creative professionals" See: Wikipedia:Multiple sources Orlando Davis (talk) 23:48, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
In case my previous argument doesn't convince, the article should pass with the Wikipedia:Ignore all rules guideline under the rationale I previously explained under WP:NCREATIVE and Wikipedia:Multiple sources. Orlando Davis (talk) 00:53, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. After research on the subject, I believe does not meet WP:NCREATIVE, making it fall below the level of notability. Historyexpert2 (talk) 02:21, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I can understand why you believe that. However, could you elaborate? Please avoid "just pointing at a policy or guideline without elaborating" See: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions Thank you. Orlando Davis (talk) 05:33, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment See Wikipedia:Don't bludgeon the process which says “It is not necessary or desirable to reply to every comment in a discussion.” “The more often you express the same ideas in a discussion, the less persuasive you become.” “Dominating a discussion is a violation of the disruptive editing behavioral guideline and can get you blocked. Theroadislong (talk) 06:46, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Syed Mosharaf Hossain

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

Copy and paste move from Draft:Syed Mosharaf Hossain. Fails WP:BIO. References are churnalism and passing mentions. Fails WP:V 🇵🇸‍🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦‍🇵🇸 16:10, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and India. 🇵🇸‍🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦‍🇵🇸 16:10, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Fail WP:BIO $Destinyokhiria 💬$ 16:22, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators and West Bengal. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 16:40, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Other than the safety shoe invention, I don't really see notability for this person. The awards seem trivial and the rest of the sourcing is simply a resume/CV. Oaktree b (talk) 19:24, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Gnews brings up this gem [18], with a whole four lines of text. Gscholar only has two hits on the name, that I don't think are about this person either. Not much of anything in RS. Oaktree b (talk) 19:26, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your input. I’d like to provide clarification and context on Syed Mosharaf Hossain’s notability, especially beyond the surface-level view of awards and basic sourcing.

🔬 1. Invention & Innovation: Safety Shoe for Farmers

While it may appear modest at first glance, the safety shoe innovation was recognized by grassroots technology networks and national-level education-focused NGOs, including National Innovation Foundation–India and the India Science Wire. His work has been demonstrated at regional science exhibitions (e.g., Paschim Banga Bigyan Mela) and reported in regional media as a functional solution adopted by small-scale agricultural communities in rural Bengal. It goes beyond a one-off idea—it’s an application-driven invention with social utility and adoption, which is a key indicator of applied innovation notability in developing contexts.

🏅 2. Awards and Recognitions – Not Trivial

The awards may seem local in nature, but several (like those from Asia Book of Records, Positive Barta, and Grassroot Innovator Forums) are curated via peer review and field validation, particularly in the education and rural development sector. These recognitions are third-party validations of social impact, not just self-nomination trophies. He was also selected as Principal of the Year (2024) by a consortium of skill-development organizations under the Directorate of Technical Education in West Bengal.

📚 3. Reliable Secondary Sources
Though not abundant in Google Scholar due to the nature of his work (not academic), his profile and work have been:
Covered by leading Bengali newspapers such as Anandabazar Patrika and Ei Samay in regional editions.

Highlighted by Bangla-language educational YouTube channels, regional digital portals, and field reporting platforms covering Bardhaman and Nadia districts.

Listed as a featured speaker and delegate in two district-level government innovation workshops (verified by district administration websites).
🛠️ 4. Scope of Impact

Syed Mosharaf Hossain is not just an inventor but a grassroots education reformer, having led multiple campaigns for inclusive skill education for rural girls, ITI modernization, and anti-dropout programs for economically marginalized students. These initiatives have been independently referenced by local government circulars and panchayat reports, and his role as Principal of a Government ITI has seen him directly involved in state-level technical outreach. Syeddeep2025 (talk) 07:37, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - non-notable vanity article. Interesting shoes, though. —A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 04:12, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Syed Mosharaf Hossain is a distinguished educator and innovator whose contributions have drawn significant independent recognition. Not only was he honored by the Asia Book of Records, but on June 17, 2025, he was also named “Principal of the Year 2025” at the Asia Education Conclave held in Mumbai, alongside another ITI principal from Bengal, for his work in enhancing technical education and multi-skill training en.wikipedia.org+6magzter.com+6x.com+6. These are reliable, third‑party sources establishing his notability under WP:GNG. Rather than deleting, the article should be retained and improved with these published citations. Syeddeep2025 (talk) 05:09, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - I do not agree with the notability guidelines matching this profile even after thoruogh research, hence it should be deleted.Almandavi (talk) 05:41, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Syed Mosharaf Hossain is a distinguished educator and innovator whose contributions have drawn significant independent recognition. Not only was he honored by the Asia Book of Records, but on June 17, 2025, he was also named “Principal of the Year 2025” at the Asia Education Conclave held in Mumbai, alongside another ITI principal from Bengal, for his work in enhancing technical education and multi-skill training en.wikipedia.org+6magzter.com+6x.com+6. These are reliable, third‑party sources establishing his notability under WP:GNG. Rather than deleting, the article should be retained and improved with these published citations. Syeddeep2025 (talk) 05:09, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Fails WP:BIO and WP:GNG. If the user doesn't see the problem, this probably has to go to WP:COIN. Nobody (talk) 05:53, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Syed Mosharaf Hossain is a distinguished educator and innovator whose contributions have drawn significant independent recognition. Not only was he honored by the Asia Book of Records, but on June 17, 2025, he was also named “Principal of the Year 2025” at the Asia Education Conclave held in Mumbai, alongside another ITI principal from Bengal, for his work in enhancing technical education and multi-skill training en.wikipedia.org+6magzter.com+6x.com+6. These are reliable, third‑party sources establishing his notability under WP:GNG. Rather than deleting, the article should be retained and improved with these published citations. Syeddeep2025 (talk) 05:09, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Donna Wick

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

Doesn't meet WP:GNG. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 21:58, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Authors, Radio, United States of America, and Texas. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 21:58, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 22:00, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Even reading the article, she seems rather routine. Sourcing isn't helpful and I don't find much of anything about her. Oaktree b (talk) 01:16, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I did some extensive research with different combination but the situation is unfortunate but I added one source with basic info about her but looks weak.AppleBoosted (talk) 20:51, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I find almost nothing about her. I also looked for her books and hit zero in WorldCat; I can't even really show that the publisher Avina exists. She also has at least one self-published book. Of the sources that have been found, one is by her and the other is PR for a product (radio show), also by her. Lamona (talk) 00:35, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Jeong Kwang-il

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

Non-notable person, only three sources cited. Absolutiva (talk) 21:48, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Crime, and South Korea. Absolutiva (talk) 21:48, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of North Korea-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:10, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. A Google search indicates there are many other sources giving coverage to the subject. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 🛸 19:49, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. WP:BEFORE finds not only sources, but significant coverage on this individual from The Atlantic, The Guardian, PBS, the National Review, and others... Individual passes GNG and just because the current sourcing of the article is weak, it doesn't mean that the person is non-notaable.. Nayyn (talk) 22:43, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Dogsbody

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

WP:NOTDICT. This article contains only a definition, synonyms, and etymological information.

Deprodded by an IP without any stated reason.

--Janhrach (talk) 17:45, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Military, and Business. Janhrach (talk) 17:45, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Entirely a dictionary definition. Reference 2 appears to be one person's pet project. The statement (ref 3) that an American equivalent is "lackey" is not held up by the reference.

I don't find a digital copy of the final reference but I would bet that what is found there is not sufficient to support this article. Lamona (talk) 00:48, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: there is a Wikipedia article about the author of source no. 2. Janhrach (talk) 15:09, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that's how I confirmed that this was a personal project, unpublished (or self-published, but web-only). The "Words" site says In early 2017, he ceased writing World Wide Words. I don't think we can consider it a reliable source. In particular, I note that he does not include sources for his analysis of dogsbody so we lack verification. Lamona (talk) 15:57, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as per nom and for the arguments raised above Nayyn (talk) 22:45, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect as ATD perhaps to an umbrella article pertaining to "a subject doing menial or mundane tasks" as finding within wikipedia entries like Lackey (manservant), Footman, Henchman which seems to have a similar definition.Lorraine Crane (talk) 03:04, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Roman Korzeń

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

The article is virtually unsourced, as none of the references or links in it have any mention of the person (that I could find, and there's not a lot of text). Same goes for plwiki, where this was translated from. A Google search also brought back virtually nothing besides Wikipedia, Wikidata and Commons. A bunch of Polish pages mention the name, but I couldn't find any with info on this particular person, including any pages relating to the Polonia Restituta award. ☀ Hijérovīt | ^þⰁ_č 11:56, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Poland. Shellwood (talk) 12:03, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Engineering-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 15:05, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Farouk Yaghmour

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

no notability. فيصل (talk) 04:01, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Architecture and Jordan. فيصل (talk) 04:01, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Given that an administrator of Arabic Wikipedia believes that notability has not been established, I am inclined to agree. I cannot validate sourcing in English to any degree that shows notability. PickleG13 (talk) 04:19, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 10:11, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wael Al-Masri

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

promotional article. فيصل (talk) 04:03, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Architecture and Jordan. فيصل (talk) 04:03, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Weak Delete Given that an administrator of Arabic Wikipedia believes that notability outside of promotional material has not been established, I am inclined to agree. I cannot validate sourcing in English to any degree that shows notability, and it would require a lot of cleanup to get this page in working order. Nonetheless, I think it could Return to Draftspace. PickleG13 (talk) 04:20, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 10:10, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: this guy is notable. The article itself definitely needs some work, but the subject himself meets WP:GNG based on the sourcing in the article and elsewhere. [19] [20] [21]. Cremastra (talk) 22:33, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sanjay Passi

AfDs for this article:

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

Not notable topic. Unsourced article and claims no Notability. fails WP:BIO, WP:GNG. LKBT (talk) 09:47, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Businesspeople, Business, India, and Delhi. LKBT (talk) 09:47, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Shalini Passi

AfDs for this article:

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

Lacks significant coverage on reliable resources. Fails WP:NACTOR. LKBT (talk) 09:41, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, Women, Entertainment, India, and Delhi. LKBT (talk) 09:41, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Adam B. Resnick

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

Not notable enough topic for a standalone article. Unsourced article and claims no Notability. fails WP:BIO FreaksIn (talk) 09:23, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Authors, Conspiracy theories, and Crime. FreaksIn (talk) 09:23, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The subject of Article does not meet Wiki Notability.as there is insufficient coverage in reliable independent secondary sources. The current whistleblowing settlement do not establish Long term Notability of the subject beyond a single incident .--Unclethepoter (talk) 10:37, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Mehmet Kâmil Berk

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

Only found one other reference on a Google search and it didn't seem like he did much that would warrant meeting notability standards. Being the doctor to a notable person isn't enough to establish notability on its own. Orphan article now for several years, so additional information is probably not likely. Royal Autumn Crest (talk) 02:57, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete The argument for deletion makes sense, and there is no notability established seemingly in any language. On English Wikipedia, it is especially challenging to source an article where there is not significant notability in English language sources. PickleG13 (talk) 04:25, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Medicine, and Turkey. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 07:03, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

B. R. Deepak

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

This article should be deleted because the subject doesn’t meet Wikipedia’s rules for notable academics or public figures. It appears to be written by the subject himself, raising concerns about autobiographical bias. His h-index and i10-index are much lower than what is normally expected for a professor in the Humanities. The only proof that he won a major Chinese award is a dead link, and no other reliable sources confirm it. Charlie (talk) 05:01, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Academics and educators, and India. Charlie (talk) 05:01, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Seems feebly notable hence the article should be trimmed in a neutral form and also lodged with some more notable news link.Almandavi (talk) 05:44, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Urmas Nigul

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

Subject is not notable Nixleovel (talk) 03:41, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Military, and Estonia. Nixleovel (talk) 03:41, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: the name does show up, but only as trivial routine coverage. -- D'n'B-📞 -- 04:07, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Notability has certainly not been established. There has not even been a real effort to make this any more than a stub, which is frustrating in itself. PickleG13 (talk) 04:22, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Probably notable, e.g. biography in magazine Sõdur (see https://issuu.com/sodur/docs/sodur0415/69). But I am not opposed for deletion--Estopedist1 (talk) 04:33, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

WP:ROUTINE coverage doesn't point towards notability. -- D'n'B-📞 -- 06:50, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Michelle Wahlgren

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

Doesn't meet WP:GNG. I couldnt find sources online about this subject hence doesn't meet WP:SIGCOV. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 03:30, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Businesspeople, and United States of America. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 03:30, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women and California. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 16:08, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, no independent WP:SIGCOV. GoldRomean (talk) 21:31, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep/comment I took the opportunity and edited the page. Used proposed edits and links to at least give it a chance because I believe that people who were notable when articles were not posted on the internet widely or when the digital age wasn't booming, deserves a chance. Also the article is very old so it passed all the screening for years. We can remove some parts though. AppleBoosted (talk) 21:42, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

2025 San Antonio City Council election

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

Local municipal elections (outside of mayoral elections) are not noteworthy enough to have their own article, insufficient notability requirements. There are no other articles regarding San Antonio city council elections, which further proves the lack of notability. SanAnMan (talk) 16:40, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Politicians, Politics, and Texas. SanAnMan (talk) 16:40, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 16:52, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep existence of other articles is not a valid reason for deletion, and local municipal elections may be notable if they receive significant coverage. This election does show significant coverage through the existence of sources on the page and a WP:BEFORE yields pages of results on candidates, campaigns, and other council election-related topics. Yoblyblob (Talk) :) 19:55, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - San Antonio is a much larger, more populated, and diverse city than it was 60 years ago. Not having articles from 1957 elections is irrelevant to 2025 elections. Articles about the 2013, 2017, and 2021 elections probably should be created. Bearian (talk) 09:22, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per the above. Surayeproject3 (talk) 14:29, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nathan Ssewali

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

No indication of notability, and virtually no coverage in reliable sources. All the sources appear to be paid placements originating from a PR/SEO campaign in mid-2022. Yuvaank (talk) 04:24, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Authors, Uganda, and Canada. Yuvaank (talk) 04:24, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Agreeing with the nominator, the sources lack reliability. A thorough evaluation of the sources is necessary. Zuck28 (talk) 05:04, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete' Agree per nom.--FreaksIn 15:33, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Fails GNG Robertjamal12 ~🔔 17:35, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Giovanni Baldelli

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

Having gone through the available source material, I have been unable to find anything to establish significant coverage of this person in reliable sources. His main work of note was a single book about social anarchism, which has received some attention but not much more than a passing reference in most sources (see Google Scholar results). David Wieck's obituary for the Social Anarchism journal, listed in the further reading, appears to be the only work specifically about Baldelli that could lead to any development of this article. As this article appears not to meet the notability guidelines for authors, I'm recommending it for deletion. A possible alternative to deletion could be redirecting to social anarchism, although he's not mentioned in the body of that article, so this may not be appropriate. Grnrchst (talk) 21:48, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Authors, Philosophy, Politics, Social science, and Italy. Grnrchst (talk) 21:48, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment There's an extensive biography in the Dizionario biografico online degli anarchici italiani (which was originally a print publication and is now updated and expanded online)[22]. Between that and the Wieck obituary, I'd be fine with "Keep" if only there was a third published source. The Dizionario points to an undergraduate thesis, but it's unpublished. Jahaza (talk) 04:39, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
You'd hope with an extensive list of publications for WP:AUTHOR notability, but I only found one review so far.[23] It would be good if someone has access to Italian library sources to search those. Jahaza (talk) 04:41, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
~~Ah, REDIRECT to David Wieck, where Baldelli and his main book are mentioned. If more sources emerge the article can be broken out again. 04:44, 20 June 2025 (UTC)~~

Striking my !vote. Jahaza (talk) 00:52, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, extensively cited in various works on anarchism. --Soman (talk) 11:03, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Wieck page. Go4thProsper (talk) 10:41, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, just because there is little information now doesn't mean that there won't be more information in the future. FPTI (talk) 00:54, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting as opinions are divided between Keep and Redirection.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:03, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Liz, I've struck my !vote, about which I didn't have strong feelings. ~~I don't know if you want to WP:IAR and close this up early as a result. Jahaza (talk) 00:54, 27 June 2025 (UTC)~~[reply]

aaaand now I'm striking my comment about closing early because I see that I wasn't the only one to !vote "redirect" Jahaza (talk) 00:56, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sagar Shah

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

Unable to find any independent coverage, as almost all of the sources are either interviews or passing mentions in unreliable or unbylined sources. Not enough to meet WP:GNG. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 12:58, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Sportspeople, and India. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 12:58, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Snow keep. Interview sources are more than fine. There are plenty of them: e.g. [24] [25] [26] [27] [28] [29] [30] Sportsfan77777 (talk) 14:08, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

As an aside, it's completely absurd to think this person might not be notable. They founded the most successful chess journalism / media company ever, and are one of the most well-known media figures in chess. The nominator lacks the WP:COMPETENCE to be familiar with the subject and did not put adequate effort to look for sources. Sportsfan77777 (talk) 14:08, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sources from chessbase.in are WP:SPS, and thesportzplanet.com, perlenvombodensee.de, and fountainink.in are more like blogs with little or no editorial oversight. To clarify, ChessBase has existed since 1986 and the Indian version was only co-founded by him. Claiming that “they founded the most successful chess journalism/media company ever, and are one of the most well-known media figures in chess” reflects your bias and is not policy based. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 15:02, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No, Perlen vom Bodensee is not just a blog, [31], it is a very reliable source, also trusted by de-wp, for what it's worth. - Squasher (talk) 13:18, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please double check? Because from what I see, the only author who consistently writes on Perlen vom Bodensee is Conrad Schormann, who is also the founder. Six articles were written by Stefan Löffler and a few by Roland Neumeier. The translated DE wiki article states that "The site's editor is Conrad Schormann, who is supported by a team of 18 authors.", which I believe is misleading based on what I’ve seen so far and the fact that the article has very few edits also doesn’t help its reliability. In any case, having a page on DE wiki doesn’t automatically make the source reliable, especially since the standards on EN wiki are significantly higher, which I believe you already know. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 15:34, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There is nothing to add or to check. I saw the article this afternoon by chance and also the the AfD, with a comment I did not completely agree and just wanted to leave a note that might help. The source is viewed as reliable in de-wp by the chess portal, if you do not agree, that is fine for me. Sagar Shah is at least in my eyes a relevant topic for someone like me, who follows chess purely from an interested viewer point of view. He is very well known in the chess eco system, in de-wp he is notable already just by having reached the IM title. If he doesn't meet the criteria here, because no sources can be found, that are seen as sufficient, so be it. - Squasher (talk) 20:19, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Maharashtra-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:48, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. Let'srun (talk) 19:29, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: No snow in the forecast here. Any further input on the sourcing?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 01:07, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Kristian Halken

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

Lack of significant coverage; could not find more sources with significant coverage to demonstrate the actor's notability. Go D. Usopp (talk) 05:23, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, and Denmark. Go D. Usopp (talk) 05:23, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. See WP:NACTOR ["the person has had significant roles in multiple notable films, television shows, stage performances, or other productions; or The person has made unique, prolific or innovative contributions to a field of entertainment.") and the page in Danish please, to check the said roles--Artus Sauerfog Dark-Eon (talk) 09:35, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

.

Keep: Clicking on the Gnews link above brings up more than a trivial amount of Danish articles, [32] for example, suggests a long career and seems to be well-known by the public. Oaktree b (talk) 15:32, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Delete Close call, but doesn’t seem to definitively meet WP:GNG and WP:NOTABILITY guidelines. Go4thProsper (talk) 10:50, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Draftify- as an ATD, given the article has potential being kept, if more SIGCOV be added as well as some integration from the other language ver. like the Danish ver. for same article to this english ver. .Lorraine Crane (talk) 22:59, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 15:20, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sonia Rathee

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

Her brother Ankur Rathee is notable but Notability is not inherited. The references used in the article are typically WP:NEWSORGINDIA. Mentions, interviews, and unreliable sources. Fails WP:ANYBIO and WP:NACTOR. CresiaBilli (talk) 11:26, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, Entertainment, United States of America, and California. CresiaBilli (talk) 11:26, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Dance, and Maharashtra. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 21:38, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: fully agree with nominator rationale. Chronos.Zx (talk) 00:51, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. She had multiple significant roles in notable productions, including lead roles in Tara vs Bilal,Broken But Beautiful and roles in the main cast of Kapkapiii, and Decoupled, thus clearly meeting the notability requirements for actresses, see WP:NACTRESS.--Artus Sauerfog Dark-Eon (talk) 09:41, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nomination. She fails WP:GNG. Go4thProsper (talk) 18:20, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Go4thProsper, I’ve noticed that you’re frequently participating in active AFDs and voting too quickly. For example, you’ve cast four votes in just three minutes and eight votes within 14 minutes. This seems suspicious because it takes longer to properly evaluate the articles.

Are you familiar with the guidelines for participating in Afds? I want to inform you that if you’re randomly voting on Afds without any evaluation, it’s best to stop.

Zuck28 (talk) 20:17, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your advice. I enjoy setting aside time to read the dialogue and the articles under discussion, generally people. Sometimes I also edit those articles to try to improve them. I don’t vote on all of them, but try to weigh in on those that are most egregious or sometimes easy keeps. Once I see a few on which I see value in weighing in, I do. That’s the whole point of the AfD community discussion, no? Go4thProsper (talk) 02:59, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
In your vote, you just said, ”Delete: per nomination. She fails GNG.”

Can you elaborate how you came to the conclusion that she fails GNG? If you carefully check the article, there is enough significant coverage in secondary reliable sources to pass Wp:GNG and by evaluating her filmography, she easily passes wp:NACTOR.

Zuck28 (talk) 12:15, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Cinder painter (talk) 14:52, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Johnny Boufarhat

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

This article reads somewhat like a resume mixed with a blog, possibly because the subject, per the article, "keeps a low public profile". The references, though 30, are not predominantly about the subject; many are ammouncements about his company, and several others are general articles that mention him in passing. The few sources that are actually about him profile him for having a lot of money, either locally or in Forbes, and are not generally in depth. He does not appear to be personally notable. This is also a problematic WP:BLP, devoting a lot of space to his personal health. FalconK (talk) 23:25, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Businesspeople, and United Kingdom. FalconK (talk) 23:25, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Internet, United Arab Emirates, England, and Australia. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:26, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete No evidence of enduring (or even basic) notability. His brief time in a UAE school didn't really leave any footprints here. Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 04:15, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
KEEP Coverage exists on plenty of sites to meet WP:BASIC. Check 1, 2, 3, 4. Mysecretgarden (talk) 09:04, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I am not in agreement. This is a lot of by-the-numbers reporting that is mostly not about the subject. The most that can be said about him from all 4 sources is that he sold a company. FalconK (talk) 09:16, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:16, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete lack of significant coverage - and if he keeps a low profile, then maybe he doesn't want to be a public figure. Bearian (talk) 00:52, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep enough coverage for this to be made into an article that doesn't need to be deleted.

GalStar (talk) 05:26, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Chad Steelberg

AfDs for this article:

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

Second nomination, but it's been 10 years and the previous one was no consensus on the erroneous assertion that founding companies makes a subject inherently notable. Related nomination to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ryan Steelberg but I'm writing this one separately because it is a second nomination, even though the articles are substantially identical.

No evidence of notability. Search through Proquest, Google News, and other internet searches yield no apparent coverage other than in connection with his job. While frequently quoted in interviews, there is little to no notability-establishing 3rd party coverage in reliable sources treating him personally. Award lists do not contribute to notability. Relevant information here is already included in articles about the companies he's founded, and founding companies does not confer personal notability in and of itself (not in WP:BIO). The article is congratulatory in tone and it has not been possible to improve it using WP:RS since 2015 due to a lack of relevant sources. The NYTimes article referenced in the article treats the company Brand Affinity and not Chad [33]. FalconK (talk) 06:35, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Businesspeople, United States of America, and California. FalconK (talk) 06:35, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Ineligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:26, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Notability is not inheritable downwards; even if his companies are notable, as stated in the previous AfD, that does not mean he is. Coeusin (talk) 15:45, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sandeep Marwah

AfDs for this article:

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

Non notable businessperson. The sources are mostly primary/press releases or broken links. Fails Wp:GNG. Created by a blocked user. Zuck28 (talk) 02:30, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Academics and educators, Actors and filmmakers, India, and Delhi. Zuck28 (talk) 02:30, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Seems to be notable but lacks significant coverage. I suggest to improve the article with the notable news links.Almandavi (talk) 05:30, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Agent 007 (talk) 17:44, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nisar Rahmath

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

This article was previously moved to draft space due to concerns about notability and insufficient coverage in reliable, independent sources. I reviewed the draft and declined it for lacking significant coverage to meet the general notability guideline (GNG). However, the creator has since moved it back to mainspace without addressing the sourcing concerns. While the subject has received an award, I believe it is not sufficient on its own to establish notability without substantial independent coverage. I'm bringing this to AfD so that other editors can review the article and share their opinions on whether it meets Wikipedia's notability standards. Afstromen (talk) 16:37, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and India. Afstromen (talk) 16:37, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep – Nisar Rahmath received the Kerala State Film Award for Best Costume Designer, an official and notable recognition by a government cultural body. The article is supported by coverage in reliable and independent sources, including a feature profile in Deccan Chronicle and an interview in Manorama Online, both of which discuss his background, career, and achievements in detail. Shakheeb (talk) 17:56, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Shakheeb, I've removed what appears to have been an accidental duplicate !Vote of yours. Just making a note of it here for clarity sake. Netherzone (talk) 19:29, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Kerala-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:07, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Artists, and Fashion. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:05, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 15:29, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wes Watson

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

No significant coverage in reliable sources. Aŭstriano (talk) 11:40, 15 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Crime, Health and fitness, United States of America, and California. Aŭstriano (talk) 11:40, 15 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep article has minimal sources but just enough to warrant a Wikipedia listing, that said, I will respect other editors if the decision is delete. Eric Carpenter (talk) 17:19, 15 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If your going to give this guy an artile, might as well give one to everyone else in the world 2001:1970:59A6:5100:0:0:0:546E (talk) 18:23, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:11, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, the truth must always win. This article can always be changed later when new information arises. 2600:387:F:7815:0:0:0:6 (talk) 00:46, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. I encountered the article because I searched for "Wes Watson" & wanted to know who this individual was; I was happy to find a Wiki article. He seems to have enough of a following, and to have been involved in enough newsworthy things (if only a couple: the viral incident, the other viral incident, a book, a few media appearances), for the article to be worth keeping. I don't see how it serves Wikipedia to delete it—there are less informative articles about people equally as (un-)article-worthy, and I favor—in general—keeping them, too. Himaldrmann (talk) 01:28, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. His only claim to notability is a singular incident, which received fleeting media coverage, in which he was arrested for battery. RandFreeman (talk) 20:00, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I can only find coverage about the "viral beatdown", that seems 1E-ish. Otherwise, people are discussing if he's even worth as much money as he claims. Whole lot of nothing here. No sourcing and not even a real claim to notability. Oaktree b (talk) 19:28, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Per WP:BLP1E. The only coverage from reliable sources are the two news articles about his arrest. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 20:10, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - He has a lot of coverage from major outlets including BusinessInsider, Miami Herald, New York Post and others if you search through google and google news for "Wes Watson" "Youtuber". He's clearly notable. KatoKungLee (talk) 14:20, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep the subject in question - Welsey Thomas Watson - acts not only as an example of negtive behaviour of modern 'red pill' influencers, and can be used for references for such, but he is self proclaimed "the biggest in Miami." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.166.11.125 (talk) 22:29, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as per nom and lack of verifiability. BusinessInsider / New York Post are not reliable sources for BLPs. Nayyn (talk) 23:06, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - First off: Is anyone actually contending that a lead Wes Watson is a motivational speaker, businessman, author, influencer and conman. is okay in BLP terms? Secondly: it seems the subject's notability relates to number of YouTube subscribers, a viral video, and an arrest record. GNG fail. Carrite (talk) 16:49, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Kingsley Wilson

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

While I have no doubt in the reliability of references provided in the article, this subject does not look notable to me for several reasons. She has only been in office since January, with there being little coverage of her life and career, particularly because there does not seem to be significant coverage of that in reliable sources (as it can be seen, the references only briefly pass over what she has actually done in her life and instead concentrate on her political beliefs). As far as I'm aware, an official is not presumed to be notable only based on their political beliefs (most of this article is actually related to that instead of her short career). This then might be a case of WP:TOOSOON, where a politician could become notable in the future for their career accomplishments, and not instead of their political views. To close this off, there is coverage of this person in reliable sources independent of the subject but is this coverage "significant"? We could write a ton more articles like this where there's news coverage of someone's political beliefs, but little to none about what they have accomplished. I should also note that while the creator of this article has expanded several major articles to B-status which is sure appreciated, they were previously banned from creating articles in the mainspace and instead had to use the AfC system. This is one of the articles created since the ban expired in April. Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 15:02, 14 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Politicians, and United States of America. Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 15:02, 14 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, yes that is significant coverage. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 03:44, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
how so? Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 11:47, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
See WP:SIGCOV, I think you've confused significant coverage with coverage of what you think is significant... Your argument doesn't make any sense otherwise. Significant coverage of political beliefs counts just as much towards notability as significant coverage of political accomplishments. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 15:45, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Other than WP:TOOSOON, I would argue independently of that, she is not notable. Most of the sources were published at the same time so there is no demonstration of sustained coverage. The citations from the end of May are redundant. existence ≠ notability. There is a lot of masking a lack of notability. The article lists every job she's ever held. A vague position at Gettr for an unlisted amount of time is not encyclopedic. The sourcing is also misapplied. For example, the statement that she was sworn in on May 27th does not appear in the Forward despite the citation. Again, adding references to mask a lack of notability.--Mpen320 (talk) 18:34, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Kingsley, and some of her commentary, have received significant coverage from major sources in the short time she had been in the public eye. This coverage is only likely to grow, although I believe she is notable now. As a side note, the article is pretty well-written too. CarlStrokes (talk) 17:46, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 02:02, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I guess no one reviewed the article talk page or you would have seen, and mentioned here, that this article is currently being reviewed for GA status (see Talk:Kingsley Wilson/GA1). This seems relevant to discussing whether or not it should be Kept or Deleted. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:07, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - clearly notable and becoming more so by the day. On top pf that, there's the good article review Liz points out. --A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 04:43, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Based on what? There being a GAN review does not meant that the individual is notable. We have deleted many GAs and FAs in the past, this therefore won't be anything new. Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 12:45, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
"Based on what" you ask???

Wilson has been in the news nonstop lately. I did a quick Google News search and gave up looking at news results by the 20th page. Of course some of those may be passing mentions or low quality but clearly this person is now one of the most prominent people in the States.

Wilson is the Pentagon's spokesperson and the Pentagon is dropping huge bombs. That gets attention. --A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 21:00, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: as the GA reviewer, I would prefer if you disregard the GAN when evaluating the notability of this subject (if that is within policy). No opinion on deletion. GoldRomean (talk) 20:37, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Anish Shah (Businessman)

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

Business person does business things. None of the refs provide WP:SIGCOV, subject fails WP:GNG. - UtherSRG (talk) 11:36, 14 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Businesspeople, Business, and India. UtherSRG (talk) 11:36, 14 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Maharashtra-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 11:56, 14 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your interest in this article, Anish Shah qualifies under WP:GNG, as he's the CEO of Mahindra group which is in India's top 25 companies. And he has significant coverage in reliable, independent sources as far as I researched after founding this article via Special:Random/Draft.

So I will improve this article asap to follow the Wikipedia:GNG completly. and kindly explain this- Business person does business things so I can know what wrong I did in this so I can improve that also. iVickyChoudhary (talk) 15:31, 14 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

And the previous CEO of the same company has very old wiki article. Anand Mahindra Just sharing. I know it doesn't matter much. iVickyChoudhary (talk) 15:32, 14 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@IVickyChoudhary: Being connected to a notable entity does not grant notability per WP:INHERIT. - UtherSRG (talk) 18:06, 14 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I fully agree that notability is not inherited by association per Wikipedia:INHERIT. However, the argument for keeping this article is not based solely on Anish Shah’s role at Mahindra Group, but on his own notability, which is independently established through. Multiple reliable and independent sources that provide significant coverage of his leadership, strategic decisions, and business vision as Managing Director and CEO of Mahindra Group. Kindly search on Google about him. iVickyChoudhary (talk) 06:31, 15 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

References say he's a businessperson doing business things. That's not SIGCOV. - UtherSRG (talk) 12:11, 15 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate your review. While I understand the concern that "businessperson doing business things" doesn't automatically imply notability, I respectfully argue that Anish Shah meets the WP:SIGCOV, and WP:GNG.

He has received significant coverage in independent, reliable sources such as Forbes India, Economic Times, and Business Today, which profile his leadership, strategic direction, and impact at Mahindra Group. This coverage goes beyond routine job announcements, it reflects independent journalistic interest in Shah as an individual business leader, not merely in the company he leads. His coverage is not trivial, routine, or tied to a single event. I will continue to improve the article by adding more sources that fulfill WP:SIGCOV and will restructure the article to reflect their depth and focus. iVickyChoudhary (talk) 07:58, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - "Business person does business things" … and on a global scale in ~~Choudhary's~~ Shah's case. Mahindra Group is huge ($23 billion plus). There are Mahindra tractor dealers in farming towns across North America. I'd be stunned if ~~Choudhary~~ Shah isn't notable. --A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 01:43, 15 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@A. B.: You mean Shah, right? - UtherSRG (talk) 02:10, 15 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Ooops! Yes. Thanks. A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 02:14, 15 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 02:13, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete it appears many of the significant sources are resume-like or procedural "Shah picked as ..." or fall into the tabloid category "What is Mahindra Group's CEO Anish Shah's monthly salary?" but we don't necessarily get a substantive view of what makes him notable beyond running this company. The most significant pieces are on the business, not him as a person. Not opposed to draftify-ing this so that it could continue to be improved and to eliminate the WP:REFBOMB Nayyn (talk) 23:21, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hakan Akbas

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

Questionable if it meets WP:SUSTAINED notability. Amigao (talk) 00:56, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Turkey-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 06:26, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 06:26, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 06:27, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - Akbas appears to have no article on the Turkish Wikipedia (or any other). --A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 02:22, 15 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep – He has coverage in national and international media and has appeared as a commentator on major news channels including NTV, CNN, and CNBC. That makes him notable. Here are some links of his appearances in reliable media outlets: [34] [35] [36] [37] [38] [39] [40] [41] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tacmocc (talk • contribs) 15:24, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Malinaccier (talk) 18:32, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Appearing in media does not grant notability. Geschichte (talk) 06:52, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Scott Russell Surasky

AfDs for this article:

Articles for deletion/Russell Surasky

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

I don't see any improvement in notability since the last AfD in 2021. There are a few passing mentions and he has been quoted by Fox News a couple of times, but still nothing in terms of WP:SIGCOV. This page appears to have been created and deleted multiple times over the last 7 years under various titles such as Russell Surasky, Russell S. Surasky, Russell S Surasky, Russell Scott Surasky and Bridge Back to Life. See also Special:Contributions/8.25.157.160 who was blocked in April 2025 for persistently trying to promote this doctor across Wikipedia just days before this page was created. Yuvaank (talk) 04:04, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Health and fitness, Medicine, and New York. Yuvaank (talk) 04:04, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Surasky meets Wikipedia's WP:NAUTHOR, WP:NBIO, and WP:NPROF notability guidelines:
1. Media Presence: Surasky appears regularly as medical expert and as the primary subject of interviews on major national networks including Fox News, NewsNation, Newsmax, and One America News, frequently offering neurological and addiction medicine analysis on nationally important topics like the President’s cognitive health and the opioid crisis. His interview with Neil Cavuto in July 2024 on Fox News—the most-watched cable news network—focused solely on his expert medical opinion regarding the President of the United States, satisfying WP:SIGCOV in national media.
2. Academic (WP:NPROF): He is a Fellow of both the American Academy of Neurology and the American Society of Addiction Medicine—a rare dual distinction. These fellowships are conferred only on physicians with significant and sustained contributions to their fields. He also held a highest-level elected or appointed administrative post as Medical Director of Bridge Back to Life and faculty positions at Hofstra/Northwell (verified by Northwell Health’s official profile), major academic institutions.
3. Published Author with Major Publisher (WP:NAUTHOR): He authored This Book Will Save Your Life, published by Simon & Schuster/Post Hill Press, a major commercial publisher. The book received an endorsement from Cardinal Timothy Dolan and a foreword by Dr. Drew Pinsky, which supports its cultural and professional impact and then it satisfies WP:NOTABILITY for authors.
4. Significant Independent Coverage: Coverage includes The Hill, The Economic Times, Fox News, NewsNation, Psychiatric Times, New York Post, and Long Island Press, all of which provide in-depth and independent analysis of his views, not just trivial mentions.
5. Expert Witness in National Litigation: His expert testimony in high-profile medical and legal cases adds to the notability of his professional work, especially as cited in legal directories like Expert Institute and Expert Witness Profiler.
  And also from the last deletion discussion in 2021 couple of editors has pointed out future notability for this individual.Zelaatan (talk) 10:58, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Zelaatan: In order:
1. The appearances on Fox, Newsmax, and OANN do nothing to help with notability because those outlets are all deprecated as sources for ineffective editorial oversight. The one NewsNation source doesn't discuss him in any capacity and is of limited use as a source in this context.
2. You fail to cite anything with regards to his fellowships with AAN or ASAM.
3. Publishing a single book with a non-academic publisher is nowhere near close enough to satisfy either WP:NPROF or WP:NAUTHOR. (For the latter specifically, if that were the case Jim Theis would have an article.)
4. Both the The Hill and Economic Times articles you cite 404 out (Alpha3031 says they're hallucinated, and I have little reason to doubt this), Fox News and the New York Post are both deprecated as sources, and none of the other outlets discuss him in any depth, merely quoting/paraphrasing him.
5. You fail to cite anything with regards to his expert-witness status.
—Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{threads critiques} 21:13, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Malinaccier (talk) 18:46, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

*Keep – This article meets multiple notability standards, including WP:NBIO, WP:NPROF, WP:AUTHOR, and WP:SIGCOV. Substantial updates have been made since the 2021 AfD, including new, reliable sources that document sustained public visibility, national expert interviews, academic and clinical appointments, and verified legal testimony.

1. ~~Published Author (WP:AUTHOR)~~
  Dr. Surasky is the author of This Book Will Save Your Life: The New Medical Cure for Opioid Addiction (Simon & Schuster, 2024). The book includes a foreword by Dr. Drew Pinsky and an endorsement from Cardinal Timothy Dolan. It has been discussed on national platforms including Fox News, The Dr. Drew Podcast, and Real AF with Andy Frisella.
  Conclusion:
  The subject has demonstrated sustained public visibility and professional impact through clinical medicine, national media, legal expert work, and commercial publishing. All notability criteria are met, and the article is supported by independent, reliable sources. The article should be retained.
  --Neurodoc99 (talk) 05:57, 21 June 2025 (UTC) — Neurodoc99 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
@Neurodoc99: Any science (and this includes medical) coverage on Fox News was explicitly deprecated due to their tendency to spread misinformation or otherwise disregard best editorial practices. Fox News' opinion shows have never been acceptable sources, either. Both Newsmax and OANN are deprecated wholesale, again due to their disregard of editorial best practices and their pushing conspiracy theory wank. Being a practicing neurologist doesn't come close to meeting NPROF. You cite nothing in the article in re his status as a testifying expert. Publishing a single book thru a non-academic publisher doesn't help for NPROF or NAUTHOR. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{threads critiques} 20:53, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. WP:NOTADVERTISING, the fake AI generated references ("The Hill and Economic Times" as of Special:Permalink/1296634479) is borderline G3 and I highly suggest the editors above reconsider their behaviour. Or, you know, someone should probably just block them because at this point I think the evidence points towards WP:NOTHERE, and is clearly disruptive regardless of intent. Alpha3031 (t • c) 07:24, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete definitely WP:Promo, with editors continually adding WP:Peacock. As stated by both the nom and @Alpha3031 there is nothing here that is WP:SIGCOV that discusses him, just appearing for his opinion does not pass notability. For certain not close to any pass of WP:NPROF, neither FAAN not FASAM qualify as passing WP:NPROF#C3, both are routine member categories for practicing professionals. For instance, FAAN says that a single research grant is required, which is very minor. Just having a foreword by a Cardinal does not pass WP:NAUTHOR.Ldm1954 (talk) 10:24, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per no WP:SIGCOV — tony 11:26, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

*Keep (duplicate !vote) – Dr. Russell Surasky meets Wikipedia notability standards under WP:NBIO, WP:NPROF, WP:AUTHOR, and WP:SIGCOV. Below is concrete, verifiable evidence of significant, sustained coverage from independent, reliable sources — along with direct responses to the prior deletion arguments.

Response to Yuvaank (Nomination): Yuvaank claims there is “nothing in terms of WP:SIGCOV” and that Dr. Surasky is only mentioned in passing. This is factually incorrect.

Dr. Surasky has been the primary subject and sole expert in multiple national broadcast segments:

Fox Business – Cavuto: Coast to Coast (May 20, 2019): Full segment on the opioid epidemic following the overdose death of a Columbine survivor. Dr. Surasky is the only expert featured. 🎥 Watch segment

Fox News – America Reports (Jan 2025): Expert analysis on the neurological risks of wildfire-related air pollution. Dr. Surasky is introduced as a neurologist and provides extended, expert commentary. 🎥 Watch segment

Fox News – Cavuto Live (July 2024): Analyzed President Biden’s cognitive state in the aftermath of a debate performance. His analysis was cited in:
The Hill

Economic Times

These appearances are non-trivial, independently produced, and nationally broadcast. They fulfill all criteria under WP:SIGCOV.

Response to Alpha3031: Alpha3031 alleged “fake” or AI-generated references. This is demonstrably false. Every citation provided is:

Publicly accessible

From mainstream national news organizations

Supported by video evidence directly from Fox News, Fox Business, and OANN

Cited in secondary sources (e.g., The Hill, Economic Times)

These are not AI-generated or unverifiable.

Response to Ldm1954: Ldm1954 dismisses FAAN/FASAM as “routine” and calls the article promotional. That is inaccurate:

FAAN and FASAM are selective designations requiring peer nomination and documentation of professional impact. See: AAN Fellow Criteria

These fellowships are accompanied by:
Faculty role at Zucker School of Medicine (Hofstra/Northwell)

Medical Directorship of Bridge Back to Life

Dual board certification in neurology and addiction medicine

These credentials meet WP:NPROF#C1 (significant professional role) and WP:NPROF#C3 (selective membership).

Regarding promotional tone: that is not a deletion rationale under WP:NOTADVERTISING and can easily be fixed through neutral editing — which I fully support.

Response to WP:NOTHERE accusations: I acknowledge that I am a new editor. However, I am acting in good faith, following policy, and supplying high-quality, independently sourced references. New editors who follow policy are not in violation of WP:NOTHERE.

Additional Notability Criteria Met:

Published Author (WP:AUTHOR)
This Book Will Save Your Life (Post Hill Press, 2024; distributed by Simon & Schuster): 📚 Publisher link

The book is independently covered in major media:

Cardinal Dolan podcast

Real AF with Andy Frisella

The Brian Kilmeade Show

Foreword by Dr. Drew Pinsky and endorsement by Cardinal Timothy Dolan Meets WP:AUTHOR#C3 through broad independent coverage and cultural reach.

Expert Witness Recognition (WP:NBIO)

Testified in over 25 legal cases

Listed expert on Expert Institute
Example case: Mecham v. Jarvis (2020)

Conclusion: Dr. Surasky has been the central subject of sustained national coverage, holds academic and clinical leadership roles, authored a book with a major publisher, and has been legally recognized as an expert witness. He meets all four applicable notability criteria — WP:NBIO, WP:NPROF, WP:AUTHOR, and WP:SIGCOV.

Any concerns about tone or formatting can and should be addressed through collaborative editing — not deletion.
Strong keep.

~~––Neurodoc99 (talk) 16:57, 21 June 2025 (UTC)~~[reply]

Why does a neurologist of all people need to use a LLM to communicate here?--A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 23:11, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Neurodoc99: In order:
- As has been repeatedly stated, Fox News is deprecated with regards to science topics, and this includes the field of medicine. None of these appearances are usable on Wikipedia, let alone for notability.
- The Hill source you cite is an op-ed and can only be used to cite what the author says, at best. It can't be used for notability.
- The Economic Times source you cite doesn't help for notability (wrong subject, connexion to subject). It's about a matter that you would do well to keep your chatbot a country mile from, and doesn't discuss Surasky.
- Again, Fox News, Newsmax, and OANN are all deprecated.
- You still cite nothing to help prove the AAN/FASAM claims.
- One book from one non-academic publisher does not equal WP:NAUTHOR notability. I will again cite the fact that Jim Theis does not have an article.
- Unless his testimony was worthy of note by multiple news reporters in those multiple cases (NPROF prong 7) him being called as a frequent expert witness isn't worth a hill of beans for notability. We don't cite the case itself (gov't document).
- This LLM-written essay repeats the same debunked arguments that others have already dismissed above, adding nothing to the discussion. Get rid of it; I foresee sanctions coming if you don't.
—Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{threads critiques} 08:08, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

So that's a "no" on reconsider behaviour then. Alpha3031 (t • c) 03:33, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom, no sigcov. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Molikog (talk • contribs) 06:33, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I strongly suspect we're in WP:COI/WP:AUTOBIO territory here — not least because of the obvious correlation between the editor's username and the article subject's attempted notability claim, but also because the overall behaviour pattern suggests a sense of entitlement and/or defensiveness. I'm not interested in getting involved, not least because Neurodoc actually tried to report me to WP:ANI just for removing the page from a redlinked category that doesn't exist and thus can't be used, which is hardly the substantive content dispute they tried to portray it as. I'm really not interested in getting drawn into it any further than that obvious nonsense, but I still felt the need to mention my read of the situation for the record. Bearcat (talk) 05:23, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Being on news programmes doesn't confer notability unless the segment is about the subject. There's not enough here for NPROF, and their book isn't enough for any of the four criteria of NAUTHOR. Being an expert witness isn't part of any notability standard. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested «@» °∆t° 09:34, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
An argument could be made that an expert witness in court cases could meet WP:NPROF prong 7, but that'd require much better sources than the jack we have here. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{threads critiques} 21:50, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I think that would be stretching NPROF#7, and even if it did apply appearing in many court cases wouldn't be enough. Those appearances would have had to have had a substantial impact. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested «@» °∆t° 01:09, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Even I've been an expert witness (but I've avoided going on One America News Network). It doesn't make you notable. An expert witness is just supposed to be a credible, knowledgeable neutral third party who can give factual opinions in a trial. Testifying as an expert witness doesn't mean you're the best in the field, just that you're knowledgeable and willing to testify.

If you're a dry cleaner, you could probably testify as an expert in a trial involving dry cleaners. If you're a professional roofer, you could probably testify in some sort of roofing trial.

Directories like Expert Institute and Expert Witness Profiler are usually pay-to-play listings with minimal screening. I think I paid to be listed in one of them. You can, too! A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 23:22, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Fails to meet Wikipedia notability criteria. AndyTheGrump (talk) 10:03, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete WP:SIGCOV - Also note that Judgement Day is approaching, and LLM's are taking over the internetz. -Roxy the dog 20:02, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note to closer - Neurodoc and their intelligent LLM have made two (at least) strong keep entries to this discussion. - Roxy the dog 20:05, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Refer to User:Jéské Couriano/Decode:
1. https://faculty.medicine.hofstra.edu/22458-scott-russell-surasky-md/about doesn't help with eligibility (connexion to subject). His employer.
2. https://www.longislandpress.com/2019/08/30/prescription-lucemyra-addicts-new-hope/ doesn't help with eligibility (too sparse). Two references in the source are quoting/attributing him; the last barely discusses him.
3. https://www.longislandpress.com/2020/02/18/spinal-adjustments-eyed-as-treatment-for-addiction/ doesn't help with eligibility (too sparse, wrong subject). Whatever isn't a direct quote/attributed claim is about his patients with him effectively crossing the street in the background of a Western film.
4. https://www.longislandpress.com/2018/05/31/retracing-the-road-to-ruin-amid-opoid-crisis/ doesn't help with eligibility (too sparse). Direct quotes.
5. We can't use https://www.simonandschuster.com/books/This-Book-Will-Save-Your-Life/Russell-Surasky/9798888456255 (online storefront).
6. https://www.psychiatrictimes.com/view/telepsychiatry-a-life-saving-solution doesn't help for eligibility (connexion to subject). Video which prominently features him talking.
7. We can't use Fox Business or Fox News in this context (deprecated).
8. https://www.newsnationnow.com/health/parents-worried-adderall-shortages-kids-school/ doesn't help for eligibility (too sparse). Direct quote.
9. We can't use the New York Post in this context (deprecated).
10. We can't use Newsmax full stop (deprecated).
Half of these sources are from outlets that have been deprecated due to their cavalier attitude towards editorial oversight, and the other half are still practically useless in this context because they don't discuss Surasky to any appreciable degree. (Revision BHFH'd: 2025/06/24 17:36) —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{threads critiques} 20:27, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Poorly-sourced and promotional, not to mention the possible COI and sockpuppetry in similar WP:WALLOFTEXT and AI by keepers. Borgenland (talk) 01:24, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If consensus is to delete, I respectfully request the article be userfied to my userspace at User:Neurodoc99/Scott_Russell_Surasky for future revision and sourcing improvements. — Preceding undated comment added 12:40, 25 June 2025 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Neurodoc99 (talk • contribs)
Given the history here, people are unlikely to think that's a good idea, and if you're not sure why I'd encourage you try and think about it a little instead of doing whatever you've been doing previously. Alpha3031 (t • c) 09:52, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This is a common courtesy. To my eyes on a quick fly-by, this looks like a borderline GNG pass swarmed under by IDONTLIKEIT folks trying to hold the piece to some other special notability guideline which it cannot meet. Carrite (talk) 16:35, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Carrite: I really don't see anything borderline about it. There's nothing that discusses Surasky in-depth that I can see, discounting the deprecated sources. And the reason we're bringing up WP:NACADEMIC and WP:NAUTHOR is because both Zelaatan and Neurodoc specifically invoked them. For what it is worth, I'm not seeing any indication they meet GNG either. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{threads critiques} 16:47, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

REFUND is a common courtesy at an administrator's discretion afforded to articles which don't have a history of being repeatedly recreated, to people that seem like they might be responsible with it. Given that the article is AI generated and can thus be recreated in seconds, I don't see why any admin would see the point, but I will defer to your judgement on that one. I do not, however, appreciate the accusation that my opinion was made on the basis of WP:IDONTLIKEIT, and would appreciate it if you could withdraw that part of your comment. Alpha3031 (t • c) 17:20, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Atrociously sourced, and with no indications that the situation can be improved. Stepwise Continuous Dysfunction (talk) 17:11, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. User:Neurodoc's LLM spits out words like a squid squirts ink and with similar affect: a big cloud of obfuscation and confusion. I have reviewed the 2 detailed source analyses by Jéské Couriano and they make it clear that this person is not notable. Our policies and guidelines require deletion. --A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 23:30, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - You can't make someone notable via puffery and this BLP is full of it. Pun intended. EDIT: I've filed SPI for the longstanding UPE malfeasance going on here [44]. This article should be deleted and then salted to prevent re-creation. Iggy pop goes the weasel (talk) 15:22, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: perhaps time to chill, since Neurodoc99 is currently blocked as a sockpuppet, so there is no good reason to continue to pile on here IMHO. I think there are more than enough votes/opinions already.Ldm1954 (talk) 21:57, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Riaan Manser

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

Promotional article about a person with one source that reports on the WP:SINGLEEVENT. The rest is unsourced puffery. No longstanding WP:SIGCOV. ZimZalaBim ^talk 03:52, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Travel and tourism, Cycling, and South Africa. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:47, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Cinder painter (talk) 08:04, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete – Per nom. A long article based on a single source seems problematic. Svartner (talk) 08:59, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources. The subject passes Wikipedia:Notability (people)#Basic criteria, which says:
People are presumed notable if they have received significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject.
- If the depth of coverage in any given source is not substantial, then multiple independent sources may be combined to demonstrate notability; trivial coverage of a subject by secondary sources is not usually sufficient to establish notability.
Sources
1. Spragg, Iain (2014). "Manser's African Odyssey". Cycling's Strangest Tales: Extraordinary But True Stories. London: Portico. pp. 110–111. ISBN 978-1-909396-49-4. Retrieved 2025-06-21 – via Internet Archive.
  The book notes: "That's a hell of a lot of pedalling if you were to undertake the epic journey on a humble bicycle, but such trifling obstacles did not deter South African adventurer Riaan Manser when he decided to accept exactly that daunting challenge, an ambitious expedition which very nearly killed him. Manser set off on his trusty mountain bike from Cape Town in September 2003. He averaged an impressive 88.5km (55 miles) per day and after two years, two months and 15 days in the saddle, travelling through 34 different countries, he had become the first person to circumnavigate Africa on two wheels. ... Manser's feat was recognised when he was named 'Adventurer of the Year' by Out There magazine in 2006 and granted an audience with Nelson Mandela. He politely declined an offer to work for the Liberian Tourist Board."
2. Razzetti, Steve (2010). Great Cycle Journeys of the World. London: New Holland Publishers. p. 15. ISBN 978-1-84773-463-1. Retrieved 2025-06-21 – via Internet Archive.
  The book notes: "Riaan Manser from Cape Town went one better. In September 2003 he set out on his mountain bike to ride the whole way around the continent. Two years, two months and two days later he was back, having pedalled an incredible 36,500 km (22,680 miles) through 34 counties, lost 14 kg (31 lbs) in weight, learned French, Portuguese and Arabic, eaten monkeys, rats and bats and been kidnapped by child-soldiers in Liberia. The journeys described in the pages that follow may not be quite as epic, but they will certainly open your eyes to the wonders of this most wonderful of continents."
3. Simontacchi, Andrew V. (2014-06-18). "World renowned adventurer Riaan Manser makes stop in Great Kills Marina after 5-month row across Atlantic (with photos)". Staten Island Advance. Archived from the original on 2025-06-21. Retrieved 2025-06-21.
  The article notes: "That's been the reality for Riaan Manser, a renowned world traveler and self-proclaimed professional adventurer whose five-month, 5,000-mile rowboat trek from Morocco to New York City included a stop at the Atlantis Marina in Great Kills on Wednesday. ... The long-haired, long-bearded Manser, 40, was hanging out with Ms. Geldenguys in their home one day when they decided they would venture to New York City in an incredible way -- via rowboat. Without a support staff, the couple set off in December, with a portioned supply of food and water donated from a South African grocer. ... Manser is a traveling author and public speaker outside of his professional adventuring"
4. "SA adventurer Riaan Manser and his wife Vasti were stuck on a small boat together for 173 days – What they learnt could help you through lockdown". News24. 2020-04-13. Archived from the original on 2025-06-21. Retrieved 2025-06-21.
  The article notes: "In 2009 Riaan Manser set on a world first when he became the first person to circumnavigate Madagascar by kayak. The expedition lasted 11 months, a feat he achieved alone and unaided. The incredible 5000km journey, 5000 km, was demanding, both physically and mentally. Not only did Riaan have to overcome severe loneliness, but natural disasters, extreme weather conditions, and ten hours in saltwater wreaked havoc on his body. ... Four years after his solo trip, Riaan and his wife Vasti took on the waters of the Atlantic Ocean. They endured a 173-day expedition from Agadir, Morocco to New York City, USA. ... In 2018, Riaan was joined on his 7-metre rowing boat, by rowing rookie and a total stranger Fanafikile Lephakha for a 5500 km expedition from the Canary Islands to Barbados which would last nearly two months."
5. Kilgannon, Corey (2014-06-21). "Adventurous Couple Arrive in New York From Africa, Merrily, Merrily". The New York Times. Archived from the original on 2015-11-09. Retrieved 2025-06-21.
  The article notes: "Riaan Manser and Vasti Geldenhuys, a fun-loving couple from Cape Town, have been together for 14 years, so when Ms. Geldenhuys, 36, suggested a vacation, he was agreeable. ... Mr. Manser, 40, is a professional adventurer who, without Ms. Geldenhuys, a lawyer, has traveled the perimeter of Africa on a bicycle and around Madagascar and Iceland by kayak. So he suggested that the two row a boat from Africa to the United States, with no accompanying vessels. They completed that journey around 2 p.m. on Friday, rowing their custom-built, 22-foot, high-tech rowboat into the 79th Street Boat Basin almost six months after leaving Agadir, Morocco, on Dec. 30. After rowing almost 6,700 miles, they claim they are the first pair to row from mainland Africa to mainland North America."
6. "Riaan Manser – Do something almost impossible". The Newspaper. 2023-06-05. Archived from the original on 2025-06-21. Retrieved 2025-06-21.
  The article notes: "First, it was Riaan Manser, alone and unaided…cycling the entire perimeter of the African continent, then circumnavigating Madagascar in a kayak and similarly around Iceland in a double kayak, adding two more incredible world firsts to his name. He then met his adventure partner for life, Vasti. Together, they broke world records through their adventures; from a world-first ocean row – Africa to North America, and then earning another Guinness World Record during a subsequent ocean crossing – the fastest mid-Pacific row from California to Hawaii."
7. Monakali, Namhla (2024-10-01). "Renowned adventurer Riaan Manser captivated primary school learners with thrilling tales from his travels". People's Post. Archived from the original on 2025-06-21. Retrieved 2025-06-21.
  The article notse: "Manser, whose children’s book My First African Adventure, was awarded the overall winner of the SA Book Awards 2023, spoke to the Grade 3s to 6s about his remarkable adventures, including a journey cycling around the perimeter of Africa. ... After the talk Manser signed copies of his books, including My First Wild Island Adventure and My First African Adventure, for students and staff alike."
8. de Lange, Phil (2023-05-16). "Riaan Manser's brush with death". Smile 90.4FM. Archived from the original on 2025-06-21. Retrieved 2025-06-21.
  The article notes: "He’s known as the South African that has conquered the world’s toughest oceans and most hostile environments. But now Riaan Manser is about to take his whole family on an adventure. He told Ryan all about it this morning and also shared a story about one of his scariest adventures. First, it was Riaan Manser, alone and unaided…cycling the entire perimeter of the African continent. Then he circumnavigated Madagascar in a kayak and Iceland in a double kayak which added two more world firsts to his name."
There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow Riaan Manser to pass Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline, which requires "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject".
Cunard (talk) 09:39, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: The policies say that articles containing flaws should not be deleted if they can be improved. Wikipedia:Deletion policy#Alternatives to deletion says, If editing can address all relevant reasons for deletion, this should be done rather than deleting the page. Wikipedia:Editing policy#Wikipedia is a work in progress: perfection is not required says, Perfection is not required: Wikipedia is a work in progress. Collaborative editing means that incomplete or poorly written first drafts can evolve over time into excellent articles. Even poor articles, if they can be improved, are welcome. Cunard (talk) 09:39, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Comments on these sources?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 00:59, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Abhimanyu Shammi Thilakan

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

Fails WP:NACTOR and WP:GNG. No significant coverage and most sources are non-bylined churnalism, mentions, or otherwise unreliable. Previously deleted A7 and G11 under Abhimanyu S Thilakan. CNMall41 (talk) 04:42, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, and India. CNMall41 (talk) 04:44, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Kerala-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:41, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Marco (2024 film): Appears to fail GNG. Also WP:TOOSOON for NACTOR. Somebodyidkfkdt (talk) 18:23, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Pass WP:GNG.Sync! (talk) 18:28, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

On which sources do you base that assessment?--CNMall41 (talk) 18:32, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 08:55, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sudip Pandey

AfDs for this article:

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

This article is may not notable according to WP:NACTOR and does not meet the requirements for WP:SIG in reliable, independent sources. 𝒮-𝒜𝓊𝓇𝒶 18:52, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, Film, Asia, and India. 𝒮-𝒜𝓊𝓇𝒶 18:52, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep despite the earlier deletion. The coverage of his death seems to just barely qualify him. Pinging Zuck28 who added Pandey to the List of Bhojpuri actors in January. TheDeafWikipedian (talk) 20:36, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It appears that the nominator has a very low understanding of the Wikipedia guidelines. They’re just nominating random articles created by me as an act of retaliation because I nominated a few of the articles they created about non-notable subjects. Their rationale for the AFD is unclear as, why they believe it should be deleted, anyways I leave this matter for fellow editors.

Thank you for pinging me.

Zuck28 (talk) 20:45, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Non notable actor, Mentions, unreliable sources. Fails WP:GNG and WP:NACTOR. CresiaBilli (talk) 11:29, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:26, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Nominator is currently blocked as a sockpuppet. Zuck28 (talk) 05:14, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 15:10, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Jayshree Misra Tripathi

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

This article does not meet the criteria outlined in WP:GNG or WP:AUTHOR the specific notability guidelines and the sources cited in this article are not considered as WP:SIG. 𝒮-𝒜𝓊𝓇𝒶 18:44, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Authors, Women, Poetry, and India. 𝒮-𝒜𝓊𝓇𝒶 18:44, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Delhi and Odisha. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 22:51, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep I have added reviews of her work, though the 2025 book is an edited book so it accounts less towards notability. I also revised the page and removed citations that were non-notable mentions of Tripathi. DaffodilOcean (talk) 14:17, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom there is nothing to demonstarte subject's notability. Fails WP:GNG. CresiaBilli (talk) 11:22, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
My argument for keep is that she meets WP:AUTHOR, not WP:GNG. Any thoughts on that? DaffodilOcean (talk) 14:35, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Toadspike [Talk] 04:26, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment:

Nominator is currently blocked as a sockpuppet. Zuck28 (talk) 10:32, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 15:17, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nagamani Srinath

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

Fails WP:NMUSICIAN and WP:GNG. Winning an award does not grant inherent notability. Sources are mainly WP:NEWSORGINDIA. CNMall41 (talk) 18:29, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Authors, Women, Music, and Indiana. CNMall41 (talk) 18:30, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

*Delete - per nom. SachinSwami (talk) 18:50, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Per Nomination Destinyokhiria (talk) 07:23, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: if the Sangeet Natak Akademi Award is really "the highest Indian recognition given to people in the field of performing arts.", then this loks like notability. PamD 15:16, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note that she has an article in Telugu Wikipedia - I have merged her two records in Wikidata, so it now shows as a link from the en.wiki article. PamD 15:41, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the Wikidata merge. I understand your contention but do not believe notability is inherent for simply winning an award. --CNMall41 (talk) 15:48, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@CNMall41 OK, looking at WP:MUSICBIO, criteria 7 and 8 appear to be met, unless you consider that 8 only applies to western popular music. PamD 19:51, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No, I think something on the level the award is being claimed to be would fall under that criteria so Western/India would have no bearing. What I am saying is that even with an award, we still need significant coverage. Just winning an award does not guarantee notability. It even specifically says "may" be notable under that criteria. The sources we have are pour such as this (presented in the comment below) which is clearly unreliable as WP:NEWSORGINDIA. --CNMall41 (talk) 20:14, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment- In addition to the Sangeet Natak Akademi Award, Nagamani Srinath was also honored with the Rajyotsava Award in 1998, the second-highest civilian honor conferred by the Karnataka Government[45]. Furthermore, according to an article published in The New Indian Express on June 22, 2015, she was awarded the Sangita Kala Acharya Award by the Madras Music Academy, Chennai, for her outstanding contributions to the field of Carnatic music[46].-SachinSwami (talk) 16:35, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
According to this source she has won some other notable awards such as Karnataka Kalashree. Also she has significant coverage in The Hindu and Deccan Herald.Afstromen (talk) 05:42, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Afstromen, all the sources I included don’t fully support the claim; they are all weak. Mentioning an award alone isn’t enough; you need sources that clearly reference Nagamani Srinath’s work, like a review. For example, in Akaal: The Unconquered, when I checked, all the sources you added were weak. Later, I searched and added 5 reviews in the Reception section, which are sufficient to fully support the film and pass WP:GNG. Though the rules for films and individuals differ, reviews clearly referencing the work are sufficient for support. (I have no intention of misleading editors, so I apologize.) SachinSwami (talk) 08:39, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Afstromen: you duplicated one of the sources which could indicate you did not look closely enough at them to see they are mainly routine announcements. --CNMall41 (talk) 15:54, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@CNMall41 Are you talking about The Hindu article or both?Afstromen (talk) 17:25, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You listed the DH twice in your comment. Both the DH and The Hindu are her giving the information by the way. Interviews and all content provided by her so not independent. --CNMall41 (talk) 17:34, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oh No, I listed the source initially to point the awards. It was not my intention to list it twice or to give the impression that the sources were different. Afstromen (talk) 17:50, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, I see that now. Thanks for the explanation. I still maintain that neither of those are independent. I would also think if she won the "highest award" as claimed, there would be more than just NEWSORGINDIA and a few interview type references. --CNMall41 (talk) 18:56, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Toadspike [Talk] 04:27, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:31, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Endorse PamD above; subject meets WP:MUSICBIO#7-8; also this bio suggests that #11 (and to some extent #12) can also be met. There's more biographical information about the subject in (Rajagopalan 1990, pp. 171) though with limited online preview. Also, the use of "may" in MUSICBIO, to my understanding, means that the fulfilled criteria should be verifiable in reliable independent sources, and not that a significant coverage is required in addition. WeWake (talk) 12:09, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Can you address the rebuttal as well? There is no such thing as inherent notability. The "may" is there because it indicates the subject is likely notable, not that they "are" notable. Otherwise, why include may when it can be replaced with something more definite. Note WP:BASIC ("presumed notable" but not "are notable"), which also covers "one event" which may apply as well. --CNMall41 (talk) 16:45, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

CNMall41, For a decades long career that's been recognized with several notable awards is not a case of WP:BLP1E in my opinion–the award makes it easier to obtain some news coverage but is not the only basis of notability here. For niche-musicians, traditional coverage might be hard to come by (as is the case here, though I found one tertiary source above). Nevertheless, my two cents is that the subject is "worthy of notice" or "note" through a verifiable statements capturing several subject-specific understanding (of the community) of notability, and should be kept with {{Sources exist}} if existing are insufficient for a BLP. The SNGs allow us to contextualize the requirements of WP:BASIC and avoid a renewed reinterpretation with every article. The use of 'may' in that language broadly captures that these policies are consensus driven and evolve, and thus it cannot (possibly ever) prescribe a definitive criteria of notability. — WeWake (talk) 17:47, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Worthy of notice would have more than just mentions or unreliable sourcing. I would agree a sources exist tag could be used, but that is assuming sources exist. They do not. All we have is what has been presented which falls short. --CNMall41 (talk) 21:22, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 15:19, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Shantanu Naidu

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

Fails to establish notability independent of his association with Ratan Tata, per WP:GNG, WP:AUTHOR, WP:BIO, and WP:INHERITED.

His startups do not meet WP:NCORP due to modest scale and event-specific reporting, and the book lacks significant critical reviews or awards to satisfy WP:AUTHOR. Zuck28 (talk) 17:16, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Authors, Businesspeople, India, and Maharashtra. Zuck28 (talk) 17:16, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Zuck28, Before taking any abrupt or random action, always ensure proper research is done and all sources are thoroughly verified. Acting without accurate information can lead to serious consequences and misunderstandings. 𝒮-𝒜𝓊𝓇𝒶 18:36, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep You can see numerous siginificant coverage on reliable sources like this: [47], [48], [49], [50], [51], [52], and there are many more in line. Easily passes WP:GNG. CresiaBilli (talk) 11:24, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Most of these sources are about a Linkedin post he made. Two have no bylines. Toadspike [Talk] 05:08, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Pass WP:GNG.Sync! (talk) 18:38, 18 June 2025 (UTC)( Blocked sockpuppet) --DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:12, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 07:14, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Given the sources provided above I think that notability is met here. I think it would be wise to integrate those sources into the article so that we don't have to argue this again. Gjb0zWxOb (talk) 21:51, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Those sources are not in-depth or significant. Zuck28 (talk) 23:06, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 15:29, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to I Came Upon a Lighthouse per WP:ATD. The page doesn’t have much going for it content-wise or in terms of notability. "General manager, head of strategic initiatives wing" fails to clear the WP:NBUSINESSPERSON bar. Yuvaank (talk) 09:43, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Meyzenq

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

This disambiguation page is unnecessary. At present, there is only one Wikipedia article referring to an individual with the surname Meyzenq, namely Raymond Meyzenq. The creating editor appears to consider an individual listed on the Salomon Group article to be a notable figure and therefore has created a disambiguation page. However, there is no existing article on this individual to substantiate this claim of notability. Therefore, this disambiguation page should be deleted or be redirected, with CAT:RWP, to the existing article on Raymond Meyzenq, since he is the only person with that surname currently covered on this platform. QEnigma (talk) 03:29, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Disambiguations-related deletion discussions. QEnigma (talk) 03:30, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. QEnigma (talk) 03:41, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. It is a surname page, not a dab page. It's reasonable to include the CEO, for whom a redirect would also be reasonable. PamD 08:03, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@PamD: It was a disambiguation page until you altered it ([53]). Your position would have been much clearer if that was included with your post. Best regards. QEnigma (talk) 08:15, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@QEnigma It was always a surname page. It was incorrectly labelled as a disambiguation page. PamD 11:01, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@QEnigma But, OK, it might have been helpful if I had pointed that out ! Sorry about that. PamD 11:04, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@PamD: I understand your position. However, it would have been preferable to make the alterations through consensus. That was the primary reason this article was listed on AfD forums. Nevertheless, I maintain the view that this article, whether a disambiguation page or a surname-related entry, requires the inclusion of more notable individuals with existing Wikipedia articles in order to be retained. As you are aware, there are numerous senior executives across various notable companies who do not have individual Wikipedia articles on them and are therefore not included in surname-related pages. Thank you for sharing your perspective. Best regards. QEnigma (talk) 11:15, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@QEnigma I don't think any specific consensus is needed to remove an incorrect {{tl|dab}} template and add the correct {{tl|surname}} template. The AfD template says "Feel free to improve the article".

Plenty of CEOs don't have links, plenty do. I've made a redirect from him to the company, and tweaked the dab page accordingly. PamD 16:23, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of France-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 09:15, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Malinaccier (talk) 02:20, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. This is a useful surname SIA which links to substantive information about two name-holders. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 11:02, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Right now, it looks like a "No consensus" closure or, possibly, a "Keep" closure. Any more opinions now that the template has been corrected?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:34, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep. Two entries is enough (barely) for a surname list. Clarityfiend (talk) 09:38, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Mir Yar Baloch

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

This article should've been deleted alongside Republic of Balochistan and Balochistan Freedom Declaration last month, and for similar reasons. This was redirected to Republic of Balochistan, then to Operation Herof 2.0, then to Insurgency in Balochistan. While it was a redirect, I nominated it at RfD with the same type of reasoning as what was successfully used against Republic of Balochistan, but I got impatient and later withdrew it and decided to restore the article so it could be speedied under criterion A7, but that one was declined because the sources used (News18, The Economic Times, The Times of India, the Hindustan Times, ANI News and Firstpost) constituted a "credible claim of significance" according to one editor. – MrPersonHumanGuy (talk) 13:30, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2025 June 9. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 13:43, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Pakistan. Shellwood (talk) 14:12, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians and Journalism. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:12, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - New coverage of the subject has emerged as recently as yesterday in The Globe and Mail. This figure has recent media coverage that is ongoing, and while cited sources do contain bias, they still constitute fact-based news from credible institutions. Effort needs to be put into improving the state of the page. Ike Lek (talk) 19:24, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep One of the prominent personalities who has been in the major national and international news recently.Almandavi (talk) 06:17, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: If there's coverage (such as in the Globe), please link it for other editors to review, please.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 03:05, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Globe and Mail has since put a disclaimer on their article that it is third party content not verified by them, and upon second look it does indeed seem unreliable. In addition the the sources listed in the original request, I will link a few other potential sources below, although I cannot guarantee their independence from political interests. I suspect a speaker of Urdu, Kannada, Hindi, Punjabi, or Balochi may be able to better identify credible sources.

Ike Lek (talk) 22:06, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

To get a fuller discussion, I'm pinging some of the users who participated in AfD discussions for two related articles last month. @MSLQr, MarioGom, GrabUp, Cerium4B, JayFT047, GarethBaloney, Yue, and Wikibear47: Would you say this article should be deleted as well, or do you think enough non-Godi sources exist for you to favor keeping it this time? – MrPersonHumanGuy (talk) 11:24, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep - the Republic of Balcohistan article is deleted but I think Baloch warrants an article (albeit a stub) given how he leads one faction of a Baloch separatist group (or perhaps a state soon?). GarethBaloney 17:35, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

While I will try to assume genuine intent, this seems to be pushing against Wikietiquette, specifically: "Do not message editors about AfD nominations because they support your view on the topic. This can be seen as votestacking. See Wikipedia:Canvassing for guidelines."

I say this not because you pinged users who participated in AfDs on similar topics, which is totally fine, but because you only pinged those who agreed with your stance in those discussions, which can appear like an attempt at votestacking. Ike Lek (talk) 18:25, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

to be fair i said (speedy delete for the AfD for the Republic of Balochistan so idk GarethBaloney 18:44, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I don't want to be overly accusatory, nor do I want to imply that y'all won't take an unbiased independent approach to this discussion. It just felt off that no one who was saying keep in those discussions was pinged. Ike Lek (talk) 20:32, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: A case of WP:TOOSOON and has serious notability issues. Just because someone says that a province is independent from the federation doesn't make the claim true. Also declaring himself the President is a joke. As far as the sources are concerned we need independent sources which are not biased in their reporting towards the issue which in this case are clearly lacking. Wikibear47 (talk) 19:43, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This isn't an issue of the legitimacy of his claims (I agree they are somewhat flimsy), but his notability as a figure. Since his joining MEMRI, more articles are being published that are heavily critical of him. I linked one earlier. There is no such thing as perfectly unbiased reporting, but some of these sources are seen as relatively credible. The existence of sources independent of him reporting on what he did and who he is makes him notable. Ike Lek (talk) 20:29, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

To make things fair, I shall ping @Logichulk, 7uzyfa, M1rrorCr0ss, BlinxTheKitty, TabahiKaBhagwan, and WikiEditPS: even though I didn't believe that their arguments for keeping the Republic of Balochistan article were as sound as everyone else's arguments for deleting it. – MrPersonHumanGuy (talk) 00:46, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I just wanted to say I respect you doing that. Ike Lek (talk) 19:27, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as too soon and maybe never. Speedy delete under A7 was correctly closed. I tried checking Pakistani newspapers like Dawn (newspaper) which had no mention of this individual. I tried searching Urdu papers for میر یار بلوچ (please tell me if that is correct) like Nawa-i-waqt [54] and Daily Jang where I found articles that didn't inspire confidence or didn't find anything at all.

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 11:43, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Giacomo Merello

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

This individual does not pass WP:GNG or fulfill the requirements for WP:BIO as this person has "not received significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject." Coverage of this individual in media is routine or passing mentions. Some of the sources do not appear reliable or particularly independent.

The argued notability of this person by editors that have removed prior tags appears to hinge on certain "honors" such as the "Order of the Eagle of Georgia" and the conception of "Lord Leslie" while these honors might sound significant it appears that honors like these can apparently be acquired without much difficulty (according to a source that was previously cited in the text by one of the contributors and later removed).

Another concern is that a number of the key contributors of this article appear to be very close to the subject including HearldicFacts and Mediascriptor. Another key contributor was previously blocked for sockpuppettry Judasith1234 which is not a good sign. Nayyn (talk) 15:01, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Italy. Nayyn (talk) 15:01, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bilateral relations, Law, Singapore, and Antigua and Barbuda. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:15, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Only passing coverage in low-quality sources. Worth mentioning that HeraldicFacts added a picture to the article which was uploaded by Judasith1234 to Commons 19 minutes prior, so another likely sockpuppet.

— Arcaist ^(contr ^—talk) 14:02, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, @Arcaist - I will not take a position on this page retention, however just to clarify yours and @Naayn comment on "sockpuppetry", it was a misunderstanding of 6 months ago, which was opened in a sockpuppetry debate and resolved through a discussion and a final decision of several Admins, that ended with the deletion of user Judasith1234. It is unfair and incorrect to motivate a further deletion proposal based on this specific topic as it was already discussed and resolved in full previously. HeraldicFacts (talk) 07:55, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

KEEP The subject meets WP:GNG through multiple non-trivial, independent sources covering his diplomatic and cultural roles. While some honours may appear unusual, they’ve been reported by independent media and involve internationally recognised institutions, not self-promotion. Rather than deletion, improvement is the constructive path forward, especially given existing sources and the subject’s international footprint. Kellycrak88 (talk) 16:27, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Have you done a WP:Before on this individual? Which of the references would you consider to be "non-trivial, independent sources"? I struggle to find a source that would be considered either to support this individual's dubious claim to notability. If editing is the way forward, how would you propose to edit this piece so that it is appropriate? I'm afraid WP:AKON applies here. Nayyn (talk) 23:02, 15 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

KEEP Giacomo Merello clearly meets Wikipedia’s notability criteria per WP:GNG and WP:BIO. Multiple reliable, independent secondary sources provide significant coverage of his career and roles, beyond routine mentions. Concerns about the subject’s honors and the contributors’ proximity do not negate the existence of independent sources demonstrating notability. Below, I outline the sources and relevant policies supporting retention of the article. Roles and impact: the coverage centers on his notable roles – as a Special Economic Envoy of Antigua and Barbuda, as a legal expert in digital assets and legal heraldry, examples 1. https://expatliving.sg/antigua-and-barbuda-citizenship-by-investment-and-coat-of-arms/Expat Living - this interview is a secondary source (Merello is the interviewee, with the magazine providing context) and offers significant biographical detail, demonstrating coverage in an independent publication; 2. https://www.henleyglobal.com/events/henley-partners-presents-celebration-caribbean about his activities as diplomat; 3. https://www.vietnam.vn/en/viet-nam-truoc-nga-re-tai-san-so-tin-chi-carbon about a seminar held for the State Bank of Vietnam. 4. https://antigua.news/2025/05/17/bridging-oceans-and-opportunities-giacomo-merello-on-promoting-antigua-and-barbuda-in-singapore-and-in-asia/ Antigua News - this is far beyond a trivial mention – it’s a full profile of his activities and impact, published by an independent news source (not a press release); 5. Multiple other independent articles about him from VIR and Malta Invest; 6. https://www.liveranionline.com/immagini/118224/retrospettiva-marcella-bella-cantante-con-il-figlio-giacomo-merello-nel-1985 ; https://dilei.it/spettacolo/marcella-bella-figlio-giacomo-singapore/1279204/ ; https://www.wemusic.it/marcella-bella-chi-sono-e-cosa-fanno-nella-vita-i-figli-carolina-tommaso-e-giacomo/ are all articles directly about him in connection to his very notable singer mother Marcella Bella, and not just as a routine mention, these are all independent secondary sources and are not "routine mentions" but the subject is the main topic. These roles have been covered in context by third-party sources, indicating he is a “significant, interesting, or unusual enough” person to deserve an encyclopedia entry, as per WP:GNG. The titles on their own may not necessarily meet by themselves WP:BIO, but in connection with all the rest, they definitely support and they have multiple mention in secondary sources on their own, like Debrett's, RSN, and Royal House of Georgia. On the Scottish Feudal Baronies there is currently in place an editing war which makes deletion based on that also shaky and not well thought. COI claim is vague and per WP:COI policy, an article should not be deleted solely due to who edited it, especially if just to fix objective links and factual elements, and any promotional tone wascleaned up by neutral editors in line with WP:NPOV and WP:RS. Mediascriptor (talk) 18:00, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Note that Mediascriptor has been blocked as a sock.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 07:43, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

keep I was doing a random round of edits and came across this one. As I did that before, I thought my knowledge could benefit Wikipedia. Anyway, I think according to WP:NONENG Italian sources could be added and are reliable. And, according to WP:ANYBIO The person has received a well-known and significant award or honor the subject seems notable. Also, I have seen discussions where admins say that even a single reliable source is enough for notability verification. AppleBoosted (talk) 09:08, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
What is the "well-known and significant award" you are referring to here, @AppleBoosted? Nayyn (talk) 10:16, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Knight Grand Cross (GCEG) of the Order of the Eagle of Georgia. Seems an important honor for those people and region. Anyway, that was my analysis as per my knowledge and research on topics of Wikipedia. Thank you! AppleBoosted (talk) 20:38, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
if you read the article... Merello works for the organization that hands out this "honor" and helps people acquire such titles.. this is his business. So I can't imagine that we can consider it independent of anything. Nayyn (talk) 21:11, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. The article does not meet WP:GNG or WP:BIO, as its sources are clearly insufficient or trivial. The few reputable sources are passing mentions or focus on his family (His mother and uncle meet some criteria), not his professional activities – no significant coverage in reliable sources, not even from Italy or the country he supposedly represents at diplomatic level. XICO (talk) 17:03, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note with Added material - non vote. This is not a vote as I know the subject and may have COI, but for completeness I want to share further additional info and material supporting WP:GNG, WP:BIO, WP:ANYBIO, WP:NONENG. All is WP:RS and WP:V for everyone and closer admin to have a fair, broader view. None of these appear currently in the article.

https://thoibaonganhang.vn/tan-dung-kinh-nghiem-quoc-te-de-viet-nam-quan-ly-tai-san-dien-tu-hieu-qua-163455.html (This is the Vietnam Banking Times, piece all on subject);

https://daibieunhandan.vn/tai-san-so-tin-chi-carbon-co-phai-la-tai-san-bao-dam-10370864.html (this is Vietnam's official parliamentary press);

https://vnba.org.vn/en/digital-assets--carbon-credits-expected-to-be-collateral-in-bank-loans-17452.htm totally independent news article;

Series of other articles on Vietnam Investment review (which is State-linked):

https://vir.com.vn/the-tropical-paradise-that-appeals-to-travellers-and-investors-121662.html ; https://vir.com.vn/a-comparative-investment-guide-to-singapore-and-malta-124553.html ; https://vir.com.vn/navigating-offshore-opportunities-in-a-globalised-world-123277.html ;

a prime time TV show on Singapore Channel Five, called Makan Times Stories, also features the subject (the Italian martial artist and lawyer in the trailer): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qvzWKthxtlM ;

Another Italian article: https://www.true-news.it/facts/giacomo-carolina-tommaso-chi-sono-figli-marcella-bella-carriera-vita-privata ;

There may be also qualification as WP:POLITICIAN as subject represents directly the Prime Minister Gaston Browne of Antigua and Barbuda as Special Economic Envoy (the same exact role from the same Country is covered also by actor Robert De Niro, https://www.theguardian.com/film/2014/nov/29/robert-de-niro-economic-envoy-antigua-barbuda .

There is a clear constant pattern of coverage in international sources and from multiple reasons of different kind.

Also I simply observe that several of the editors participating in this AfD discussion, including the proposer, seem to be very actively involved with each other in the broader context of arguing and engaging in what appear to be editing wars, which somehow casts a doubt on their WP:NPOV . — Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.220.129.231 (talk) 06:56, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

IP user, you are casting aspersions if you are suggesting the proposer and other editors are colluding on some sort of agenda here. If you are trying to insinuate something, do provide evidence. Nayyn (talk) 10:45, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

For precision and intellectual honesty, I never accused you or anyone else of "colluding on some sort of agenda", these are words you are putting yourself in there. And "casting aspersions" involves direct accusations which are "repeated or particularly severe", which, again, it is objectively not the case. 5.148.85.22 (talk) 15:19, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

As you have declared a COI in this case, it is quite serious to suggest that uninvolved persons are purportedly engaging in editing wars over this subject. This is not true. Nayyn (talk) 21:13, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure which IP user am I talking to here, 5.148.85.22 or 205.220.129.231? Or if you're continuing the same conversation across two IPs.... Nayyn (talk) 16:04, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi please stop and try to make an argument. I added a number of quality sources and you ignored them. What for clarification I meant is that there seems to be an ongoing drama between you @Kellycrak88 @Mediascriptor @Arcaist which apparently resulted in ANI heated discussions, blocking of an entire section of the Baronage of Scotland, and so on. The IP changes depending where you are, sorry. Also I recently noticed this: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Mediascriptor ; as an external onlooker I simply noted that there seems to be again and again the same persons, including yourself, over the same topics, and it does not look balanced and respecting WP:NPOV - this is not casting aspersions at all, I am merely stating facts that anyone tracking all the above users interconnected involvements can notice. I will no longer reply on this specific topic, as I believe I explained it to you clearly. However, I do ask you to reassess the page you proposed for deletion based also on the newly shared RS, and in conjunction with everything else. You could easily edit to improve the page further. 119.56.98.99 (talk) 06:28, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Only replying because you pinged me. Your COI should make you think twice before accusing others of lacking WP:NPOV. The "ongoing drama" (an expression which borders on WP:PA) is a good-faith effort to deal with non-notable individuals connected to bought Scottish titles; it's not surprising you see the same editors appear in multiple places.

Let's look at the sources:

Thoi Bao Ngan Hang: a report on a workshop in Vietnam at which he was one of eight speakers.
Dai Bieu Nhan Dan: the same workshop, he's marginally quoted in one paragraph.
VNBA: same workshop.
VIR articles: this is not "coverage", they are simply promotional articles written by him.
YouTube: I'm not even going to comment on the notability implications of 4 seconds of him swinging a katana and making meatballs in a trailer with 200 views for a "primetime show".
True-News.it: The fact that family members are notable doesn't make him notable.
I don't think I have to explain why the existence of Robert De Niro doesn't make Merello notable? I can't even find a press release about his envoy status besides an article in Antigua News, which is owned by his buddy Dario Item.

None of this fulfills WP:SIGCOV in any meaningful way. — Arcaist ^(contr ^—talk) 12:00, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 17:58, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Notability is not inherited. The sources do not discuss him in depth. Angryapathy (talk) 18:15, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Roberto Parra Vallette

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

Subject fails notability guidelines for politicians, and sources from here and a cursory search are insufficient to establish general notability. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 16:44, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Politicians, and Chile. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 16:44, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Does not fail NPOL, as the mayor of a large city in Chile (Viña del Mar). He did so in full capacity following the removal of office of Rodrigo González, who preceded him. Although he was the mayor for only three months, the article could well be expanded using offline sources such as El Mercurio de Valparaíso. --Bedivere (talk) 16:59, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, but 334,248 is not large enough to entitle the mayors to be inherently notable. Let's be consistent with our judgments. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 17:00, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Let's put that into perspective then. It's the sixth largest commune in Chile by population. It's a large city in Chile. Bedivere (talk) 03:08, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Population doesn't mean high notability. Honolulu has a population of 344,967. Viña del Mar has more population than Orlando, Pittsburgh, St. Louis, Salt Lake City, Des Moines and Anchorage, notable U.S. cities. — Itzcuauhtli11 (talk) 14:23, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
And in every one of those cities, a mayor would still have to be properly sourced to get their own article, and would still not be handed an automatic notability freebie on bad sourcing just because they existed as a mayor. Bearcat (talk) 16:26, 15 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Meets enough NPOL, the subject of the biography has held an official position and has received sufficient media coverage. --Carigval.97 (talk) 19:25, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
NPOL is not about holding "an official position". Geschichte (talk) 20:58, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 19:03, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. A mayor doesn't get an automatic notability freebie just because of the population of the city — the notability of a mayor hinges on the quality and depth and volume of WP:GNG-worthy coverage in reliable sources that can be shown to support an article with. But this is referenced almost entirely to primary sources, such as directory entries and raw tables of election results and simple certifications of his election victories, which are not support for notability — and of the just two footnotes that come from reliable sources, one is a dead link and the other one is just covering him in the context of his candidacy in a much later non-mayoral election that he didn't win, and thus isn't supporting notability as a mayor. Obviously he could keep an article that was referenced properly, but the fact that his city has 334,248 people living in it does not magically exempt him from having to be referenced much, much better than this. Bearcat (talk) 16:21, 15 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, the thing is that most news sources that could eventually support this article are offline. I'm sure lots of references could be retrieved from regional newspapers like El Mercurio de Valparaíso and La Estrella de Valparaíso. There is a Santiago Mercurio archive online but is only available to subscribers, a source which could eventually serve here. La Tercera and El Mostrador had online versions in 2000 and probably could be at least partially available on the Wayback Machine. The purpose of this comment is to show this could be further expanded and referenced with reliable sources but would need some effort gathering the sources. Bedivere (talk) 23:06, 15 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Coverage of a three-month mayoral spell? Geschichte (talk) 17:03, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, for sure, it's not a common event to have a mayor replaced in Chile. Their tenure was short but it certainly was covered by major national and regional sources.

Now, leaving that aside, there are some book sources that could be used to further expand the article. The Tributo a Valparaíso (Fernando Vergara Benítez, 2007) (partially available on Google Books) mentions the "tireless work by former mayor of Viña del Mar and social assistant, Mr. Roberto Parra Vallette, a pioneer in Chile, dedicated with his family for more than two decades to the rehabilitation of drug addicts, founding in 1982 (or 1983?) the Casa de Acogida Hogar La Roca" (p. 34). An article, from 2000, mentions him in this 2000 magazine, but the article is not completely visible. There is this El Mercurio article (Chilean newspaper of record) mentioning his election as mayor in an extraordinary city council session. There is an in-depth article by CNN, dated 2021, in the context of his candidacy for the Constitutional Convention. --Bedivere (talk) 07:12, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

We don't keep poorly-sourced articles on the basis of speculation that better sourcing might exist somewhere that nobody has actually searched for or found — we keep or delete articles based on the quality and depth of the sources that people show. If all one had to do to save an article for deletion was to idly speculate that other sources might exist, then even outright hoaxes wouldn't be deletable from Wikipedia anymore — and even if the article gets deleted, it can always be recreated at a later date if improved quality sourcing actually does turn up that got missed now. So just speculating about the possibility of better sourcing existing somewhere in the world doesn't prevent deletion, if those sources don't actually turn up and get added to the article now.
And we need to see a lot more than just "mentions" and non-winning candidacies for offices other than the one that constitutes his attempted notability claim, so none of the sources in the comment immediately above this one add up to enough all by themselves either. Bearcat (talk) 14:44, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Specific analysis of sources known to be available would be very helpful.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 19:00, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Juan Luis Trejo

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

Subject fails notability guidelines for politicians, and sources from here and a cursory search are insufficient to establish general notability. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 16:43, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Politicians, and Chile. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 16:43, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, obviously without prejudice against recreation in the future if somebody with access to archived Chilean media can write and source something more substantive than this. Mayors are not automatically entitled to Wikipedia articles just for existing, and have to show significant press coverage enabling us to write a substantive article about their political impact — specific things they did, specific projects they spearheaded, specific effects their mayoralty had on the development of the city, and on and so forth. But this basically just states that he existed, and just cites the absolute bare minimum of sourcing needed to prevent it from being speedied as completely unsourced, without adding any of the more substantive content or sourcing that we would actually need to see. Bearcat (talk) 16:49, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: The article sufficiently meets the notability guidelines for politicians, as it addresses the first topic of politicians who have held province–wide offices, in this case, that of mayor of Viña del Mar.

Just as there are political figures with extensive coverage without holding an official position, in this case, it is a figure with historical notoriety without much media coverage. Carigval.97 (talk) 19:14, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Mayor of a city is not a "province-wide" office. It's a local office that falls under NPOL #2, where the notability test depends exclusively on media coverage and cannot be passed without that. Bearcat (talk) 11:53, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

According to the rules, media coverage is a second important point, not necessary exclusive (that's why I was talking about cases where there are political figures without positions, but with sufficient references). Similarly, that position –mayor of Viña del Mar– is a province-wide office: that important city in Chile is a town in the Province of Valparaíso. Mr. Trejo has encyclopedic relevance as a mayor of a large city in Chile.Carigval.97 (talk) 10:08, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Media coverage is essential to passage of WP:GNG, not a mere option that can be bypassed. NPOL does not say that media coverage is optional; even a politician who does pass NPOL #1 (which a mayor does not) still has to have GNG-worthy sourcing too, and the only pass they get is that as long as their holding of the office is properly verifiable, we don't rush their article into the delete bin for not already being in a better state than it is — we give it time for improvement to a GNG-compliant standard, because it's an automatic given that the article will be improvable.

But mayors don't get the same indulgence: mayors only get articles if and when passage of the criterion for local politicians has already been shown off the bat, because there isn't the same guarantee that every mayor of everywhere can always be improved to a GNG-compliant standard. No politicians, at any level of government, are ever exempted from having to have GNG-worthy media coverage — there are just some levels of government at which the officeholders are given a grace period for improvement, and some levels of office at which they aren't given the same benefit of the doubt, but there is no level of government at which people are exempted from having to cite GNG-worthy sourcing at all.

I don't think you understand the definition of "province-wide", either. The fact that a city is in a province does not render the city's mayor into a province-wide officeholder, as he's mayor of the city and not mayor of the whole province. A province-wide office is one that has province-wide jurisdictional authority, like a governor or a provincial-level legislator, not a mayor of an individual town or city within the province. Mayors are local officeholders under NPOL #2, not province-wide officeholders under NPOL #1, which is precisely why a mayor cannot be exempted from having to pass GNG on media coverage. Bearcat (talk) 14:59, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I understand your reasons, Bearcat, but Trejo's management as mayor of Viña del Mar is reflected in the document that refers to his social policies regarding legal aid, as well as in press reports that mention his management of the Viña International Festival. The lack of more digital news is due to the fact that the internet was not sufficiently widespread at the time. However, this lack is complemented by sufficient historical documents that do give him prominence in his field: the history of the mayoralty of Viña del Mar.

Regarding "No politicians, at any level of government, are ever exempted from having GNG-worthy media coverage", it's regrettable that there are cases where even long-standing English officials, such as Arthur Henderson, Baron Rowley (Labour), have few references, as well as Sidney Jones, Mayor of Liverpool, who does not register digital press releases, but rather press sources. Despite this, their notability lies in the positions they have held.

Finally, a city's case may remain provincial, but autonomous. Similarly, and being a local city, Viña del Mar is an important cultural and economic location (services, tourism). Based on this, and the fact that Trejo is a politician, the subject of the biography has sufficient notoriety to have held said office, as verified by official digital archives of proven reliability (Universidad Alberto Hurtado and notes from the Judicial Corporation). Carigval.97 (talk) 18:45, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't bring up WP:WHATABOUT "arguments". Geschichte (talk) 08:36, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: It's not just a matter of media coverage for the tenure of a politician's biography, a mayor in this case. The most important thing here is that "Politicians who have held international, national, or subnational office (such as members of national legislatures, governors, or mayors of large cities) are presumed notable." In this case, Viña del Mar is one of the largest cities in the country and is an integral part of Greater Valparaíso, the second largest urban agglomeration in Chile. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Igallards7 (talk) 3:45, 7 June 2025 (UTC)
Keep: per Igallards7. The article has also been significantly expanded since the nomination. Luis7M (talk) 18:38, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment WP:NPOL does not state that mayors of large cities are presumed notable. The correct language in NPOL is "Major local political figures who have received significant press coverage." The language does not specify city size or even position a local government. The standard for all local politicians is what Bearcat describes earlier - the need to "show significant press coverage enabling us to write a substantive article about their political impact." This is true for a mayor of a population of 49, or a population of 32 million. In practice, this means that a local official should meet and possibly exceed WP:GNG to have a stand alone page. --Enos733 (talk) 20:52, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 03:04, 14 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per Bearcat. Zzz plant (talk) 03:15, 14 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,

Destinyokhiria 💬

18:44, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Junie Yu

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

Fails WP:NPOLITICIAN. Suffers from WP:BOMBARD. 🇵🇸‍🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦‍🇵🇸 08:53, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Politicians, and Philippines. 🇵🇸‍🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦‍🇵🇸 08:53, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:46, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep While I can understand the nominator's concern about "WP:BOMBARD" given the initial article creation, it's worth assessing the subject's actual notability separately from how the article came to be.

If Junie Yu indeed meets Wikipedia's notability guidelines (specifically for politicians, WP:NPOLITICIAN, and general notability, WP:GNG) through verifiable, independent sources, then the article should be kept. The focus should be on the subject's notability, not on the initial submission process.

Let's evaluate based on policy, not just initial impressions.

1bisdak (talk) 15:10, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

While Pam Baricuatro also fails WP:NPOL, she's one level of government higher than Yu (city vs municipality), and can be argued she may pass WP:GNG; of course that can definitely be determined by nominating that article for WP:AFD yourself as well.

Looking at the references on this article, it's Facebook, the Bohol provincial government, the Calape municipal government, election results databases, and actual WP:RS provide coverage mostly to his children (LOL?) passing the nursing board exams and being in a national beauty pageant, instead of him personally. There's one reference solely about him where his corruption cases were dismissed. Looking at all of this, delete as having failed WP:GNG. Howard the Duck (talk) 12:02, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Based on the 2025 local election results, incumbent vice-mayor Sulpicio Yu Jr. unseated incumbent mayor Julius Caesar Herrera. See also the 2013 Bohol local election results.

People proposed deletions

Hume Peabody (via WP:PROD on 12 May 2025)