Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Asia

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

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 as 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|Asia|~~~~}} 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.

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 other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Asia. For the other XfD's, the process is the same as AfD (except {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName}} is used for MFD and {{transclude xfd}} for the rest). For PRODs, adding a link with {{prodded}} will suffice.

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:

WikiProject Deletion sorting/Asia/archive

Purge page cache

watch

Purge page cache

This list also includes sublists of deletion debates involving articles related to specific Asian countries.

Asia

1173 Polonnaruwa invasion of Chola

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

Doesn't meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines; lacks significant coverage in reliable secondary sources. This submission, or separate article, appears to be either a duplicate or unsourced fork of larger themes such as Chola–Polonnaruwa relations in general. There is no indication of historical significance worth having an article on its own. BharatGanguly (talk) 08:37, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Military, Royalty and nobility, Hinduism, Asia, Sri Lanka, India, and Tamil Nadu. BharatGanguly (talk) 08:37, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:36, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nur Shah railway station

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

No reliable source covers the station, does not meet WP:GNG Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 18:38, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Travel and tourism, Asia, and Pakistan. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 18:38, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Stations-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:03, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Lodhran–Raiwind Branch Line. To give context, I came across this article yesterday, felt that something was fishy, and did a dive into the sources only to find that almost every single one was being severely misrepresented (diff). This article does not have sufficient sourcing to meet GNG. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 12:25, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Lodhran–Raiwind Branch Line. — Preceding unsigned comment added by PunjabiEditor69 (talk • contribs) 18:11, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You were the same person who added this "fan club" source, weren't you? Why are you adding such sources? - PunjabiEditor69 (talk) 19:58, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@SheriffIsInTown - PunjabiEditor69 (talk) 19:58, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your question is beyond the scope of this discussion. That source was added in an effort to provide some sourcing to a completely unsourced article so it could be removed from the unsourced list. Its presence does not confer notability. These articles just add to the management overhead for editors. Thank you for the reminder — I will be nominating other such articles for deletion as well. I hope I can count on your support, since you were the one who raised this point. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 20:46, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

We should redirect pages of small stations that have no reliable sources. - PunjabiEditor69 (talk) 08:23, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

1Munti Partylist

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

The organization does not seem to be notable enough to warrant its own article as of right now. The article creator seems to have a undisclosed WP:COI with the subject, and the article seems to contain machine-generated text. If the organization wins any seats in the Philippines 2025 general election, a article about the subject could be made. But as of right now, there's just coverage about the subject and their partylist - with some passing mentions and unreliable sources, and I think it is WP:TOOSOON. There is some independent, reliable coverage - but that's only about the organization's partylist. WormEater13 (talk • contribs) 17:29, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Politics, Asia, and Philippines. WormEater13 (talk • contribs) 17:29, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This party did not win seats in last week's election. Howard the Duck (talk) 17:35, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Pinky Rajput

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

All sources are unreliable. An article in Indian Express is dead link. Non notable. Afstromen (talk) 11:00, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, Asia, and India. Afstromen (talk) 11:00, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment This is an abandoned article which was created in 2012. Notability tag which was inserted in 2013 shows that there is no new coverage about the topic. But her work as a voice-dubbing artist is impressive. AndySailz (talk) 12:17, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women and Maharashtra. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 12:23, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete for now. I found that her work as a dubbing artist is good but there isn't any significant coverage about her in reliable and independent references. Fade258 (talk) 02:47, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete This article lacks notable coverage, despite being working as a dubbing artist for a lot of work, and even the first citation of Indian Express is dead.Almandavi (talk) 05:04, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Kishore Bhatt

AfDs for this article:

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

No significant coverage in reliable sources. Absolutely non notable Afstromen (talk) 10:47, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, Asia, and India. Afstromen (talk) 10:47, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Maharashtra-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 10:57, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Though his extensive career as a voice-dubbing artist but still fails to pass the notability standards due to the lack of significant coverage about him in reliable and independent references. Fade258 (talk) 02:56, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I concur that he has accomplished much as a voice-dubbing artist; yet, it still does not satisfy WP:SIGCOV. AndySailz (talk) 03:35, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - working dub actor, but ultimately run of the mill. Bearian (talk) 22:40, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete It fails notability because no significant coverage in independent sources, not even a single organic news reference is there.Almandavi (talk) 05:14, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I don’t see, nor could I find after extensive searching, any WP:SIGCOV that would establish evidence of notability satisfying WP:GNG. As such, I think the proper outcome would be to delete the article. If there were WP:RS establishing WP:NOTABILITY, I would be more inclined to keep; however, this is not the case and so I land here. ZachH007 (talk) 17:53, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Amar Babaria

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

He has only one news source (Tribune). Filmography is totally unsourced. No significant news coverage. Afstromen (talk) 10:31, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, Theatre, Asia, and India. Afstromen (talk) 10:31, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Maharashtra-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 10:57, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Fails to show WP:GNG and WP:SIGCOV as well as WP:NACTOR. Fade258 (talk) 08:34, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Subject lacks reliable sources that are in-depth. and fails WP: GNG and WP: NACTOR. Pasados (talk) 13:50, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ram Awana

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

He doesn’t have significant news sources. His filmography is totally unsourced. Non notable in my point of view, please share your thoughts on this. Afstromen (talk) 10:17, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, Asia, and India. Afstromen (talk) 10:17, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Uttar Pradesh-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 10:59, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ashish Kumar (actor)

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

This article doesn’t have even a single source. I checked on google for this actor and there is not even a single reliable source available. Absolutely non notable in my point of view. Afstromen (talk) 20:21, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, Artists, Asia, and India. Afstromen (talk) 20:21, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Removed from Artists as no indication this individual is a visual artist. Jahaza (talk) 20:32, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete This unreferenced article indicates the weak references that do not satisfy WP:SIGCOV. AndySailz (talk) 03:43, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Society for Cultural Interaction in East Asia

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

Non-notable academic society. Lacks RSs and seems unlikely any would exist. Cabrils (talk) 03:23, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Education, Social science, and Asia. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:18, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Previously deleted by WP:PROD, ineligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 03:55, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. I found no indication of notability and can't find a suitable target for a merge/redirect. I considered whether the article could be rescoped to be about the Journal of Cultural Interaction in East Asia, but that doesn't seem to be notable either. MCE89 (talk) 13:46, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:01, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Afghanistan

Miles Routledge

AfDs for this article:

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

If not WP:BLP1E, then WP:BLP1E-adjacent. Was in the news once because he went to Kabul in August of 2021, and again because he went back to Afghanistan in 2023 and got arrested.

He is listed as an author but the only source I can find on the internet about him writing a book mentions it in passing. Having 171,000 subscribers on YouTube is probably not enough to meet notability requirements on its own.

I don't think this meets WP:N. —tony^{st (talk)} 01:13, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. —tony^{st (talk)} 01:13, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: The article is definitely not a WP:BLP1E, since as you say, there are at least two notable events -- two being a different and larger number than one, and explicitly not the focus of this policy. There is not a "WP:BLP2E" policy. Without even doing a WP:BEFORE search, in the currently-existing article there are a variety of sources that satisfy WP:GNG and WP:SIGCOV:

Wallen, Joe; Sabur, Rozina (2023-04-01). "British self-styled 'danger tourist' captured by Taliban secret police". The Telegraph. ISSN 0307-1235. Retrieved 2023-04-02.
"Tourist stranded in Kabul says he has 'no regrets' in Afghanistan collapse". NZ Herald. 2 November 2023.
"British College Student 'Lord Miles' Claims He's Stuck in Afghanistan". Vice. 16 August 2021.
Hardy, Jack (August 16, 2021). "British student stuck in Kabul after 'danger tourism' stunt backfires". The Telegraph.
"'If I die, It'll be funny I think': A student named 'Lord Miles' is live streaming from Afghanistan after getting 'stuck'". The Daily Dot. August 16, 2021.
Ball, Tom (August 15, 2021). "British student on holiday in Afghanistan 'accepts death'". The Times. Archived from the original on August 15, 2021. Retrieved August 15, 2021.
"UK student who travelled to Afghanistan for holiday evacuated". BBC News. 2021-08-17. Retrieved 2021-08-17.
"Two of three British men being held by Taliban allowed call to families". BBC. April 2, 2023. Archived from the original on April 2, 2023.

Looking him up on a web search, I see that he was also in the news last year, apparently for going on some sort of bigoted tirade on Twitter (see [1], [2], [3]). While I do not think acting like a racist knob on the Internet is noble or worthy of celebration, the man would seem to clearly meet our notability guidelines. jp×g 🗯️ 01:43, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Travel and tourism, Internet, Afghanistan, and England. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 07:09, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:BLP1E. Gamaliel (talk) 17:28, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep. I appreciate that it is galling that a self-aggrandising twit like this can make himself notable just by being a nuisance but if he has done so then we have to accept that it is valid to have an article about him. He seems to be over the line for notability even if not by much. A greater concern is what we are not saying about him. His book is published by a neo-Nazi publisher but there is nothing about his links to the far-right in the article. Maybe this can help? That links him to Andrew Tate and covers his praise for the Taliban. There are also plausibly RS sources talking about his idiotic "jokes" about nuking India here, here and possibly also here although that last one seems to be region blocked for me. Finally, I don't think that we should be giving his full name as "Miles Arthur Le-Vesconte Routledge" when the source is clearly sceptical of that (and might not even be RS) saying "Miles (who also calls himself Miles Arthur Le-vesconte Routledge)". --DanielRigal (talk) 19:12, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: WP:BLP1E, not once but twice. Self aggrandising publicity seekers do not have notability. Notoriety s not the same thing at all. Fails WP:BIO / WP:GNG 🇵🇸‍🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦‍🇵🇸 23:50, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Timtrent: Two times one is not one. jp×g 🗯️ 22:52, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@JPxG yet it was basically the same thing, repeated. In this case that doesn't make two either. 🇵🇸‍🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦‍🇵🇸 10:27, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The policy emphatically says the opposite of this. jp×g 🗯️ 17:13, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: The article is a legitimate biography encapsulating different aspects of life, including a businessman, an explorer, and an imprisonment. I don't see the urgency to delete the article, I feel the request is bias. Cltjames (talk) 15:48, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per the research provided by jpxg. Meets GNG. Randy Kryn (talk) 10:47, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

G. Jagi

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

Per Olympian historian Paul Tchir at [[4]], the only thing about this subject that we know is his Olympic participation, as not even his first name is currently known. As such, this subject does not meet the WP:SPORTSCRIT. A redirect to Afghanistan at the 1948 Summer Olympics, where the subject is listed, may be a suitable WP:ATD. Let'srun (talk) 00:19, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Olympics, and Afghanistan. Let'srun (talk) 00:19, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Since even basic information such as the athlete's given name is missing. Fails in WP:V. Svartner (talk) 05:09, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete One of the most ridiculous bios (if you can even call it that) I have ever seen on Wikipedia. Not worth the redirect, just get rid of it.
Shrug02 (talk) 11:13, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Even though this article appears to be a stub, all we know is that he competed in the Olympics. Even we don’t have his full first name (we only have the letter G). The only source in this article is just his results history. The official Olympics website has the same issue, and OlympStats says we know nothing about him, and that was the only direct mention that popped up on said source with a Ctrl+F word search. And these are the only unadded sources I could find. Clearly not notable. Kaito-san (talk/contribs) 13:04, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Per all the above. I did a google search of him and saw nothing of him that was not from an encyclopedia and results were mostly what appeared (Sorry I am tired, it is around 2:30AM where I am when making this comment) to be some sort of super hero named Jagi with no relation whatsoever to the field hockey player. Servite et contribuere (talk) 16:36, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Field hockey at the 1948 Summer Olympics – Men's team squads as that seems to be the most relevant article to his participation. In fact, it already contains everything we know about him. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 01:15, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect per Metropolitan90. ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 14:54, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Afghanistan's Next Top Model

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

The source is a "news of the weird" type story that appeared in English language outlets in 2007. The actual name of the show does not appear in the articles. A briefly mentioned unnamed show does not add up to notability. Gamaliel (talk) 02:48, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, Fashion, and Afghanistan. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:21, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Previous WP:PROD candidate, ineligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 03:52, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Family tree of the Greco-Bactrian and Indo-Greek kings

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

Opening introduction explicitly admits to "This family tree (and the trees below it) is based on a combination of Tarn's and Narain's genealogies of the Greco-Bactrian kings, which are not necessarily fully correct, as with all ancient family trees." The combination of these two trees is the entire basis of the article, which seems like not good enough for an article. It is highly speculative and not verifiable and the original authors (Tarn and Narain) have been criticised in more recent scholarship for speculative inventions. ForWhomTheSunShines (talk) 01:34, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello ForWhomTheSunShines, I understand the concerns and understand that Tarn and Narain may be inaccurate, but these are the texts that I have. I know that other authors say something different, so when I get those texts, I (or someone else) will revise the trees. Additionally, I give the kings several different fathers (for example, see Apollodotus I in the tree, who has 5 different possible fathers, so I am taking all possible considerations into account here). I also put dotted lines for some kings when the relationship is very unclear, making it being speculation clear. So I am making it clear these Greco-Bactrian trees, just like an Egyptian one (like the 1st Dynasty), will not necessarily be fully accurate. As for the speculation and unverifiable of the tree, well, we do have Greco-Bactrian coinage. The reason I said "This family tree (and the trees below it) is based on a combination of Tarn's and Narain's genealogies of the Greco-Bactrian kings, which are not necessarily fully correct, as with all ancient family trees." is because I want to make it very clear that is a probable layout for how the various kings are related to each other and is not supposed to be taken as dogma, just like many ancient family trees. If you want me to find different authors and replace Tarn and Narain, I will. I just wanted to use two of the most important Greco-Bactrian historians who helped establish the discipline.

OrthodoxByzantineRoman (talk) 01:51, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Lists of people, History, Royalty and nobility, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iran, India, and Greece. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:15, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: couldn't this be saved simply by identifying the differences between the two authors' reconstructions, either by presenting different versions of the trees, or by showing the different positions taken by each author using the varying line and border options? If other scholars disagree with their opinions, that can also be noted on or adjacent to the trees. I will suggest that the trees might need to be less horizontal and more vertical. I never stretch my browser window to the whole width of the screen, and without that the trees exceed the width of the page. But this, like noting disagreements between the authors named and other scholarship, can be achieved through ordinary editing; the page does not have to be deleted in order to improve it to Wikipedia standards. P Aculeius (talk) 13:04, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for this comment. I agree that it could be saved this way, and I will add the position of the various authors too. OrthodoxByzantineRoman (talk) 15:46, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The authors' proposals themselves are questionable and unreliable. The first citation for the first tree is clear that it is “pedigree of the Euthydemids and Eucratides to show the fictitious descent from Alexander." (emphasis added). Tarn, William Woodthorpe (1966). The Greeks in Bactria and India (2 ed.). New York, U.S.: Cambridge University Press. p. 568. ISBN 9781108009416. Retrieved 30 December 2024. The placement of a daughter of Euthydemus I marrying a Chinese emperor and bearing is son is based on speculation from an uncited paragraph. There's mashing together of speculative theory throughout the page.

This seems to be a violation of reason for deleting #6, "[a]rticles that cannot possibly be attributed to reliable sources, including neologisms, original theories and conclusions, and hoaxes." The combination of multiple speculative, unreliable articles into one family tree is effectively the construction of an original theory or conclusion. It also violates ForWhomTheSunShines (talk) 23:40, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, but if we ignore the descent from Alexander, doesn't Tarn still state everything else, according to The Greeks in Bactria and India pgs 71ff? And I agree that the connection to Qin Shi Huangdi is spurious, I just added it on the off chance it could be correct. It was taken from Christopoulos, Lucas (September 2022). "SINO-PLATONIC PAPERS: Dionysian Rituals and the Golden Zeus of China" (PDF). Sino-Platonic Papers. Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, U.S.: University of Pennsylvania. pp. 84–86. Retrieved 4 January 2025. Also, if we clean up and or/delete this article (hopefully not because I did work hard on it), we must clean up the individual articles on the Greco-Bactrian and Indo-Greek kings too, as sources need to be cited for each king's article and other changes need to be made. However, we don't have to delete this article, as it can be cleaned up to remove it of any "speculative theory." OrthodoxByzantineRoman (talk) 03:01, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
"the off chance" is not a reason to add something to an article. And you are correct, many of the Greco-Bactrian and Indo-Greek king articles should also be cleaned up. ForWhomTheSunShines (talk) 04:10, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I mean, it is my first article that I made. I did not know those rules. But tomorrow, I will delete Qin Shi Huangdi, as I see now that the Lucas reference in the Xiutu article was removed. OrthodoxByzantineRoman (talk) 04:33, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Move to draft. Not ready for main space. Celia Homeford (talk) 11:02, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Umm....other editors allowed my article to be published back in December. Why would we put it back into draft? OrthodoxByzantineRoman (talk) 14:48, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Because it's "Not ready for main space". If it's not moved, it should be deleted as a badly-formatted and ill-cited mess of original research and speculative fiction. Celia Homeford (talk) 08:08, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 01:44, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per above. See WP:NOPAGE. Koshuri ^(グ) 15:21, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - there's a thin line between using a "special interest" to build an encyclopedia – and using us a free web host to your synthesis of original material. This has crossed the line. Bearian (talk) 08:54, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - I give up. Let's just delete my article. OrthodoxByzantineRoman (talk) 16:40, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - The insistence on calling it "my article" by the originating editor tends towards this being a special interest. Parts of the article's tree could be salvageable as part of the related articles, but only parts. ForWhomTheSunShines (talk) 03:03, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I call it mine because I was the one who made the entire article, including all of the family trees and everything else in it. Other editors made only minor edits. I probably shouldn't call it mine, as this is an encyclopedia for all. However, let us just delete the article. I do not know if any of the trees could be salvagable, maybe some are, but I don’t know which ones could be saved. OrthodoxByzantineRoman (talk) 20:37, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletions

New alerts are automatically placed here, this page is kept as a historic reference.

Articles for deletion

Hrach Kaprielian

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

Non-notable businessman. Lacking any WP:RS. Cabrils (talk) 01:12, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Finance, Football, Armenia, and United States of America. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:18, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Kargin Haghordum

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

A 20-year old Armenian TV show that fails WP:GNG, and currently has no references. The only mention I can find is an Armenian interview from 2010 with the two actors, otherwise no other coverage, significant or otherwise. Celjski Grad (talk) 14:57, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Armenia. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 16:38, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - I've added 3 news refs (plus an interview. I used http://google.am to find them. (one of them is already in our Armenian language article, hy:Կարգին հաղորդում. I used Google Translate to read them. --A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 03:07, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HCTKe3SwUHU&ab_channel=KarginTV

It is one of the most popular shows in the Armenian history. 5 million views for this episode (Keep in mind, Armenia's population is only 3 million). Widely considered by Armenians to be one of the best comedy shows of all time. Wrobeli (talk) 03:08, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:58, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per WP:HEY and WP:AGF. I can't read a word of Armenian, but it looks popular and notable. Bearian (talk) 01:02, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Azerbaijan

Nasimi (Baku Metro)

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

Seems unlikely that sources exist which show that every stop on this metro line are notable per WP:STATION. Other language WP pages are poorly referenced, at best they show the station exists in public timetables etc. WP:NOTEVERYTHING JMWt (talk) 13:38, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Azerbaijan-related deletion discussions. JMWt (talk) 13:38, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 14:18, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Stations-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:52, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - I believe that this metro stop is notable as it is an example of post-Soviet architecture in Azerbaijan. Most metro stations in the former Soviet Union have unique architectural features, see stations of the Saint Petersburg Metro. You would not delete a station article for the New York City Subway or the Moscow Metro so why delete this one? Zbase4 (talk) 01:58, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: WP:NTRAINSTATION says "train stations have no inherent notability and are not presumed notable for simply being train stations." I believe this applies to metro stations as well. — Itzcuauhtli11 (talk) 18:05, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Week Keep I found one source:

AZERTAC (2024-06-04). Laməkan şairin metrodakı məkanı. Retrieved 2025-05-17 – via YouTube.

In addition, the Azerbaijani Wiki has two additional sources but they are both dead links & I cannot revive on Archive.org. From the titles they suggest SIGCOV & searching their former domains they seemed to be news sources so I will WP:AGF of the original Wiki authors and assume they are SIGCOV RS. Jumpytoo Talk 01:18, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Baku Metro. There is nothing for a stand alone article. Lacking in notability as a trainstation. Ramos1990 (talk) 05:45, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Benison (Beni · talk) 02:45, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Khumar Gadimova

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

This article does not yet appear to be notable for English Wikipedia Insufficient Sources, and the topic may not meet Wikipedia’s notability guidelines. 𝒮-𝒜𝓊𝓇𝒶 02:28, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, Bands and musicians, Women, Lists of people, Music, and Popular culture. 𝒮-𝒜𝓊𝓇𝒶 02:28, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Azerbaijan-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:06, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Khumar Gadimova is a well-known figure in Azerbaijani pop music and is widely recognized by the public in the country. Her artistic career has been covered by numerous reliable and independent sources such as APA, AzərTAc, Musavat, and Report. She has been active in the music industry since the 1990s, performing solo concerts, with her songs broadcast on national television and radio, and has participated in several state-level events.

The article is based on verifiable and independent sources, and the subject clearly meets the notability criteria due to her impact on Azerbaijani culture and public recognition. For these reasons, I oppose the deletion of the article and recommend that it be kept.Farrux Dadasbayli (talk) 10:03, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Being selected as an 'Honored artist' by the Azerbaijan government should be enough to meet WP:ANYBIO. I found sources stating this, but all are in Azerbaijani and I'm not sure if they're reliable enough.[5] [6] — Itzcuauhtli11 (talk) 18:39, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
https://president.az/az/articles/view/22993 The official website of the President of the country has reported on this. Farrux Dadasbayli (talk) 20:03, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I saw it. But independent, reliable sources are needed, and that is a primary source, which is not great. Are there others? — Itzcuauhtli11 (talk) 13:07, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
https://www.bakupost.az/xumar-qedimovaya-emekdar-artist-oldu https://mia.az/mobil/1075536 https://rublika.az/index.php?newsid=22845 https://etikxeber.az/xumar-q%C9%99dimova-%C9%99m%C9%99kdar-artist-oldu/ https://hit.az/az/senet/264643/emekdar-artist-konserte-hazirlasir/ https://musavat.com/ru/mobile/news/bacisi-xumar-qedimova-emekdar-artist-olmasindan-xebersizdir_420423.html https://www.gununsesi.info/xumar-q%C9%99dimovaya-%C9%99m%C9%99kdar-artist-adi-verildi/ https://baku.ws/show-business/xumar-qdimovaya-mkdar-artist-ad-verildi-srncam https://azxeber.com/az/emekdar-artist-turkiyede-trend-oldu/maqazin/ https://news24.az/180697-emekdar-artist-sevenlerine-seslendi.html Farrux Dadasbayli (talk) 15:46, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Are those independent, reliable sources? Linkbombing is not enough for a discussion. — Itzcuauhtli11 (talk) 18:08, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
https://president.az/az/articles/view/22993 The most reliable source. The country's president's own official website Farrux Dadasbayli (talk) 19:46, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 06:52, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep : Being selected as an 'Honored artist' by the Azerbaijani government, which is a national level recognition, is enough to meet WP:ANYBIO. — Itzcuauhtli11 (talk) 15:05, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Noting that the Azerbaijani spelling of her name is Xumar Qədimova (which I have added to the article). Searching on this spelling will probably bring up more sources in that language. RebeccaGreen (talk) 11:04, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep above information and additional sources have been sufficient to determine notability as well as WP:ANYBIO#1 with a national honour and yes, WP:NEXISTS. HilssaMansen19 (talk) 18:16, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 19:06, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Bangladesh

Syed Pir Badshah

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

This article fails to meet the notability guidelines as outlined in WP:N. The subject is not the focus of any significant coverage in reliable, independent sources. The few mentions that do exist are passing and do not provide the depth of material necessary to support a standalone article. Most of the sources cited are either not about the subject or use it only as a brief example without substantial analysis or dedicated discussion. Given the lack of notability and meaningful coverage, the article does not justify its own space. Deletion or merging into a broader, more relevant topic (if applicable) would be more appropriate. Retaining it in its current state risks violating Wikipedia’s standards. Jaunpurzada (talk) 21:15, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2025 May 23, Bangladesh, India and Islam. Jaunpurzada (talk) 21:15, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Jaunpurzada (talk) 18:21, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - I'm confused about what makes this person notable. Please ping me if you can fix this mess. Bearian (talk) 01:38, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - The given references don’t give significant coverage about subject. Not a single in depth coverage. Google search , hard to find about the subject. Even the write up looks to cover matters which are irrelevant like name of his son. COI can’t be ruled out. Hard to find genuine matters which could indicate any signs of notability. Rahmatula786 (talk) 05:30, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Syed Shah Israil

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

This article fails to meet the notability guidelines as outlined in WP:N. The subject is not the focus of any significant coverage in reliable, independent sources. The few mentions that do exist are passing and do not provide the depth of material necessary to support a standalone article. Most of the sources cited are either not about the subject or use it only as a brief example without substantial analysis or dedicated discussion. Given the lack of notability and meaningful coverage, the article does not justify its own space. Deletion or merging into a broader, more relevant topic (if applicable) would be more appropriate. Retaining it in its current state risks violating Wikipedia’s standards. Jaunpurzada (talk) 21:15, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2025 May 23, Bangladesh, India and Islam. Jaunpurzada (talk) 21:15, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Jaunpurzada (talk) 18:21, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - both the context and sourcing doesn't explain why he's notable. Where are the reviews of his works? Where are the compendiums or other collections? Bearian (talk) 01:40, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Khairul Basar

AfDs for this article:

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

Fails WP:GNG and WP:NACTOR. Two previous deletions in English and then deleted in Bengali Wikipedia four days ago. Obvious promotion attempt based on additional sourcing of YouTube, interviews, and promotional churnalism since last AfD. CNMall41 (talk) 18:12, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, and Bangladesh. CNMall41 (talk) 18:12, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: This actor is notable and he has won various awards, including the Meril-Prothom Alo Awards for Best actor, that's enough to keep the article. Aqsis Bey (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 19:19, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The non-notable awards, all of which were won prior to the 2nd AfD? Please let me know what has changed since the last AfD with these awards to make the subject notable under WP:NACTOR. --CNMall41 (talk) 19:44, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Meril-Prothom Alo Awards are the non-notable award? maybe there was no sources mentioned about the awards in the previous pages! So, due to a vulnerability editor previously created or single editor repeatedly recreating this article, this "probably notable" will never be accepted? check the career section, i tried rewriting to make it neutral. wouldn't he pass WP:NACTOR for his roles in various films, web series, web films, television drama and short films from 2017-2024? Aqsis Bey (talk) 00:19, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

AfDs are not based on what is present on a page at the time. It matters what is available in reliable soruces (see WP:BEFORE). So, my question remains...what has changed since the last AfD with these awards to make the subject notable under NACTOR? I am unsure what you mean by vulnerability of an editor or what its relation to notability is so cannot opine on that comment. For NACTOR, having "roles in various films" does not earn someone inherent notability. In fact, it must be lead roles in "notable" films (commonplace in NACTOR deletion discussions - let me know and I can link a few for you). If they did have lead roles, we still need significant coverage (not just verification) that talks about them in those roles. --CNMall41 (talk) 04:06, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

CNMall41, why do you say the Meril-Prothom Alo Awards are not notable? From the Wikipedia article, these awards appear notable along with two others awards and Bangladesh is larger than any country in Europe. A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 01:54, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That was a misstatement as one of the awards is notable. The others are not as we do not list awards without Wikipedia pages in film projects. My point is that nothing notable has happened since the last AfD unless it can be pointed out there has (which I cannot see). Also, I am unsure what country size has to do with notability but if you can clarify maybe I am missing something. --CNMall41 (talk) 04:02, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

United Bengal

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

This page suffers from multiple critical issues. It lacks sufficient inline citations for many significant claims, contains confusing structure and presentation, and has an unfocused narrative that blends unrelated historical details with the actual 1947 proposal. Much of the background is not directly relevant to the United Bengal proposal and appears to be original synthesis. BharatGanguly (talk) 10:12, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Islam, Hinduism, Bangladesh, India, and West Bengal. BharatGanguly (talk) 10:12, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep meets notability as major history books, Banglapedia and reliable sources write about the subject. Notability doesn’t depend on what is on the article, it depends on what we find on sources. And we can find plenty and detail information about the subject on the reliable sources. If there is any issue on the article then that can be fixed by editing but deleting the page for these issue is not a good idea and not aligned with policies. Mehedi Abedin 10:31, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Mehedi Abedin: The reliability of Banglapedia as a source is not yet well established here, and it may not meet Wiki standards for high-quality academic references. Banglapedia is weakly reliable not highly reliable. Chronos.Zx (talk) 13:41, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Chronos.Zx Banglapedia is not weakly reliable as it is an encyclopedia published by Asiatic Society of Bangladesh and its articles are written by scholars from all over of Bangladesh. We can't call this as weak source. Mehedi Abedin 00:05, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Per nominator rationale. Article is very confusing to me, more like a mixture of OR and unrelated content. Chronos.Zx (talk) 13:47, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The subject "United Bengal" itself is not obviously WP:OR and supporting its deletion because the article has "a mixture of OR and unrelated content" (when the issues can be resolved by editing) is not policy based argument. Mehedi Abedin 00:30, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep the Background section is a but over elaborate but the concept seems notable and well documented. Mccapra (talk) 14:39, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Quick search shows that it is something highly discussed in scholarship Jaunpurzada (talk) 18:23, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy keep: per Mehedi Abedin 𐩣𐩫𐩧𐩨 Abo Yemen (𓃵) 07:15, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy keep: per Mehedi Abedin — Cerium4B —Talk? • 09:59, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: per Mehedi Abedin. Niasoh ❯❯❯ Wanna chat? 10:41, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nasiruddin Patwary

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

WP:TOOSOON and depth coverage unavailable in reliable sources. Niasoh ❯❯❯ Wanna chat? 04:20, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians and Bangladesh. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:28, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy keep - Easy meet WP:GNG. As a politician, he has received significant national independent news coverage. Dv24mail (talk) 06:09, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
All the coverage is about the National Nagorik Committee or the National Citizen Party and press briefing speeches, but there is no in-depth coverage about him and about his biography. Niasoh ❯❯❯ Wanna chat? 06:50, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Which point of WP:GNG does the subject meet?Vinegarymass911 (talk) 16:36, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:POLOUTCOMES. We have spent the past several months deleting articles about minor party leaders, from Canada to India. Bearian (talk) 02:46, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Matsya Bhaban

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

Doesn't appear to satisfy WP:NBUILDING nor does it seem like one of the rare notable road intersections (like, for example, Hollywood and Vine). I'm not seeing anything more than passing mentions in the news. Clarityfiend (talk) 04:20, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Architecture, Transportation, and Bangladesh. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:27, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

2012 Cumilla City Corporation election

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

Clearly a non-notable election. Would have draftified first, but the creator created a page in the mainspace with basically the same content as the one in draftspace (Draft:2012 Cumilla City Corporation election) ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 10:16, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politics and Bangladesh. Shellwood (talk) 10:37, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:42, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Not a notable election. REDISCOVERBHARAT (talk) 15:34, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Has completely different results, so I have to assume this is a test page in mainspace. Nathannah • 📮 21:39, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sanjoy

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

Cannot find any evidence of notability. Refs are non existent. Page is also written very promotionally Taksoh17 (talk) 21:26, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Bands and musicians. Taksoh17 (talk) 21:26, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bangladesh and California. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:58, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:V - between a 404 page for Billboards, and unreliable and sketchy sources, nothing has been verified. Also, producers are so common that we rarely keep them after AfD. Bearian (talk) 03:40, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Kashimpur Thana

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

Police station does not appear to be notable. Although there are four sources, that may not be sufficient for WP:NBUILDING policy, which requires .." they require significant in-depth coverage by reliable, third-party sources to establish notability.". Emphasis on "in-depth".

Creator of article should provide quotes from sources to show that the sources cover the place "in depth"... more than cursory.

Note that the creator of this article may have created many articles recently on minor police stations within Bangladesh, I'm not sure. See Category:Thanas of Dhaka etc. I'm sure that many police stations in the country _are_ notable for historical or architectural reasons. But many are probably not notable. I'm not sure how AfD process manages multiple articles. Noleander (talk) 21:17, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Thana refers to a tertiary administrative division in Bangladesh similar to Upazila. These subdistricts are based on which areas have police station. Jaunpurzada (talk) 21:25, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Police and Bangladesh. Shellwood (talk) 22:06, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Seriously? It hasnt even been a day since I created the page, you do realize that these are administrative units? Right? See other AfDs for example: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tajhat Thana, this isn't just about a police station, it is about a administrative unit, Thanas are equivalent to upazilas in Bangladesh, while Wikipedia is not a directory, not creating these pages would cause some issues as many information will be missing. BangladeshiEditorInSylhet (talk) 02:16, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Thana refers to a tertiary administrative division in Bangladesh similar to Upazila. These subdistricts are based on which areas have police station. (2) Niasoh ❯❯❯ Wanna chat? 19:26, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: There is ZERO evidence these "police stations" are "tertiary administrative division in Bangladesh similar to Upazila". I do not see but three mundane or routine news reports (WP:NOTNEWS) about criminal activities of the Officer-in-Charge (OC). Two of the sources are "Jago News 24" so, if about the subject and not criminal activities of an OC, would count as one source towards notability. There is no significant coverage in reliable and independent sources about the actual "police station", NOR any connection to an administrative division, subdivision, or "units". By-the-way: When the sources levy accusations on a person, they are considered innocent until proven guilty in the US. "IF" it were notable to the world-at-large, and if kept regardless of policies and guidelines, the title needs an RFC for a name change to something like Criminal activities at Kashimpur Thana. -- Otr500 (talk) 04:31, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Who said there is no evidence that thanas are administrative units? Did you forget Wikipedia:Before and that there is a government that rules Bangladesh and administration is decentralizated? Divisions, districts, upazilas, Thanas, unions, wards, villages, mahallas, mouzas, municipalities (Pourashova), etc? BangladeshiEditorInSylhet (talk) 09:30, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Appears to be non-notable local administrative unit. No extensive coverage. Chronos.Zx (talk) 16:32, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Bamna Thana

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

Probably not notable: does not meet WP:NBUILDING. This is the third AfD I've submitted (as part of WP:NPP) on minor police stations in Bangladesh. I won't submit any more AfDs on these articles. I'll let the AfD people take it from here and decide if they want to review all the other newly-created articles by the same editor. Noleander (talk) 21:33, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Police and Bangladesh. Shellwood (talk) 22:06, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Keep - Wikipedia is not just a spam delete section, you don't delete every article after just seeing it, check why and is this even relevant? This is indeed relevant, Thanas are equivalent to sub-districts in Bangladesh, it isn't just a random police station, While [[Hussain Muhammad Ershad]] in the 1980s did convert many thanas into subdistricts under a decentralization programme, thanas remain and there are atleast 652 thanas, each covering lots of information, not creating these pages and nominating them for AfD is not applicable, in fact I was creating this pages less than a day ago, I couldn't sleep due to Wikipedia notification sounds that another article was nominated to be deleted, its too soon plus improve the article yourself then, Wikipedia is not a one-sided encyclopedia, it must be contributed to by multiple individuals! Pages about Administrative units should remain on the encyclopedia. BangladeshiEditorInSylhet (talk) 02:25, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Thana refers to a tertiary administrative division in Bangladesh similar to Upazila. These subdistricts are based on which areas have police station. Niasoh ❯❯❯ Wanna chat? 19:27, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: LMAO. Wikipedia is not a directory or yellow pages. This is a non-notable "police station". The opening statement is, "Bamna Thana (Bengali: বামনা থানা, lit. 'Bamna Police Station') is a police station in Bamna, Barguna, Barisal, Bangladesh". It is sourced with two primary Bangladesh National Portal, Government of Bangladesh sources, that does NOT advance notability, and a jagonews24.com source with the title Teenager poisoned after failing to 'marry' boyfriend. What "tertiary administrative division"? Please don't tell me an editor is thinking of, or working on, creating 652 police station articles? It looks like it. A couple of primary sources and a news report like another "police station" Rajon killing: Jalalabad OC suspended. WOW! There are over 18 THOUSAND "police stations" in the US. How about writing articles on political "subdistricts" or actual "Administrative units" and including the "police stations" there? Are these considered notable in the bn.wikipedia.org? Lacking significant coverage in reliable and independent sources, maybe even historical significance, a police station is not notable. Noleander, don't give up! If there is a list out there, somewhere, then someone will want to make articles. Some may be notable, but does Wikipedia need to know some local news that Marzia slept with her husband and children, then... (Daily Kalbela) "was stabbed to death by her mentally challenged husband...". Some interesting translations, "Marzia, who was killed in the marriage, is the mother of three children". News reports offers nothing that adds to the notability of this article or Gafargaon Thana. -- Otr500 (talk) 03:44, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
First of all, Wikipedia is not for jokes always, maybe some but this was not meant to be humorous, so i dont know what is making you laugh so much, second, You told Noleander to not give up, and if there is a list, someone will try to make articles, is this like a war or something? No its not, dont make it look dramatic, and isnt creating pages good, like without it, would Wikipedia have ever existed? And no this is not a directory, please read WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS, i will try to make more pages to be fair plus just because I did not give a source that thanas are a administrative unit, doesnt mean it isn't, plus I created these pages not even a day and these were already nominated for AfD, like give some time, when a page is stable, I have time to add more in-depth sources to it but when a AfD occurs, my focus shifts and if i do make any edits, the sources are partial, and who even talked about Gafargaon Thana here? I didn't, nobody did, when I create pages, i leave 3 sources there and add more sometime later, thats why you may see some inaccuracies but those are just to start the article, now if i can't even start a article and expand it without a freaking AfD in not even a day, whom's notification disturbs my sleep, then what is the point of all this? I understand your concern about GNG but give some time alright and your arguments need improvement. BangladeshiEditorInSylhet (talk) 09:12, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

My purpose was not to show that Wikipedia is a directory, its not, my purpose was to create pages of Thanas (administrative units and a police station, they serve two roles, they are equivalent to upazilas [sub-districts], according to the Bangladesh Government and related sources), now i take time to fully improve the page, if someone doesnt even give me that time, then don't expect me and other editors to add in-depth, independent, secondary sources to it. BangladeshiEditorInSylhet (talk) 09:16, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Syed Rayhan ad-Din

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

This article fails to meet the notability guidelines as outlined in WP:N. The subject is not the focus of any significant coverage in reliable, independent sources. The few mentions that do exist are passing and do not provide the depth of material necessary to support a standalone article. Most of the sources cited are either not about the subject or use it only as a brief example without substantial analysis or dedicated discussion. Given the lack of notability and meaningful coverage, the article does not justify its own space. Deletion or merging into a broader, more relevant topic (if applicable) would be more appropriate. Retaining it in its current state risks violating Wikipedia’s standards. Jaunpurzada (talk) 21:15, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2025 May 21, Bangladesh, India and Islam. Jaunpurzada (talk) 21:15, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:58, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Muhammad Arshad (writer)

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

This article fails to meet the notability guidelines as outlined in WP:N. The subject is not the focus of any significant coverage in reliable, independent sources. The few mentions that do exist are passing and do not provide the depth of material necessary to support a standalone article. Most of the sources cited are either not about the subject or use it only as a brief example without substantial analysis or dedicated discussion. Given the lack of notability and meaningful coverage, the article does not justify its own space. Deletion or merging into a broader, more relevant topic (if applicable) would be more appropriate. Retaining it in its current state risks violating Wikipedia’s standards. Jaunpurzada (talk) 21:15, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2025 May 21, Bangladesh, India and Islam. Jaunpurzada (talk) 21:15, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:07, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Non notable author. Unable to meet WP:SIGCOV, Fails WP:GNG. B-Factor (talk) 04:25, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tongi West Thana

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

Police station does not appear to be notable. Although there are four sources, that may not meet WP:NBUILDING, which requires .." they require significant in-depth coverage by reliable, third-party sources to establish notability.". Emphasis on "in-depth".

Creator of article should provide quotes from sources to show that the sources cover the place "in depth"... more than cursory. Noleander (talk) 21:07, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Police and Bangladesh. Shellwood (talk) 21:12, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Seriously? It hasnt even been a day since I created the page, you do realize that these are administrative units? Right? See other AfDs for example: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tajhat Thana, this isn't just about a police station, it is about a administrative unit, Thanas are equivalent to upazilas in Bangladesh, while Wikipedia is not a directory, not creating these pages would cause some issues as many information will be missing. BangladeshiEditorInSylhet (talk) 02:14, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Wikipedia is not just a spam delete section, you don't delete every article after just seeing it, check why and is this even relevant? This is indeed relevant, Thanas are equivalent to sub-districts in Bangladesh, it isn't just a random police station, While Hussain Muhammad Ershad in the 1980s did convert many thanas into subdistricts under a decentralization programme, thanas remain and there are atleast 652 thanas, each covering lots of information, not creating these pages and nominating them for AfD is not applicable, in fact I was creating these pages less than a day ago, I couldn't sleep due to Wikipedia notification sounds that another article was nominated to be deleted, its too soon plus improve the article yourself then, Wikipedia is not a one-sided encyclopedia, it must be contributed to by multiple individuals. BangladeshiEditorInSylhet (talk) 02:22, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Thana refers to a tertiary administrative division in Bangladesh similar to Upazila. These subdistricts are based on which areas have police station. Niasoh ❯❯❯ Wanna chat? 19:26, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Lacks significant coverage in reliable and independent sources to advance notability of a "police station". I keep seeing "Thana refers to a tertiary administrative division in Bangladesh similar to Upazila. These subdistricts are based on which areas have police station". Not one time a source to connect (prove it) a local "police station" as an administrative division, subdivision, or unit. I also keep seeing routine news reports that are not about the subject, a "police station". Sources on the article:
1. 1 title: A murder case was filed with Tongi West Police Station,
2. 2 title: SI's body found at Tongi police barrack,
3. 3 title: Same as #2,
4. 4 title: CCTV cameras installed at Tongi West Police Station. If kept, regardless of policies and guidelines, this might mean we could create 18,000 articles on "police stations" in the US. -- Otr500 (talk) 05:07, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
My purpose was not to show that Wikipedia is a directory, its not, my purpose was to create pages of Thanas (administrative units and a police station, they serve two roles, they are equivalent to upazilas [sub-districts], according to the Bangladesh Government and related sources), now i take time to fully improve the page, if someone doesnt even give me that time, then don't expect me and other editors to add in-depth, independent, secondary sources to it. BangladeshiEditorInSylhet (talk) 09:17, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Sure, create those pages, am i restricting anybody from creating pages about American administrative units or police stations? Am i? Prove that i am restricting it then, you want proof that Thana is a administrative unit? Sure:
1. The Daily Observer, Published 31 March 2019 (redirect)
2. ResearchGate
3. Banglapedia
BangladeshiEditorInSylhet (talk) 09:26, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Md. Abul Kashem Mia

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

Passing mentions only, need evidence for WP:SIGCOV and WP:Three. BangladeshiEditorInSylhet (talk) 16:35, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. BangladeshiEditorInSylhet (talk) 16:35, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is not a directory also, not every person deserves a article unless their contributions are detailed and in-depth sources, even 1, must be cited, not just name but also birth, birth place, education and position in work/jobs. BangladeshiEditorInSylhet (talk) 16:37, 18 May 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 May 18. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 17:06, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Computing, and Bangladesh. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:11, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment- Please note a potential retaliation issue: after my deletion nomination of Kishore Kantho under WP:NMAG, User:BangladeshiEditorInSylhet promptly nominated three of my articles—Mohammad Ejaz, Md. Matiur Rahman Sheikh, and Md. Abul Kashem Mia—for deletion. Such retalion is generally discouraged and undermines the assumption of good faith (WP:AGF). Deletion proposals must address content, not serve as personal reprisals (WP:NOTBATTLEGROUND). I urge uninvolved editors to judge each nomination on its own merits and remain alert to any pattern of WP:POINT.Vinegarymass911 (talk) 19:43, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
First of all, I would like to address that this was not retaliation, if this was, you would have seen much larger amounts of AfDs seen as "escalation" and the AfDs may not even have a clear reason, second: This page is covered by only passing mentions, please add more information and that is what I am asking, I will withdraw my nomination if you give a good reason to keep. BangladeshiEditorInSylhet (talk) 14:07, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Md. Matiur Rahman Sheikh

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

Most sources are just passing mentions or about retirement or Chief, more in-depth sources needed or nomination will not be withdrawn. BangladeshiEditorInSylhet (talk) 16:48, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Bangladesh. BangladeshiEditorInSylhet (talk) 16:48, 18 May 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 May 18. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 17:06, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Police-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:12, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment- Please note a potential retaliation issue: after my deletion nomination of Kishore Kantho under WP:NMAG, User:BangladeshiEditorInSylhet promptly nominated three of my articles—Mohammad Ejaz, Md. Matiur Rahman Sheikh, and Md. Abul Kashem Mia—for deletion. Such retalion is generally discouraged and undermines the assumption of good faith (WP:AGF). Deletion proposals must address content, not serve as personal reprisals (WP:NOTBATTLEGROUND). I urge uninvolved editors to judge each nomination on its own merits and remain alert to any pattern of WP:POINT.Vinegarymass911 (talk) 19:46, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
First of all, I would like to address that this was not retaliation, if this was, you would have seen much larger amounts of AfDs seen as "escalation" and the AfDs may not even have a clear reason, second: This page is covered by only passing mentions, please add more information and that is what I am asking, I will withdraw my nomination if you give a good reason to keep. BangladeshiEditorInSylhet (talk) 14:05, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Mohammad Ejaz

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

More reliable sources needed, violates WP:RS unless proven then i will withdraw nomination. BangladeshiEditorInSylhet (talk) 16:30, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Bangladesh. BangladeshiEditorInSylhet (talk) 16:30, 18 May 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 May 18. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 17:06, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Withdraw - This can be Keep on the source mentioned.([7]]) Dv24mail (talk) 19:10, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment- Please note a potential retaliation issue: after my deletion nomination of Kishore Kantho under WP:NMAG, User:BangladeshiEditorInSylhet promptly nominated three of my articles—Mohammad Ejaz, Md. Matiur Rahman Sheikh, and Md. Abul Kashem Mia—for deletion. Such retalion is generally discouraged and undermines the assumption of good faith (WP:AGF). Deletion proposals must address content, not serve as personal reprisals (WP:NOTBATTLEGROUND). I urge uninvolved editors to judge each nomination on its own merits and remain alert to any pattern of WP:POINT.Vinegarymass911 (talk) 19:46, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
First of all, I would like to address that this was not retaliation, if this was, you would have seen much larger amounts of AfDs seen as "escalation" and the AfDs may not even have a clear reason, second: This page is covered by only passing mentions, please add more information and that is what I am asking, I will withdraw my nomination if you give a good reason to keep, plus most sources are about passing mentions anyways, if articles with somewhat in-depth sources are deleted, then articles with just passing mentions will also surely be deleted. BangladeshiEditorInSylhet (talk) 14:08, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Jhalakathi Government High School

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

School does not appear to be notable upon search. The current sources in the article only prove that the school exists, and upon search, I can't seem to find any sources that would prove the subject is notable enough to warrant its own article. WormEater13 (talk • contribs) 15:49, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education, Schools, and Bangladesh. WormEater13 (talk • contribs) 15:49, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Kishore Kantho

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

A political magazine that fails WP:NMAG. Vinegarymass911 (talk) 14:58, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: News media and Bangladesh. Vinegarymass911 (talk) 14:58, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Most of the information given in the article is not backed by any verifiable sources. None of the references used mention anything about "Natun Kishore Kantho".

I reviewed the content of the article and found that it has been used for promoting the "Natun Kishore Kantho" Islamic magazine and the associated organizations (Islami Chhatra Shibir and Bangladesh Jamaat-e-Islami).

Though the article tells about the history of the Islamic magazine and its founder, it seems to have been written with the intention of creating a positive image of the organization.

There is not even a shred of coverage on this magazine from any newspaper, publication, or other reliable sources.

So this flies in the face of WP:GNG, WP:VERIFY, and WP:NOTPROMO policies. Somajyoti ✉ 15:36, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Keep - please explain how it violates NPOV and the page is not used here for promoting Bangladesh Jamaat-e-Islami, neutral language has been used and violation of NPOV does not mean a article has to be deleted but actually it should be improved, you have not given any evidence, It was not created to promote the organization or Jamaat-e-Islami, i don't know where you got that from and you are saying like it is not notable at all with no sources, first of all, I can use your same argument in other AfDs and sources do provide in-depth coverage. BangladeshiEditorInSylhet (talk) 16:15, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You are completely ignoring the context. BangladeshiEditorInSylhet (talk) 16:16, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Keep - I was very shocked to see the nomination to delete this article (AfD). Easy pass WP:NMAG🙄. This is a popular monthly children's magazine in Bangladesh, known as Notun Kishore Kantho (Bengali:নতুন কিশোর কণ্ঠ). This magazine is run by a student (Bangladesh Islami Chhatrashibir) organization. The articles in this magazine never promote any political party. The articles in this magazine are usually published from articles sent by readers. I think it can be speedy keep. Dv24mail (talk) 16:58, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
While you could improve your comment grammatically, you are correct, i found no piece of content that supported Jamaat in the article. BangladeshiEditorInSylhet (talk) 17:03, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Have you seen a pattern between AfDs and Jamaat-related articles, Dv24mail? BangladeshiEditorInSylhet (talk) 17:04, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! But I'm surprised to see this nomination. It was founded by a leader of a political party when he was a student leader. He is now the central leader of the political party. Dv24mail (talk) 18:05, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How does it pass NMAG?Vinegarymass911 (talk) 12:36, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - there's a lack of significant coverage about this student journal, and notability is not inherited from its founder. At best, a merge or redirect would be reasonable. Bearian (talk) 22:23, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I read WP:SIGCOV and the sources are not just passing mentions, where only the name is expressed. BangladeshiEditorInSylhet (talk) 07:33, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Who founded it has no bearing on notability (see this). There are sources that mention it but we need references that focus on the publication in-depth, not just in passing. Happy to look at additional sources if presented. --CNMall41 (talk) 19:49, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Bangladesh Jamaat-e-Islami#Affiliated organizations. The speedy keep !votes do not say how speedy keep applies. Moreover, BangladeshiEditorInSylhet doesn't address the nominator's concern, and Dv24mail makes a vague wave claiming the article easily passes WP:NMAG, but doesn't say how. The topic doesn't meet any of the criteria of WP:NMAG or WP:NMEDIA. At the same time, the picture is not as grim as the delete !votes paint it. The content is verifiable and is not promotional. There is significant coverage of the magazine (several paragraphs) in the Bangla Tribune articles (which, being by the same author and having the same publisher, count as one source towards notability). However, searches in English and Bengali found no other independent sources (about this Kishore Kantho, there were others of the same or very similar names founded in 1977 and 1980), so the topic does not meet WP:GNG and should not have been created as a stand alone article. It is somewhat interesting that to indoctrinate children a political party runs a children's magazine (as well as newspapers, schools, hospitals, banks, charities, etc.), so a merge to the party article is appropriate. --Worldbruce (talk) 15:03, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ashraf Mahdi

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

Not enough coverage to justify a standalone article. The subject fails WP:NPOL and WP:GNG. The young politician has never stood in an election. Vinegarymass911 (talk) 14:52, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians and Bangladesh. Vinegarymass911 (talk) 14:52, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, The subject easily passed WP:GNG and WP:POLITICIAN. I want to mention some significant coverage by national and international media: Deutsche Welle, Manab Zamin, Bangla Tribune, The Daily Star.–𝐎𝐰𝐚𝐢𝐬 𝐀𝐥 𝐐𝐚𝐫𝐧𝐢 ʕʘ̅͜ʘ̅ʔ 15:06, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: The sources of in the article (such as Manab Zamin, Amnesty International, DW, The Daily Star BD) are all event based reports (such as arrest, disappearance, or participation in political rallies). The reports by DW and The Daily Star BD highlight his disappearance or political activitiest and do not establish him as a nationally or internationally notable figure. The incident of disappearance and the statement from Amnesty International do not establish Mahdi as a human rights activist or a notable person, rather he is mentioned as an example of the then government's human rights violations. The article describes his political activities, such as involvement with the National Citizens' Committee or the National Citizen Party and might have been presented in an exaggerated manner. Although his activities may be related to Hefazat-e-Islam or Islami Oikya Jote, he is not a notable leader of these organizations, and his contributions are not significant enough to be mentioned in articles about these organizations. This does not fulfill Wikipedia's two criteria (depth of information and neutrality). Policies like WP:ONEEVENT says that a single event (such as disappearance) or local political participation is not enough to establish notability.

So what I want to say is that the article should be deleted, and some parts (if not already) should be merged into other articles (such as Hefazat-e-Islam or the human rights situation in Bangladesh) if suitable for merging. Somajyoti ✉ 16:13, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It does not fall under WP:ONEEVENT, as the event was part of his broader activism. There are sufficient reliable sources available to support a balanced and independent article, both before and after the event.–𝐎𝐰𝐚𝐢𝐬 𝐀𝐥 𝐐𝐚𝐫𝐧𝐢 ʕʘ̅͜ʘ̅ʔ 07:07, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete not notable + WP:TOOEARLY Ahammed Saad (talk) 13:46, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete for now - it seems he did get some decent coverage for the arrest but overall fails WP:BLP1E. SportingFlyer T·C 06:18, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Chief of the General Staff (Bangladesh)

AfDs for this article:

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

The article has only two sentences and four references, the references do not say anything about the sentences. PauKau (talk) 02:12, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

~~Probably keep~~ - there's a lot of information on the page which isn't properly sourced, however this appears to be a high level military position to which appointees are recognised in the national media. I don't speak local languages but I suspect there are likely to be more sources about the position in non-English sources.

JMWt (talk) 07:24, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Actually rereading the previous AfD from Dec 2024 I agree that this isn't ready for mainspace. There are too many asserted facts that are unreferenced. Draft until all those can be sourced. JMWt (talk) 07:30, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Military and Bangladesh. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 08:00, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Benison (Beni · talk) 09:13, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. The claimed speeches of the article do not have any reference, the given references do not say anything behalf of the claimed sentences. Moreover, the information given in the infobox are unreferenced. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 119.30.39.110 (talk) 12:55, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Umama Fatema

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

New activist and politician, article fails both WP:NPOL and WP:GNG. Niasoh ❯❯❯ Wanna chat? 03:54, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wait as per WP:NPOL: not a politician who has served in a federal government. WP:TOOSOON to say if she will become more notable

DankPedia (talk) 04:23, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Or Draftify might be a better option DankPedia (talk) 04:25, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Discrimination, Politics, and Bangladesh. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 07:55, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete : lack of notability. Failed WP:GNG. SRL1122 (talk) 08:24, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: It does not meet the criteria of WP:GNG. I see no reason to keep the article on Wikipedia. Somajyoti ✉ 08:56, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as per nom. Mehedi Abedin 19:57, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge into Students Against Discrimination. As a spokesperson, she fails NPOL, but as one of many, she's sort of notable. She received 30 minutes of fame. No harm to merge and redirect. Bearian (talk) 02:37, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom.Vinegarymass911 (talk) 12:38, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete At best, this is a case of WP:TOOSOON. Perhaps in just a little more time this article would be ready for primetime but at this point I do not think it meets WP:GNG. Gjb0zWxOb (talk) 20:35, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge into Students Against Discrimination per Bearian. She played a major role in the July Revolution while being part of the Students Against Discrimination, yet there is no mention of it in that article. ✗plicit 06:41, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: It is clearly leaning towards a delete. With this relist, hoping for opinions and to discuss on merge as mentioned above.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HilssaMansen19 (talk) 09:55, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete WP:TOOSOON, fails WP:GNG. আফতাবুজ্জামান (talk) 16:37, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Rangamati Government High School

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

Upon search, I don't think that the school is notable enough to warrant a standalone article. As far as my search, I don't see any reliable, secondary coverage, and the current state of the article also primarily cites their own website. WormEater13 (talk • contribs) 14:49, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education, Schools, and Bangladesh. WormEater13 (talk • contribs) 14:49, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Usually Bangladeshi education institutions in the Chittagong Hill Tracts does not have secondary coverage. Education institute outside Dhaka are usually area-wise popular. Like this one is a well-known in Rangamati. Additionally, this is the first & oldest school in CHT. Notable alumnis also studied here. WinKyaw (talk) 15:20, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The school doesn't have secondary, reliable coverage though, as you said in your reply. As @Hannes Röst said, just because a school exists, it does not automatically confer any notability onto the school. The school needs to be notable enough to warrant its own article, and the school clearly does not pass WP:NSCHOOL at this very moment. WormEater13 (talk • contribs) 03:13, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: It seems to be one of the 64 government high schools located in the 64 districts of Bangladesh. The locals reckon that these schools are quite the talk of the region within their respective districts. Somajyoti ✉ 16:35, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

delete there is no indication of passing WP:NSCHOOL, there are no secondary sources that I could find in books that go beyond trivial coverage. There are some sources on a formar headmaster but mentions the school in one line. The arguments of User talk:Somajyoti and User:Win Kyaw boil down to WP:SOURCESMAYEXIST which is not sufficient. Similarly the fact that notable alumni have studied here does not make the school notable by itself. @User talk:Somajyoti and @User:Win Kyaw, please see this RFC which was discussed in great length and concludes that High schools are not inherently noteable and that reliable independent WP:SIGCOV needs to exist for them as well, which I dont see here. There simply isnt any coverage that we could use to write an article. --hroest 20:27, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete does not meet WP:SIGCOV, and has no relevance in the broad encyclopedic perspective, not passes WP:NSCHOOL. Simply, if a school is known in local area (most probably by students and their guardians), it is not encyclopedic. HilssaMansen19 (talk) 09:34, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Guerillero ^{Parlez Moi} 10:02, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Bangladesh Chasi Kalyan Samiti

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

Non notable NGO. Otherthan some passing mentions, there is zero significant coverage about this NGO. Also, all the sources mentioned talks about it’s parents organisations Bangladesh Jamaate Islami. Notability isn’t inherited. Fails WP:GNG, WP:NORG. আফতাবুজ্জামান (talk) 00:17, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - passing mentions? To you even in-depth sources are passing mentions i have seen, it can mention Bangladesh Jamaat-e-Islami, what's the problem, the topic is indeed covered, read WP:Before and it clearly passes WP:GNG BangladeshiEditorInSylhet (talk) 01:13, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The article is not even 2 months old, give me some time to improve the page and rest alright? BangladeshiEditorInSylhet (talk) 01:15, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This only source might be somewhat significant coverage. Other than that, there is zero significant coverage by independent, reliable secondary sources for this organization to meet the criteria of WP:GNG. Please show me three best sources that provide significant coverage, are reliable, and independent of the subject, I will withdraw my nomination. আফতাবুজ্জামান (talk) 01:57, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Its best that you apply WP:B before you nominate articles for AfD, recently i set a limit where I have to make each of my articles pass WP:GNG in atleast 15 months if sources are found, now this article i was still checking on to see if it passes Wikipedia policies, you used to nominate several of my articles for deletion, some actually made sense because many were just passing mentions (here) but slowly the quality of reasons of your AfDs have been decreasing, just my opinion. BangladeshiEditorInSylhet (talk) 13:47, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The sources that meet notability? Please check the article or these are the sources for you, here, here, here, you can check other sources in the page too, if you want proof that the publishers are reliable then, see this. BangladeshiEditorInSylhet (talk) 13:51, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I’m not sure why you think I didn’t check before nominating. I’m sorry, but the three sources you provided is not significant coverage.

জামায়াতী এনজিও চাষী কল্যাণ সমিতির মাধ্যমে জঙ্গী অর্থায়ন - somewhat significant coverage, talks about how jamatee funds throug this organisation
জামায়াত-শিবিরের অঙ্গসংগঠন কীভাবে চিহ্নিত হবে? - passing mentions
8 held for allegedly financing militancy through NGO - passing mentions

With this, I cannot say that the organization meets the criteria of WP:GNG. আফতাবুজ্জামান (talk) 15:49, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Doesn't passing mentions only mention the name and nothing else about the subject? Example: She worked here, and there is no other information, following sources do provide information, after taking a semi-break from November to December 2024 from Wikipedia, i returned in 2025 and i check each article i am trying to make and i do not try to add passing mentions, i try to add in-depth sources, also can i give a recommendation, it would be nice if you looked for sources yourself online or offline, I as the author here created this article but I cannot always add information, I also have school, assignments, homework, exams, it would be nice if others contribute before nominating it for AfD. BangladeshiEditorInSylhet (talk) 01:17, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

One or two lines in a news article do not constitute significant coverage. I looked online, but unfortunately, I couldn't find any substantial coverage about this organization. আফতাবুজ্জামান (talk) 01:26, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The given sources i have showed do not include only 1 or two lines, not all sources will have the chosen headline, information can be spread out and if it does give information and in-depth, i think its okay. BangladeshiEditorInSylhet (talk) 07:33, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It’s clear that we do not agree on the sources and it's WP:SIGCOV. I’ll leave it to others to judge. আফতাবুজ্জামান (talk) 10:05, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, but others should give a clear reason, saying delete per nom is not enough and violates purpose and instructions under a AfD, Swamping delete votes without a proper reason especially when the article has been nominated without passing WP:Before is not applicable. BangladeshiEditorInSylhet (talk) 10:42, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

And even after the AfD, I am looking for sources both online and offline through multiple browsers, apps, and asking from newspaper circulators or authors of reports. BangladeshiEditorInSylhet (talk) 10:44, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Could you please stop saying "the article has been nominated without passing WP:Before"? As I said above, I looked online, but unfortunately, I couldn't find any substantial coverage about this organization. It’s good that you added more sources, but please note that all of them are just passing mentions/one sentence. E.g.

জঙ্গিবাদে অর্থায়ন: গ্রেপ্তার ৮ - One sentence, nothing substantial.
Limits of Islamism and Jamaat-e-Islami in Contemporary India and Bangladesh- Mentions, nothing substantial.
8 held for allegedly financing militancy through NGO - Two sentences, nothing substantial.
পমহাদেশের উজ্জ্বল নক্ষত্র মাওলানা আবুল কালাম মুহাম্মদ ইউসুফ রহ. অধ্যাপক মুজিবুর রহমান - Mentions, nothing substantial.
200 couples married in mass ceremony in Bangladesh - Just one sentence—othing substantial.
Civil Society Responses to Changing Civic Spaces- One sentence, nothing substantial.
The Rohingya Crisis Mapping the Conundrum and Challenges of Peace Building: Selective South Asian Perspectives - Mentions, nothing substantial.

-- আফতাবুজ্জামান (talk) 15:44, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and Bangladesh. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:23, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Why? Any problem? From your replies, i got the information that you should've done a WP:Before before the AfD, during the AfD may cause issues because the nominator may have a bias against the given sources, plus no its not one sentence, There are atleast a few passing mentions but more than 4 sources are in-depth about the organization, not all sources will be like 190 pages about the organization, it gives the needed information, i can nominate several pages of yours by applying your very own comment, saying that oh only "passing mention", " sources don't mention much, only 2 sentences" length of the supported text in the sources as long as it is enough for SIGCOV and in-depth coverage, is okay, it can cover a topic about some other event, that doesn't decrease its reliability. BangladeshiEditorInSylhet (talk) 15:55, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I added several in-depth sources which are already in the page and some passing mentions too, length of the supported text doesn't have to be a full book, just enough to establish SIGCOV and in-depth coverage. BangladeshiEditorInSylhet (talk) 15:58, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your initial comment says it doesn't pass SIGCOV and sources talk about Jamaat, what's the problem here? We have already commented on SIGCOV but on Jamaat, it doesn't matter if sources talk about Jamaat-e-Islami and then Chasi Kalyan Samiti, after all, Chasi Kalyan Samiti is the peasant wing of Bangladesh Jamaat-e-Islami, the source can mention its parent organization, your initial comment failed to prove how it is insufficient. BangladeshiEditorInSylhet (talk) 16:06, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Benison (Beni · talk) 11:31, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete- No independent notability beyond parant organization. Sources show routine or trivial coverage.Vinegarymass911 (talk) 15:21, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Really? No independent source? Im not sure, If this keeps going on, even notable topics will be deleted in the name of passing mentions, plus even if it covers Jamaat-e-Islami, isn't this the peasant wing of Bangladesh Jamaat-e-Islami, why would Jamaat not be mentioned? BangladeshiEditorInSylhet (talk) 13:58, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The closest thing to significant coverage are six sentences in a 2018 Dhaka Tribune article about the alleged embezelment of $43,000 from the organization. A 2020 Janakantha article adds that CID has recommended that the Bangladesh NGO Bureau cancel the organization's registration, but otherwise just reiterates the first article and says the investigation is ongoing. Rounding out the three best sources, according to BangladeshiEditorInSylhet, is a Bangla Tribune article. It contains the same three basic facts as most sources, plus a quote from the organization's website, and says it may or may not be banned by the government as an affiliate of Bangladesh Jamaat-e-Islami. The government fell a few days later, so it's unclear if it was or is banned, or whether the alleged embezelment from the organization will ever see trial. --Worldbruce (talk) 19:40, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Bangladesh Jamaat-e-Islami. The deepest coverage of this 48-year old organization in a book is a single sentence. The author has cited a dozen sources, but they're mostly passing mentions of the same basic facts. That may be why he has only been able to squeeze five sentences of content out of them. The topic does not meet WP:NORG; there is no substance for a stand alone article. A merge to the parent organization, as an alternative to deletion, is the best course. --Worldbruce (talk) 19:46, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Musfiq Mannan Choudhury

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

Mostly passing mentions in sources and he isn't a highly-cited researcher ([8]). It does note he is a vice-chancellor of a university, but this institution doesn't seem particularly noteworthy or reputable (although perhaps someone who knows more about the regulation of higher ed. in Bangladesh can correct me) Leonstojka (talk) 19:10, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators and Bangladesh. Leonstojka (talk) 19:10, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Finance and England. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:43, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment It is daddy (Abdul Mannan Choudhury) who is the vice-chancellor. The article was created in good faith, but has subsequently attracted unwelcome editing from single purpose accounts that appear to have a close connection to him. If the article is kept, it will need watchers. --Worldbruce (talk) 19:19, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: He is not a highly-cited researcher, but after reading the article, it seems it passed GNG because he has coverage in Bangladeshi newspapers. Somajyoti ✉ 20:02, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. I had a look at the Bangladeshi coverage (Daily Star, Daily Sun etc) before making the nomination and it was generally routine announcements and brief mentions. However, there was a story published today where the article subject has a more significant role; whether this is enough to justify preserving the article, or if the info should instead be entered elsewhere, I'll leave for others to determine. I imagine this discussion will probably get relisted. Leonstojka (talk) 13:50, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:37, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:14, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Mehzeb Chowdhury

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

Other than the sheer obnoxiousness of this article (which is just one long advert about why the subject is the most awesome and interesting man in the world), I'm not totally convinced it meets the notability criteria. Reasons below:

Many of the sources are just passing mentions, and they aren't always high quality (e.g. a casting website is used to support the claim he is an actor/filmmaker)
A previous editor has marked the article as relying too heavily on sources that may be closely related to the subject. I happen to agree, and the generally sycophantic nature of these articles is off-putting and undermines the case for notability (given his father is a prominent journalist, I wonder if he has some connections with The Daily Star, which is one of the main sources)
The big notability claim is his association with MABMAT, and while that is notable, I'm not sure it justifies Chowdhury having an article to himself. Furthermore, this article seems to credit Chowdhury as the sole inventor, whereas The Times was more balanced, indicating he led a team at Durham University that developed it [9]
As a researcher he has a low h-index [10]
An excessive number of claims rely on primary sources. A few claims aren't even verified (e.g. that he worked for Goal.com as a correspondent) Leonstojka (talk) 18:35, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Leonstojka (talk) 18:35, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bangladesh-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 18:41, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Authors, Journalism, Law, Social science, and England. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:50, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep (creator) The nomination is strictly reliant on issues regarding the article. Issues regarding an article can be raised in its talk page or Wikiprojects' talk pages (I do agree it needs some touch, and I'm willing to do them once able, but that's irrelevant to an article's notability).
Just because an article is not up to the mark on some aspects, it does not become non-notable. Many of the sources are just passing mentions- not every source of an article need to be of high quality or of depth. An article fo shizz will contain many sources that might just well be passing mentions, supporting the asserted claims.
There exist several sources (in Bengali as well) in and out of the article that definitely speak volume for this person's notability. X (talk) 21:05, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment 'An article fo shizz will contain many sources that might just well be passing mentions, supporting the asserted claims' – Sure, but if we're establishing general notability it is best to have more than passing mentions, because lots of people are sometimes contacted by the media to provide comment for stories. I also have concerns about the promotional nature of some of the Bangladeshi sources (e.g. this one), which read like adulatory press releases. Leonstojka (talk) 13:59, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - The article has enough RS about the subject (Wired, Digital trends, HuffPost, The Times) to pass WP:NBIO. — Itzcuauhtli11 (talk) 02:54, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment There are more features that are not cited in the article as well, such as this from Ice Today. There's coverage in Bengali too, with TV appearances, features in reputed mags such as The Diplomat and Newsweek where he is introduced as an expert. Overall, why'd a non-notable person get recurrent coverage throughout the years from big pubs. X (talk) 06:00, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Xoak is right. Somajyoti ✉ 20:04, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:38, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Notability is clear by the sources. Mifflefunt 03:47, 16 May 2025 (UTC) Striking !vote of blocked account who was here just to spam porn sites. MarioGom (talk) 16:34, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Which sources establish notability under WP:GNG? Is it this one from Business Standard? what else? I see many articles written by the subject, but I don't see reliable, independent, secondary sources with significant coverage. — 🌊PacificDepths (talk) 08:54, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The article has refs from Wired, Digital trends, HuffPost and The Times, which are independent RS. — Itzcuauhtli11 (talk) 17:34, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
No, the articles in The Times and Wired use Chowdhury as a source (as in "Chowdhury says", "he believes", "he told", "according to him"). What he says is not independent of him. Similarly, Digital Trends is an interview with him, so not independent of him. If they consulted any other sources, they don't say so. HuffPost does not contain significant coverage of him. None of these four do anything to help establish notability. --Worldbruce (talk) 02:42, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Worldbruce, These 4 aren't the only sources. Many sources exist about this individual (see the aforementioned points). A non-notable person does not get recurrent media coverage throughout the years (it may well be interviews, passing mentions, anything; he does have sig in-depth cov as well for the record). X (talk) 06:39, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Attempt at making a source assessment table. — 🌊PacificDepths (talk) 08:53, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Source assessment table prepared by User:PacificDepths
Source	Independent?	Reliable?	Significant coverage?	Count source toward GNG?
Ice Today https://icetoday.net/2024/03/building-blockbusters/	~ Not sure how to rate independence.	~ Not sure on reliability of this.	700 words about subject	~ Partial
Business Standard https://www.tbsnews.net/features/pursuit/he-modernised-crime-scene-investigation-making-movies-and-music-along-way-487946	~ Not sure how to rate independence: asked in Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard#c-ActivelyDisinterested-20250516114100-PacificDepths-20250516083000	~ Not sure on reliability of this. Promotional?	Entire article is about subject.	~ Partial
Daily Star https://www.thedailystar.net/entertainment/tv-film/news/mehzeb-chowdhury-pioneer-criminology-savant-films-3147896	~ Some interview quotes. Not sure how to rate independence.	~ Not sure on reliability of this. Promotional?	Entire article is about subject.	~ Partial
Prothom Alo https://www.prothomalo.com/lifestyle/5uuxkcz9qu	~ Some interview quotes. Not sure how to rate independence.	~ Not sure on reliability of this. Promotional?	Entire article is about subject.	~ Partial
The Diplomat https://thediplomat.com/2024/08/can-the-bangladesh-police-recover/	Mostly an interview, primary source material	~ unknown	One sentence description of subject	✘ No
Newsweek https://www.newsweek.com/body-farms-decomposing-bodies-forensic-science-murder-1798397	Mostly an interview, primary source material	~ Treat case by case basis per WP:NEWSWEEK	one sentence description and quote	✘ No
Jamuna TV Plus Interview https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I8x8r90VZE4	Interview: Primary source	~		✘ No
Wired https://www.wired.com/story/crime-scene-technology/	Interview		Little information about the subject	✘ No
The Times: "Robots will create virtual crime scenes for juries"	Primary source		One sentence about the subject	✘ No
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{source assess table}}.

@PacificDepths Simply discarding sources labeled as "interviews" is flawed. These are features that include quotations and interview segments, as features inherently contain such elements. You cannot broadly dismiss them by merely labeling them as interviews. Claiming they "feel promotional" is your subjective opinion (these features have proper bylines and are not promo pieces, if so, they'd have been designated as such from these reputed pubs). Overall, I strongly disagree with this source analysis table. Additionally, several Bengali news sources, TV appearances, and passing mentions in reputable publications recognize him as a notable person or expert. Collectively, these demonstrate his notability. GNG is fo shizzle met here. X (talk) 10:12, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
And by the way, common sense should prevail. The newsweek and diplomat sources were mentioned to demonstrate a point that this person also gets called out for their expert opinion, assessing and labeling these 2 as "One sentence description of subject" is utterly asinine, like of course these are passing mentions. And as I stated earlier, not every source of an article need to be entirely about the subject or of depth. An article will contain many sources that might just well be passing mentions, supporting the asserted claims. X (talk) 10:26, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I've re-ordered the sources and edited some. I'm not sure how to judge Business Standard, Daily Star, ICE Today. I don't think The Times should demonstrate notability. — 🌊PacificDepths (talk) 05:18, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@PacificDepths, and those who are unfamiliar, TBS, DS, Prothom Alo, Ice Today, these all are reputed and generally deemed reliable publications. X (talk) 07:02, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: While numerically, there are more editors arguing to Keep this article I don't find their arguments compelling. We need more editors reviewing and commenting on the source analysis which is a strong argument for Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:55, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Brunei

Bruneian–Igan War

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

Contested Prod without improvement. Other than the single reference listed, searches turned up zero in-depth coverage of this event. Searches in A History of Brunei by Graham Saunders did not even see a mention of it. Similarly, nothing was mentioned in Brunei - History, Islam, Society and Contemporary Issues. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 09:29, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, History, Military, and Brunei. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 09:36, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Problem is, sources about this war in specifically is rare Syazwi Irfan (talk) 13:08, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:20, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Agent 007 (talk) 15:06, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete a newspaper column in a short-lived publication isn’t solid enough sourcing for an article about an alleged war. Mccapra (talk) 19:18, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Cambodia

China

SweetSpecter

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

Fails WP:NOTNEWSPAPER, WP:EVENT and WP:PERP. Clarityfiend (talk) 08:55, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Crime and China. Shellwood (talk) 09:08, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Computing, and Internet. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:43, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wang Xiaolong (coast guard)

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

Typical case of WP:1E; otherwise non-notable. To be awarded bravery medals etc posthumously by the state doesn't change that. Schwede 66 00:40, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Military, Police, and China. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:52, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: No other publicly available case of Chinese coast guardsmen(To be exact, the post-2013 chinese coast guard, not the pre-2013 border defense coast guard with the same english name that currently lacks an article) dying in the line of duty. Also had significant coverage. Thehistorianisaac (talk) 00:54, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:1E. - Amigao (talk) 02:04, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Even though the subject is no longer alive, please see Wikipedia:What BLP1E is not. The AFD fails both criteria 2 and 3. Thehistorianisaac (talk) 03:54, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I see this in a situation similar to the Yang Jia article(except the roles are reversed):

Both are notable mainly due to one event, and both of the articles mainly focus on the people themselves because most of the media coverage focused on the person.

I am open to renaming it to "Death of Wang Xiaolong" instead of deletion, though most of the coverage on him focuses on his entire career and the subject himself Thehistorianisaac (talk) 12:27, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - clearly WP:1E. WP:NOTBLP1E supports deletion as (1) subject only notable for a single event, (2) was low profile outside this event, and (3) the event was not significant and Wang's role was neither substantial nor well documented. I'd normally say keep due to receiving a significant honor, but it doesn't look like it was awarded for personal achievements. CohenTheBohemian (talk) 14:35, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note:

This is the first publicly avaliable case since 2013 of a coast guardsman getting killed in action. Additionally, this was highly documented in Chinese media, particularly southern china. Thehistorianisaac (talk) 23:54, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep just rename. WP:1 says the rule is to cover the event, and so not to have another article. We do not have another article on the event. Just put "death of" in front of the title. PARAKANYAA (talk) 23:34, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I would also agree, but as stated above, this is sort of a similar situation to how we have the article named Yang Jia but not "2008 Zhabei attacks", since a lot of media attention was also about the subject himself. Thehistorianisaac (talk) 23:56, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yao Yuanjun

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

Typical case of WP:1E; otherwise non-notable. Schwede 66 00:36, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and China. Schwede 66 00:36, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Event was highly covered and also pretty notable thanks to the Police dog. Subject was notable both in 2011(when he died) and 2021 (when the video of his police dog came out). Thehistorianisaac (talk) 00:44, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:1E. - Amigao (talk) 01:30, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Military and Police. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:52, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep until we have an article about the event. Or just add "Death of" to the title. WP:BIO1E does not suggest deletion, it suggests renaming or merging. We could add "death of" to the title.

What 1E says is this: 'When an individual is significant for their role in a single event, it may be unclear whether an article should be written about the individual, the event or both. In considering whether to create separate articles, the degree of significance of the event itself and of the individual's role within it should both be considered. The general rule is to cover the event, not the person. However, if media coverage of both the event and the individual's role grow larger, separate articles may become justified. ... Another issue arises when an individual plays a major role in a minor event. In this case, it is not generally appropriate to have separate articles on the person and the event. Generally in this case, the name of the person should redirect to the article on the incident, especially if the individual is only notable for that incident and it is all that the person is associated with in the source coverage.'

Nowhere here suggests deletion. PARAKANYAA (talk) 03:11, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I would also support this, however the subject is also notable in the aspect of the story about his police dog Thehistorianisaac (talk) 03:26, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Isn't that also kind of about the event though? I oppose deletion in any case. PARAKANYAA (talk) 03:27, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with your opinion, but the subject gained significant coverage in two separate events which are interlinked:

In 2011 when he was killed in action(now, this itself would not guarantee notability, but it shows he has been covered for multiple events)
In 2021 when the CCTV-7 video went viral of his police dog waiting for him.

Either way, I would support keeping the article. Thehistorianisaac (talk) 04:03, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. PARAKANYAA (talk) 03:12, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep but also support changing the title to include "Death of ...." as this person appears to be primarily notable for the manner of his death. Also the behaviour of his police dog appears notable because of his death and contributes to persistent coverage of the death. As already observed, WP:BIO1E is more about what to write the article about and the article should be about the event, not the person. The article cites a dozen sources, although all are in Chinese. - Cameron Dewe (talk) 09:00, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

List of victims of the 2015 Tianjin explosions

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

A sad event, but the victims aren't notable. Fram (talk) 17:27, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Lists of people, Events, and China. Fram (talk) 17:27, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: It's a rather huge event(Compared to 911 on some occasions), and victims lists are pretty common on the article themselves, just that the article itself likely cannot fit the people. Now, I understand Wikipedia:Other stuff exists, but I would say this is about as notable as Lists of victims of the September 11 attacks. Additionally, this list sort of already exists on List of People's Armed Police personnel killed in the line of duty#2010s, and among the casualties is the former deputy chief of the TEDA zone fire brigade.

Additionally, more secondary sources will likely come soon to increase notability, this article was sort of rushed a little bit, as I originally intended for this to simply be a section in the 2015 Tianjin Explosions article. Thehistorianisaac (talk) 17:43, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I just don´t get the logic. We don´t list the victims for small accidents, as these normally don´t have an article for the event. We don´t lust the victims of truly large events (war, famine, natural disasters) as there are too many, it would be an indiscriminate list, WP:NOTMEMORIAL, take your pick... But for a small group of intermediate events we suddenly have articles to list the victims, even though they aren´t really any different from all these others. Seems completely arbitrary. Fram (talk) 18:07, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per Thehistorianisaac ꧁Zanahary꧂ 17:48, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: I am reluctant to delete any topic that is the subject of an article in a peer-reviewed academic journal. Лисан аль-Гаиб (talk) 19:25, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Concur with Fram. Event is notable as major industrial accident. Individual casualties are not, unless by some other criteria and those can be included/summarized in the relevant section of the event article. Notable findings from the Chinese Journal of Traumatology source can be added to the main event article; right now it's just being used to verify casualty statistics. It's really stretching to claim that this event is comparable to 9/11; nothing of the sort is mentioned in the event article, and I think it's pretty safe to say this industrial accident was not a major geopolitical event with commensurate global effects lasting decades (and ongoing?) - RovingPersonalityConstruct (talk, contribs) 21:45, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

WP:BLUDGEON

The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

@Fram@RovingPersonalityConstruct

I propose a third solution. Of course, I still would prefer to keep the article, however it is possible this could simply be merged back to the original article, whether it be purely the statistics table or the list itself. Thehistorianisaac (talk) 00:08, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
A 4th possible solution:

I could possibly expand the article to be more similar to Casualties of the September 11 attacks instead of Lists of victims of the September 11 attacks and include information on stuff like initial disaster relief(which has gained tonnes of coverage, thanks to the actions of the 8th street company) and make the article notable, while keeping the list itself Thehistorianisaac (talk) 00:19, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Additionally, this could also include related things(who all were heavily covered) like an alleged higher casualty count, political discussion about the police and volunteer firefighters being technically private police and originally being ineligible for certain awards etc.

This was originally how I planned to do the list, though it got AfD'ed before I managed to fully write it Thehistorianisaac (talk) 00:41, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@RovingPersonalityConstruct For the comparison to 911, here is a source from Radio France Internationale citing bloomberg that many chinese compared the damage of the attack to the September 11 attacks (https://www.rfi.fr/cn/%E4%B8%AD%E5%9B%BD/20150820-%E7%BA%BD%E7%BA%A6%E6%B6%88%E9%98%B2%E9%98%9F%E4%B8%BA%E5%A4%A9%E6%B4%A5%E9%81%87%E9%9A%BE%E7%9A%84%E6%B6%88%E9%98%B2%E5%91%98%E9%99%8D%E5%8D%8A%E6%97%97%E8%87%B4%E5%93%80) Thehistorianisaac (talk) 05:16, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comparable as in similar event/scale/impact. As I said, industrial accident vs. major geopolitical event. That sort of thing requires more than the NYFD lowering its flag to half-mast like they did after 9/11. - RovingPersonalityConstruct (talk, contribs) 11:36, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per Fram and RovingPersonalityConstruct. Perhaps further detail of casualties can be added to the main article, but a stand-alone article is not warranted. - Amigao (talk) 01:34, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

WP:BLUDGEON

The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

@Fram@Amigao@RovingPersonalityConstruct

I think I need to clarify something:

The list of victims already existed to some extent on the List of People's Armed Police personnel killed in the line of duty#2010s, however that only included the active service firefighters. The "victims" section of 2015 Tianjin Explosions originally linked to this article.

The only thing the current article does is include volunteer firefighters, police, civilians and adding some context, such as regarding the 8th Street Company, the legal status of the private police and volunteer firefighters. The only thing this article really changes is that the info is easier to access and more complete. Thehistorianisaac (talk) 12:25, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Many of these "killed in the line of duty" articles (not just China, but e.g. the endless US articles) need deletion or severe pruning, but that's a separate discussion. Having part of this information available in another article is not really a reason to create or keep this one. Fram (talk) 12:28, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I do not think the killed in the line of duty articles should be deleted or pruned as line of duty deaths often receive significant coverage and are much-discussed social topics whether in USA or china, in fact many of them need significant expansions; But yeah that's another topic.

Many topics related to Tianjin explosions casualties, as said above, did gain huge coverage by Chinese and foreign media, such as said above, the legal status and eligability for rewards of some of the firefighters and police. Many casualty related topics do have notability but not enough to have their own articles, so I put them here.

I think a victims list is pretty reasonable to include in an article like this, and I really hate to be the WP:OTHERSTUFF guy, but aren't we ignoring the fact that the September 11 attacks have a total of 3 lists + a casualty article? Yes, they are different in nature, but I really need to point out the inconsistencies here.

As stated before, victims lists are also pretty common overall. I think at most this article can simply be merged back to the original. Thehistorianisaac (talk) 14:03, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: The original article was pretty much just rushed, currently it has more content and will likely be further expanded. Thehistorianisaac (talk) 4:07, 22 May 2025 (UTC)

Delete Per WP:NOPAGE. No independent notability. There's nothing in this article that can't be merged into the parent—if it's not there already. The accident was the notable thing; a list of unfortunates whom it killed is not. It also verges on WP:NOTMEMORIAL. —Fortuna, imperatrix 13:13, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

WP:BLUDGEON
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
Regarding WP:NOTMEMORIAL, I think it has been pretty normal to include victims of crimes(just see serial killers); For merging, this actually was originally meant to be part of the parent article, but this would probably be way too long. Thehistorianisaac (talk) 13:22, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Thehistorianisaac: You have replied to every delete !vote in this dscussion. Indeed, you've contributed 50% of the edits to this page on your own. Please don't do that, it's considered WP:BLUDGEONing. You've made your points—several times now—and repetition is unhelpful. I suggest you step back and let uninvolved editors make their own minds up (which they will anyway!). Cheers, —Fortuna, imperatrix 14:17, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. We have an independent, reliable source that discusses these people as a group, so WP:NLIST is met. Looking at the article, we have [11][12][13][14]. Given NLIST is for "Stand-alone lists", I read it as superseding NOPAGE; either way, none of the three bolded bullet points under NOPAGE apply here. We have plenty of sources and discussing this topic at length in the main article would be undue.

On previous arguments for deletion: 1. The victims do not have to be notable for the list topic to be (WP:NLISTITEM). 2. The significance of the event does not matter in deciding notability or suitability of a stand-alone list. Neither do comparisons to other events. Toadspike [Talk] 08:40, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - I agree. BangladeshiEditorInSylhet (talk) 11:25, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per Nom. Although we all (or most) sympathize with victims creating a memorial is supposed to be among What Wikipedia is not. See: Wikipedia:Victim lists. There is apparently a source that names the victims. List the number of victims and link to the list. -- Otr500 (talk) 05:34, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

WP:BLUDGEON
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
This is not soley a victims list, but also includes information related to casualties during the explosions. Additionally, some of the casualties are notable(but have no wikipedia article and likely will not have one), such as as a deputy fire chief and a deputy police chief. Thehistorianisaac (talk) 08:12, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Deng Xiaolan

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

Questionable notability. This article should be moved to draft. Amigao (talk) 22:13, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Women, Music, Politics, Olympics, and China. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 23:12, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, the biography is rather comprehensive, and there exists a comparable article on the Chinese Wikipedia. I have incorporated more sources and information to satisfy the inclusion criteria. TinaLees-Jones (talk) 23:27, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge This seems like WP:MILL CCP member with a bit of propaganda press. Adding some of that detail to her father's (much more notable person) page would be DUE. I think the press she does get is more because her father was so notable. For Americans this would be like having a biography for Henry Luce III. Czarking0 (talk) 03:06, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@The Account 2: I'll stop messaging you if it is too much but I thought you might like to look at this one. Czarking0 (talk) 02:44, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Haha don't worry, it's ok. Hmm, well I'm not really an expert on Wikipedia's inclusion criteria but the question seems to be what makes her independently notable? Is there enough coverage by reliable sources? The Account 2 (talk) 10:18, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep There is enough coverage of her to meet WP:GNG. DaffodilOcean (talk) 13:22, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, seems to meet WP:GNG based on the sources in the article. —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 13:33, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Chris Lonsdale (entrepreneur)

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

Only 1 article links to this. Seems rather promotional. Marked for COI concerns noting edits from this editor. Fails WP:BIO. LibStar (talk) 06:05, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Language, China, Hong Kong, and New Zealand. LibStar (talk) 06:05, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, per NOM. Appears promotional, with little to justify an article. Even with the terribly low bar for WP:GNG, this article appears to fail. DerbyCountyinNZ ^{(Talk Contribs)} 06:54, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Businesspeople, and Psychology. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 07:01, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - we are not LinkedIn. Editors who work for the subject of an article should refrain from editing their bosses' page. Bearian (talk) 23:03, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Atul (company)

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

Fails WP:CORP and WP:GNG, no significant independent coverage in reliable sources & most important article is promotional in tone. Chronos.Zx (talk) 02:07, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Business, China, United Arab Emirates, India, Gujarat, Brazil, and United States of America. Chronos.Zx (talk) 02:07, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Keep -Atul is a noted company of India founded in 1947 , listed both on National Stock Exchange and Bombay Stock Exchange [15] with Stock Price of Rs 6773/-, Please do WP:BEFORE before nominating and read WP:DEL before nominating articles for deletion Jethwarp (talk) 03:23, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It seems that listed companies on major stock exchanges are not immediately presumed notable and still require sources to demonstrate notability (see WP:LISTED), but I would be very surprised if this one is not notable. The problem is that when I try to search for sources, the results are clogged by a huge amount of routine discussion of this company's stock price. Might count as an indicator of notability, though. Toadspike [Talk] 18:58, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The company passes both WP:CORP and WP:GNG , so the nominator rationale for deletion does not hold here. He says no significant independent coverage in reliable sources which is not true. 03:56, 13 May 2025 (UTC) Jethwarp (talk) 03:56, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
independent sources is still required per WP:CORP and WP:GNG, I conducted a WP:BEFORE search and found primarily routine financial reports like stock price updates, which do not meet WP:CORPDEPTH for significant coverage. Chronos.Zx (talk) 11:17, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Just would like to add that WP:CORPDEPTH argument does not hold here, there are substantial coverage in books and news media about Atul Limited. It is not a small a medium sized company , it is a large multi specialty chemicals manufacturing conglomerate which has spread its wings across the globe in these 8 decades. Also there is nothing promotional in the article, everything mentioned is a fact. The Lalbhai group are one of the most low-profile people, who hold highest esteem for their integrity, never involved in any controversy and known for their phinlantrohic activities also never seeking media attention and limelight. I have added many citations and expanded the article in last few days. Although I had removed promotional tag, it was added back without mentioning which part of article is promotion. It's current market cap is 19,995 crores, which is 199950 Millions. Jethwarp (talk) 03:36, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – robertsky (talk) 04:55, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep This article contains substantial coverage, as I can observe. This is unequivocally a Keep. AndySailz (talk) 12:23, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Based on mentioned references in the article which is generally a reliable and independent references. Fade258 (talk) 08:39, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The references cited are generally reliable and independent. Notability is not questionable. J. P. Fridrich (talk) 11:54, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: article has good reference & coverage. Ogambo obmagom (talk) 13:17, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tianjin Fourth Central Hospital

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

Similar to the case of Tianjin University of Traditional Chinese Medicine First Affiliated Hospital, this hospital also appears to fail WP:GNG. GTrang (talk) 03:58, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Architecture, Medicine, and China. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:16, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. There is no way a 95-year-old, 880-bed hospital affiliated to (possibly) the best medical university in China is not notable. I'm not going to do a proper source search just this moment, but I will provide references for my claims: [16][17]. Toadspike [Talk] 00:02, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep.This hospital is classified as a Grade A Tertiary Hospital, which means it is one of the highest-level hospitals officially accredited by the Chinese government. It is a non-profit public institution, not commercially operated, and treats tens of thousands of patients annually. Frankly speaking, one reason I focus on writing entries about large public hospitals is to help prevent misleading commercial promotion by smaller private hospitals. The references cited are based on the most authoritative and professional data sources available regarding local healthcare conditions. Has the proposer fulfilled their responsibility in reviewing this content seriously? Have they conducted any academic searches or reviewed relevant literature? I was able to retrieve numerous academic papers through Google Scholar. Or is the proposer simply speculating based on personal unfamiliarity? Such an attitude is neither friendly nor consistent with the rigor and responsibility that this task requires.--Amazingloong (talk) 15:48, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Cinder painter (talk) 06:21, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: GTrang What's your assessment of the existing Chinese sources available in Google, Google News, Google Books, for example? Any other databases you searched? --MarioGom (talk) 22:43, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 19:40, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Tons of sourcing over in GScholar, [18], [19] deal with the hospital. These are studies of diseases taking place within the patient population of the hospital [20], [21]. Last two might be considered primary, but they help show the importance of the hospital. Oaktree b (talk) 20:02, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep but the article desperately needs improvement in the form of better sourcing. SportingFlyer T·C 23:48, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The amount of WP:RS WP:SIGCOV is sufficient to meet WP:GNG WP:NOTABILITY requirements for inclusion. The nature of coverage passes the WP:SIGCOV threshold, so the case cannot be made that coverage is WP:TRIVIAL or WP:ROUTINE, since it is significant and demonstrates WP:IMPACT, therefore justifying a standalone article. I also find that available sources are reliable and independent, removing any concerns about WP:PROMO. Since the subject is notable, WP:NOTABILITY criteria per WP:GNG are met. Additionally, there is plenty of SIGCOV to demonstrate the subject’s notability in a manner that satisfies the relevant guidelines for the subject. ZachH007 (talk) 00:05, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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

The result was delete‎. Star Mississippi 16:11, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Teng Lin

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

This fails WP:NACTOR. All sources are none WP:RS Ednabrenze (talk) 07:30, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

i've add links to biographical data, the sources can only be found in his own social media livestream as short drama actors info are in general lacking online. I've included the link and even the timestamp at which he mentioned those biographical data Laiwingnang (talk) 10:07, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers and China. Shellwood (talk) 11:31, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

also want to mention such info are usually hard to come by because short drama actors are not signed to any publicist or angecies..so they don't have staff to register them with movie databases, fans have to get that info from their livestreams, from social media, but fact is short vertical dramas are highly popular in china with hundreds of millions views/social media engagement and are now being seen by millions on youtube/tiktok internationally through many drama apps, they are more relevant than many mainstream actors from china. Laiwingnang (talk) 13:19, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

added a reference for his short dramas, they are listed in a WeChat application named WeTrue. It's a market data research company used by short drama industry insiders...but it is a built in app inside china's wechat and requires a wechat app installation to access the data. A link to their www feed page is added, any link on that page will give you a link to the wetrue application, upon clicking the application link will launch the data application on wechat. Laiwingnang (talk) 10:11, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Has he been profiled in any reliable sources such as newspapers or magazines? Cunard (talk) 23:23, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per the lack of significant coverage in reliable sources. I did not find significant coverage in my searches for sources. I found a passing mention here and a self-published source here. Teng Lin (Chinese: 滕林) does not meet Wikipedia:Notability (people)#Basic criteria. Cunard (talk) 23:23, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
the industry used wechat app wetrue is a more reliable source than the ones you mentioned, it's the imdb for chinese short dramas. What you referenced are mainstream news outlet paid to write articles for agencies to hype up their stars. It's pay per play. Fact is Teng Lin is at 200k followers on china's douyin with an total of over 3 million likes and many chart topping popular short drama just in the last 12 months, many of the c-list musicians, actors who doesn't have a hit with next to no followers get to have a wikipage because their agency pumps articles about them and register them with all types of websites. China isn't America, they are not stuck in the www page age, apps like weTrue or dataeye are used by millions of drama fans and industry insiders for chart data and new releases. They are more reliable sources even if they aren't through http. They don't rely on www page that probably gets like 50 clicks. That's really an American thing. Laiwingnang (talk) 09:40, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

also want to mention, his short film trailers have millions of views on tiktok...he's not only relevant within, china, but also internationally. His recent dramas are getting subbed by kalostv, reelflicks, flicksreel and other drama apps and many are amongst the most watched short dramas internationally. Alot of activities are happening on apps , www news site gatekeeping pay per play is 2010s. Laiwingnang (talk) 09:59, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

spotify is on app, social media is on apps, netflix in on apps, in 2025, most of what the public consume is on apps, so should short drama apps like wetrue or dataeye be considered as legit sources as well Laiwingnang (talk) 10:04, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

https://www.52hrtt.com/ey/n/w/info/G1732591212530

if you want a www article, here's one...the first short drama awards and Teng Lin won one of the 3 actor awards. He's one of the top short drama actors , doesn't make him less relevant just because he doesn't have an agency to pay for written articles Laiwingnang (talk) 11:22, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

he's also on douban, china's imdb ....so googling might not show you results, but it's there

https://movie.douban.com/celebrity/1563988/movies?sortby=time&format=pic&role=A1 Laiwingnang (talk) 23:28, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

here's another stock exchange listed entertainment info company https://ir-en.maoyan.com/ that has teng lin listed https://m.maoyan.com/asgard/celebrity/3071840

so it's not true that his info isn't on the internet, it's google's algo that isn't giving search results Laiwingnang (talk) 14:26, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This 52hrtt.com link mentions Teng Lin (Chinese: 滕林) on one line. I still don't see enough "significant coverage" in reliable sources to establish notability under Wikipedia's guidelines. Cunard (talk) 17:52, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
https://k.sina.com.cn/article_2345992875_8bd502ab00101fg96.html

here's a sina article about him ...

This is basically another promo article paid by the film company, he refuses to talk about his person life and family and he is not signed to any agency, so these types of promo articles only mention him because he's involved in their projects. Laiwingnang (talk) 21:53, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This is a good find. I didn't find any evidence that the article was paid for by the film company. If it was paid for by the film company, then it wouldn't be considered an independent source so would not contribute to establishing notability. I agree that the article has limited biographical coverage about him as it's focused primarily on his appearance in the short drama and how netizens responded to that. Are there any other reliable sources like this that discuss him? Cunard (talk) 05:57, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
here's an article that mentioned another of him and his drama topping the charts...but not focused on him

https://www.toutiao.com/article/7458155280858923571/?wid=1747493850370

he's an article that mentioned many of his dramas and is full of pictures of him, but only mention his roles, but not the actor's name

https://k.sina.com.cn/article_5953466483_162dab07301901ce3q.html?from=ent&subch=oent

here's one where his female costar was interviewed and there's a mention of him, but as he doesn't do interviews and doesn't have an agent to force him to do publicity work. it's really hard to get any articles about him specifically and even when they write an article about him like in the article i provided earlier, he did not participate

https://news.sina.cn/gn/2025-01-26/detail-inehhkse0672369.d.html?from=wap Laiwingnang (talk) 16:08, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for providing these sources. I agree with your assessment that the first and third sources provide passing mentions of him, while the second source mentions only his role but not his name. Cunard (talk) 08:07, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
while him and his costar are on the same level of popularity, both around the same number of followers on social media, his frequent costar 鄔倩 has alot of articles online and willing to talk about her personal life and reveal her professional life. Unfortunately, Teng Lin is a private person who never deals with the press, so articles about him is limited. Laiwingnang (talk) 16:48, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – robertsky (talk) 19:20, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Benison (Beni · talk) 01:31, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete since it does not look like much coverage to establish a stand alone page. Lacks clear notability imo. Ramos1990 (talk) 01:43, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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

Georgia

Psychonaut 4

AfDs for this article:

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

Fails WP:BAND, was unable to find any form of significant for inclusion. They also seem to have been nominated and deleted previously, and judging from the nomination that time, there doesnt seem to much of an improvement this time around. No charting album, not on a notable label, no inclusion in any big publication. In fact most of their 'press' seems to just come from underground metal online tabloids like Metal Injection and MetalSucks, like many others of this bands size. Searching their name just brings up the usual for underground metal acts such as LastFM or Sputnikmusic mostly. Lil Happy Lil Sad ^:): 05:08, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 09:38, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Georgia (country)-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 09:39, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep There is plenty of coverage. Not everything, especially for bands from smaller countries will be instantly on the front of major news outlets, which does not discredit their notability. The majority of the coverage on them has been published since the first deletion as well. Seacactus 13 (talk) 04:10, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment so you edited the page since the delete nomination with this edit with the summary "Maybe actually look past page 1 of Google search results". What am I missing here? Obscure webzines/blogs in Italian and Danish? That's the big comeback with verifiable sources? User-created blogs and webzines are generally not reliable sources. You claim "There is plenty of coverage. Not everything, especially for bands from smaller countries will be instantly on the front of major news outlets, which does not discredit their notability", which is fine when it comes to small metal bands due to their appearances on verifiable publications like Revolver or Kerrang etc. yet I still dont see any noteworthy sources like those. All that's mostly used on the article are metal webzines, which anyone can create and maintain - and are generally disallowed per wp:USERG — Lil Happy Lil Sad ^:): 06:58, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Benison (Beni · talk) 06:40, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: The page has three+ sources with SIGCOV. One of them (metal.de) is for sure reliable per wp:A/S. The rest doesn't raise any apparent problems. —LastJabberwocky (Rrarr) 06:39, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I am not seeing significant coverage of this group. Does not meet WP:BAND. Seeing that it was deleted in the last AFD, it does not look like it improved much this second time in terms of notability. Ramos1990 (talk) 04:36, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Specific analysis of the available source material would be quite helpful.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 20:04, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The Metal.de and the Osservatorio Balcani e Caucaso Transeuropa focus on the article subject in depth and therefore both sources fulfill criteria 1 of WP:BAND: Has been the subject of multiple, non-trivial, published works appearing in sources that are reliable, not self-published, and are independent of the musician or ensemble itself. This criterion includes published works in all forms, such as newspaper articles, books, magazine articles, online versions of print media, and television documentaries. The nominator has described these sources as self-published "blogs", but that is simply not accurate. Both sources are online independent news publishers, with an editor in chief and staff writers, etc, as opposed to blogs written by a single author - under WP:BAND, what constitutes a "published work" is deliberately broad. Flip^and Flopped ㋡ 20:43, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: A final relist for a clear consensus. Hoping to have any further arguments, favor/opposition to above analysis discussed here, and other suggestions also welcome.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HilssaMansen19 (talk) 21:49, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion

Hong Kong related deletions

Sleek Flow

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

Article is about a startup that fails to meet the relevant notability guidelines (WP:NCORP). There aren't sources that discusses the subject in depth, and the sources are mostly sponsored, routine announcements of raisings etc..., and talk about the founder other than the business itself. Also note that this source, while it meets WP:SIGCOV, it might also be sponsored by the way. ToadetteEdit (7M articles) 15:39, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and Hong Kong. Shellwood (talk) 15:50, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Sources fail WP:ORGCRIT, including the one listed in Hotelier which is unbylined and likely churnalism or sponsored. --CNMall41 (talk) 17:31, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 23:25, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Although the company is not very old, but it has garnered significant press in several reputable sources. Complies with WP:NCORP. SailabK (talk) 03:50, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Chris Lonsdale (entrepreneur)

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

Only 1 article links to this. Seems rather promotional. Marked for COI concerns noting edits from this editor. Fails WP:BIO. LibStar (talk) 06:05, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Language, China, Hong Kong, and New Zealand. LibStar (talk) 06:05, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, per NOM. Appears promotional, with little to justify an article. Even with the terribly low bar for WP:GNG, this article appears to fail. DerbyCountyinNZ ^{(Talk Contribs)} 06:54, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Businesspeople, and Psychology. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 07:01, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - we are not LinkedIn. Editors who work for the subject of an article should refrain from editing their bosses' page. Bearian (talk) 23:03, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hong Kong Institute of Asia-Pacific Studies

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

Article is about a private academic/educational organization. There are only 3 sources: and all 3 are from the organization's own website.

Hence, no independent sources, therefore fails the WP:V and WP:Notability requirements.

Log says that an article of the same name was deleted in the past, but I cannot find that older AfD. Noleander (talk) 13:11, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This is a well-known independent institution in Hong Kong. Multiple local news agencies have reported findings of such institute which they are well cited.

https://news.mingpao.com/pns/%E6%B8%AF%E8%81%9E/article/20250328/s00002/1743099198748/%E4%B8%AD%E5%A4%A7%E4%BA%9E%E5%A4%AA%E7%A0%94%E7%A9%B6%E6%89%80%E6%B0%91%E8%AA%BF-63-%E6%8C%87%E7%8F%BE%E9%9D%9E%E8%B2%B7%E6%A8%93%E6%99%82%E6%A9%9F-42-%E6%96%99%E4%BE%86%E5%B9%B4%E8%B7%8C%E5%83%B9

https://hk.on.cc/hk/bkn/cnt/news/20241111/mobile/bkn-20241111134821159-1111_00822_001.html

https://www.inmediahk.net/node/%E6%94%BF%E7%B6%93/%E3%80%90%E8%B2%A1%E6%94%BF%E9%A0%90%E7%AE%97%E6%A1%88%E3%80%91%E4%B8%AD%E5%A4%A7%E6%B0%91%E8%AA%BF%EF%BC%9A%E4%BA%94%E6%88%90%E5%8D%8A%E5%B8%82%E6%B0%91%E6%84%9F%E4%B8%8D%E6%BB%BF-%E6%BB%BF%E6%84%8F%E5%83%858%EF%BC%85

Articles from secondary sources on this institute include

https://baike.baidu.com/item/%E9%A6%99%E6%B8%AF%E4%BA%9A%E5%A4%AA%E7%A0%94%E7%A9%B6%E6%89%80/7260339

https://onthinktanks.org/think-tank/%E9%A6%99%E6%B8%AF%E4%BA%9E%E5%A4%AA%E7%A0%94%E7%A9%B6%E6%89%80/

Please let me know if you are unsatisfied with what I have provided and would like more or something else, thank you. Ilovefood123123 (talk) 15:00, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment The first three sources cite the organization's work without anything about the organization itself. The Baidu Baike entry is another online encyclopedia, and onthinktanks.org is a directory listing with content likely provided by the organization. Oblivy (talk) 23:07, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Cunard Hi there I’m not sure if you would have the time of doing so but could you please take a look and see if you could try finding related sources to this article, since you have similarly done so in the past. Thank you very much. Ilovefood123123 (talk) 12:21, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education, Schools, and Hong Kong. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 16:57, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This institute has been cited hundreds of times on Jstor. [22] Their polls are regularly covered in the news, e.g. SCMP: [23][24][25], NYT: [26][27][28][29]. They are also called variations like "the Institute of Asia-Pacific Studies at Chinese University" or "Hong Kong Institute of Asia Pacific Studies" (no hyphen) or the abbreviated "HKIAPS". I haven't found sigcov yet but I am not sure if meeting the GNG is required here; similar to our standards for academics and newspapers, I think the bar should be lower here. Toadspike [Talk] 07:22, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Btw, the previous deletion was a speedy under WP:A7 from 15 years ago. [30] There was no AfD and that speedy deletion, being a content issue and not a notability issue, should have no bearing on the outcome of this discussion. Toadspike [Talk] 13:40, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Agent 007 (talk) 15:06, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ho Yi

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

Little established notability; sparse amount of sources available online or offline while article used to have iMDb as most sources. Subject edited own article, which has not been properly maintained to denote his significance and notability to be kept as an article. MimirIsSmart (talk) 06:19, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers and Hong Kong. MimirIsSmart (talk) 06:19, 12 May 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. Ng, Hung 吳雄 (2015-07-14). "中學念本地左校黃浩義香港經歷文革" [Attended Local Leftist School in Secondary School: Wong Ho-yee Experienced Cultural Revolution in Hong Kong]. Hong Kong Economic Journal (in Chinese). Archived from the original on 2025-05-04. Retrieved 2025-05-04.
  The article notes: "香港「舞台劇之父」黃浩義長居上海，偶而回港為這片鄉土澆上一瓢清泉，其中一瓢是2013年8月拍成的電影《紅色的迴廊》（Red Passage）。奈何劇本早在2009年已寫好，先遇上資金、取景的困難，後遇上政治熱帶氣旋帶來的狂風暴雨，至今未有發行商願意放映。 ... 片中男主角從官校轉到左校，他就是黃浩義本人。... 結果，黃浩義去另一地方拍英國旗再把畫面合併。雖然拍攝在暑假進行，但傳媒竟找上門拜訪他。... 政治改變思想，思想改變命運，黃浩義中三就轉校，開涼茶舖的父親總算及時轉軚，才有了今天的舞台劇之父。"
  From Google Translate: "Hong Kong's 'Father of Stage Play' Wong Ho Yi has lived in Shanghai for a long time. He occasionally returns to Hong Kong to bring some fresh air to his hometown. One of his contributions was the movie 'Red Passage' which was made in August 2013. Unfortunately, the script was written as early as 2009, but it first encountered difficulties in funding and location selection, and then encountered the storm brought by the political tropical cyclone. So far, no distributor is willing to screen it. ... The protagonist in the film transferred from the official school to the left school, and he was Wong Ho Yi himself. ... As a result, Wong Ho Yi went to another place to take pictures of the British flag and then merged the images. Although the filming took place during the summer vacation, the media came to visit him. ... Politics changes thoughts, thoughts change destiny. Wong Ho Yi changed schools in Form 3, and his father, who ran a herbal tea shop, finally changed his mind in time, and he became the father of stage plays today."
2. Dong, Jin 董進 (2013-04-28). "香港舞台劇之父開創無厘頭風格后被周星馳借鑒" [Father of Hong Kong Stage Drama Pioneered Absurdist Style, Later Borrowed by Stephen Chow]. Chongqing Morning Post (in Chinese). Archived from the original on 2016-11-10. Retrieved 2025-05-04 – via People's Daily.
  The article notes: "黃浩義1983年在港創辦香港青年劇團，成為第一代專業搞戲劇的。... 作為導演，黃浩義執導了不少優秀的舞台劇，而作為演員，黃浩義除了參演眾多港台劇，還在多部好萊塢電影中擔任角色，與布拉德·彼特(《間諜游戲》)、皮爾斯·布魯斯南（《007之擇日而亡》）都對過戲。聊起在好萊塢拍戲經歷，黃浩義很有感觸。"
  From Google Translate: "Wong founded the Hong Kong Youth Theater Company in Hong Kong in 1983, becoming the first generation of professional theater practitioners. ... As a director, Wong has directed many outstanding stage plays, and as an actor, Wong has appeared in many Hong Kong and Taiwan dramas, and has also played roles in several Hollywood films, starring with Brad Pitt ("Spy Game") and Pierce Brosnan ("007's Death"). When he talked about his experience of filming in Hollywood, Wong was very touched."
3. Sek, Kei 石琪 (2019-11-17). "粗口和紅色迴廊" [Profanity and the Red Corridor]. Ming Pao (in Chinese). p. S5.
  The article notes: "大家於是提及香港劇場，卅多年前最早把粗口引進「大雅之堂」，開路先鋒是黃浩義，一九八六年把美國著名粗口劇《美國水牛》翻譯演出，改名《鉤心鬥角》，台上猛講粵語粗口，大受青年學生歡迎，紛紛起哄，創下場場數特多的紀錄。... 黃浩義在香港劇壇的創舉不少，移居英國及上海也在演藝界創造一些先例。其實二○一四年他自編自導了一部很特別的香港獨立片《紅色的迴廊》，以他本身的少年經歷，描述七十年代初一個男生，因父親愛國，送他入香港左派中學，該校追隨大陸文革作風，念《毛語錄》，忠字舞，批批跳鬥，很「恐怖」。"
  From Google Translate: "Everyone then mentioned Hong Kong theatre, which was the first to introduce swear words into the "classical arena" more than 30 years ago. The pioneer was Wong Ho Yi, who translated and performed the famous American swear play "American Buffalo" in 1986, renamed it "Intrigue", and used Cantonese swear words on stage, which was very popular among young students. They all cheered and set a record for the number of performances. ... Wong Hoyi has made many innovations in the Hong Kong theatre scene, and his move to the UK and Shanghai also created some precedents in the entertainment industry. In fact, in 2014, he wrote and directed a very special Hong Kong independent film "Red Corridor", which was based on his own teenage experience and described a boy in the early 1970s who was sent to a leftist middle school in Hong Kong because of his patriotic father. The school followed the style of the Cultural Revolution in mainland China, reading "Quotations from Chairman Mao", doing the loyalty dance, and dancing criticisms. It was very "scary"."
4. Sek, Kei 石琪 (2014-11-15). "入讀左校的日子" [The Days of Enrolling in the Leftist School]. Ming Pao (in Chinese). p. D5.
  The article notes: "在「香港亞洲影展」看了黃浩義自編自導自製新片《紅色的迴廊》。黃浩義是本港資深話劇人，最具爭議性是廿多年前自導自演《勾心鬥角》，即美國著名粗口劇《美國水牛》的粵語版，大講粵語粗口，多次重演都滿座，成為本港舞台爆粗的先驅。隨後他的獨立電影《雷雨》改編曹禺名劇，涉及性問題也有爭議，但票房失利。"
  From Google Translate: "I watched the new film "Red Corridor" written, directed and produced by Wong Hoyi at the "Hong Kong Asian Film Festival". Wong Hoyi is a senior dramatist in Hong Kong. His most controversial work is "Intrigue" which he directed and starred in more than 20 years ago. It is the Cantonese version of the famous American foul-mouthed play "American Buffalo". He used a lot of Cantonese foul language and the theaters were always full during many re-performances, making him a pioneer of swearing on the Hong Kong stage. His subsequent independent film Thunderstorm, adapted from Cao Yu's famous play, also controversially dealt with sexual issues, but failed at the box office."
There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow Wong Ho Yi (traditional Chinese: 黃浩義; simplified Chinese: 黄浩义) to pass Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline, which requires "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject".
Cunard (talk) 07:17, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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) 07:17, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – robertsky (talk) 14:42, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: per sources provided by Cunard; hopefully these references can be placed in the article during or following the discussion as right now there are still quite a few unreferenced passages. -- Recon rabbit 17:54, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Notable, but reads like a vanity piece, needs rewriting from scratch.♦ Dr. Blofeld 09:11, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

India

Please see: Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/India

Indonesia

Shania Yan

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

Subject doesn't meet WP:SINGER criteria. I cannot find multiple independent, credible sources on the web. I began trying to remove obviously-bad sources but reverted when I realized I would have stripped the article of basically all citations and I wasn't having luck finding better ones. The sources in the article appear to be promotional articles and almost all of them do not actually match the statements they're supporting:

Article Text	Source
Details about her family and early education remain private, as she prefers to keep her personal life out of the public eye	Blog post which does not match what it's supporting in the article, appears to be AI
Her content often draws inspiration from anime and video games like Genshin Impact, reflecting her personal interests	Blog post which does not match what it's supporting in the article, appears to be AI
"Her Instagram account, also under @shaniayanofc, has over 2 million followers, where she shares selfies and career-related content"	Two sources: beacons.ai marketing platform, and myCast which is user-generated content

I'm unable to find credible, independent sources in my Googling. The only thing that comes close is the paper listed as a source in the article. While articles generated through AI are not (to my knowledge) automatic candidates for AfD, it's still worth mentioning that the article itself appears to be mostly just that, and some of the sources' URLs show very clearly that the editor arrived there by ChatGPT (https://beacons.ai/i/blog/shania-yan-bio?utm_source=chatgpt.com). I don't believe this meets notability per WP:SINGER, and if it does meet notability, I'm not sure how we're going to replace the bad sources if independent, credible ones do not exist. —tony^{st (talk)} 18:41, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Bands and musicians, and Indonesia. —tony^{st (talk)} 18:41, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women and Internet. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:52, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Yes I agree that major revisions are needed in this article, but I definitely do think the subject of the article is notable. There is also a peer reviewed article on her song : https://jurnal.masoemuniversity.ac.id/index.php/englishpedagogy/article/view/677 Yes, most of the current content are unsourced because some are from primary sources, but those can be improved. Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 21:08, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Borobudur Vesak Lantern Festival

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

Completely LLM generated, WP:BLOWITUP would probably be the best course of action as I don't see any salvageable content. Laura240406 (talk) 18:21, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: the creator of the page was also blocked indefinitely Laura240406 (talk) 18:23, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Buddhism, and Indonesia. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 20:48, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Draftify: as a recent creation without inline sources, which would not have passed either AFC or NPP, this is a good candidate for draftification. MarioGom (talk) 18:02, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
it's completely written by AI though, that's why I suggested WP:TNT Laura240406 (talk) 19:05, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There's no policy prohibiting content written by AI though. Lack of sources, however, is a reason to draftify a new article. MarioGom (talk) 19:44, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect with a selective merge to Vesak. I don't see any need to have a poorly sourced and poorly written article about a holiday celebration for one site. Bearian (talk) 22:37, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Rachmat Harsono

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

Refs are run of the mill puff pieces, PR and business news. No indication of signifiance. Fails WP:SIGCOV, WP:BIO. scope_creep^Talk 20:13, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and Indonesia. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 21:22, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep Found another independent reference, but the article definitely needs some cleanup. It's worth giving it some time to see if anyone else might dig something up. If that isn't possible, deletion might make sense at that point. The article on the Bahasa Wikipedia does not appear to be much different.[31] Royal Autumn Crest (talk) 10:47, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yea. That refs is a profile. Its not a reliable source. Its more PR and more confirmation that he is non-notable. scope_creep^Talk 10:55, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:48, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP: TNT - puffery writing of a puff piece. Bearian (talk) 04:19, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment This might be the way to go. This article needs to be rewritten. Can it be rewritten to meet notability standards? Probably, but it remains to be seen. If starting over helps in that process, works for me. Royal Autumn Crest (talk) 18:04, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Bagus Ilham

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

Unable to find any coverage satisfying WP:BIO, although it's possible there's something in Indonesian that I'm missing. Player for a second-tier football club; sources are a database entry, a brief article mentioning a transfer, and an instagram post. — Moriwen (talk) 15:06, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Indonesia. — Moriwen (talk) 15:06, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Per nom. Svartner (talk) 16:11, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 18:43, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 18:48, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: With this, hoping for Engaging Discussion about sources and notability
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HilssaMansen19 (talk) 18:54, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Indonesia Proposed deletions

Flag of King Sisingamangaraja (via WP:PROD on 19 March 2025)

Japan

Dodô (footballer, born 1990)

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

Fails GNG and SPORTCRIT due to his career never getting off the ground, recording mere minutes of play in his many clubs, and lack of significant coverage. Geschichte (talk) 09:21, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, Japan, Portugal, and Brazil. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:35, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – He was runner-up in the J-League with Gamba Osaka, but I didn't find any WP:SIGCOV. Svartner (talk) 23:00, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Doda (footballer)

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

No usable sources (including ja:wiki) and not really anything resembling a claim to notability to meet either WP:GNG or WP:SPORTCRIT. No valid redirect target. Geschichte (talk) 09:19, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Brazil. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:34, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Japan and Greece. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:35, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – I didn't find anything about him even in databases. Svartner (talk) 22:59, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Takuma Nakajima

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

Previously deleted. No trace of notability, only 1 match on J League level. Geschichte (talk) 09:17, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Japan. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:34, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Fails in WP:GNG. Svartner (talk) 23:02, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Kei Sugimoto

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

Playing 16 football games in the J League system is not a strong claim to notability. The article would need several pieces of significant and independent coverage to meet WP:SPORTCRIT and WP:GNG, and has neither that nor a Japanese Wikipedia page. Geschichte (talk) 13:20, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 15:34, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 15:35, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 15:35, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Fails in WP:GNG. Svartner (talk) 00:34, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Jiro Hiratsuka

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

Playing 11 football games in the J League system is not a strong claim to notability. The article would need several pieces of significant and independent coverage to meet WP:SPORTCRIT and WP:GNG, and has neither. Geschichte (talk) 13:19, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 15:33, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 15:33, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 15:34, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Fails in WP:GNG. Svartner (talk) 23:09, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Masafumi Mizuki

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

Playing 20 football games in the J League system is not a strong claim to notability. The article would need several pieces of significant and independent coverage to meet WP:SPORTCRIT and WP:GNG, and seems to lack that. Geschichte (talk) 14:18, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 15:30, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 15:30, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 15:30, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Fails in WP:GNG. Svartner (talk) 00:36, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Criticism of Akira Kurosawa

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

This is a POV fork! TheLatinNerd (talk) 20:57, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 21:13, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The article under discussion deals with the reputation of Japanese filmmaker Akira Kurosawa, unarguably one of the most historically important film directors from any country who has ever lived. I created the article to demonstrate the fact, also unarguable, that due to his prominence, Kurosawa has attracted, in addition to enormous praise, a great deal of criticism, including from his own countrymen. These viewpoints are very important because they illuminate not only Kurosawa's work, but the public perception of that work, as well as the ways in which these negative reactions reflect the relevant cultures and time periods involved.

This article has existed for years and years, with a number of knowledgeable people contributing to it, so why is it now suddenly being challenged? Shouldn't there be a "statute of limitations" on such challenges, given the fact that this was created way back in 2010? Or perhaps the rules should be changed to require two or even three editors to nominate an article for deletion, to lessen the possibility of baseless attacks?

It's deeply ironic that the editor who recommended this article for deletion cited "POV" issues, given its origins. The main Kurosawa article contains a section, "Criticism," about negative views of the filmmaker, which I included precisely to maintain a neutral point of view in that article, which also contains a great many positive opinions of Kurosawa, all sourced. Because that original section was much too long, however, I shortened it in the main article and created this separate article for those readers who wish to know in detail who among critics and the general public has found fault with the director and why.

Yet even within this article, necessarily shorter and more narrowly-focused than the main one, a neutral point-of-view has been maintained, because for the majority of sourced negative opinions cited, some response to that particular criticism, either by Kurosawa himself or some other reputable figure, has been included for balance. None of the opinions cited has been presented by me or other editors as factual "truth," and every assertion and particularly every quotation in the article has been sourced to my knowledge.

The Help page states that one should "address the arguments, not the person making them." But the five-word sentence "This is a POV fork!" is not an argument at all, but the kind of completely evidence-free attack which is all too common on social media platforms, but which does not belong, and should not belong, on Wikipedia.

In effect, I have already answered the accusation that the article lacks NPOV on its talk page under the title Merger Discussion back in 2017.

It should be noted that when I perused the User Contributions for TheLatinNerd, I could find no other contributions for any other article about Japanese Cinema, nor indeed about cinema at all. Of course, it's not strictly necessary to have specialized knowledge of the topic at hand (as I, as a published author on Japanese cinema, do possess) to contribute to or comment upon such an article. But it certainly helps a great deal if one wants to make an informed opinion as to whether a particular subject is notable, and whether it has been handled in a neutral fashion or not.

I will be unavailable at the end of this week and all next week to deal with this. I would ask that no final decision on the article be made before I have had time the following week to fully address any responses that TheLatinNerd or others may make to this reply. Dylanexpert (talk) 22:34, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep An article about one of the masters of cinema who has had entire books devoted to the criticism and impact of their works is in no way in a condition for deletion, and this is the second spurious nomination of the week by LatinNerd with an awful WP:IDLI rationale and no further explanation. I suspect this will be kept just as fast. Nathannah • 📮 22:40, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - when a very famous thing has a really long article, sometimes you must create a POV fork. Bearian (talk) 03:46, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - not a real POV fork, just an expansion of a section of the main article. It might be better to add material on his influence and honours and rename the page something like "Public profile of Akira Kurosawa" or "Influence and assessments of Akira Kurosawa" to avoid this perception, but that's not AFD talk. CohenTheBohemian (talk) 14:45, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Osamu Chiba

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

No usable sources (including ja:wiki) and no good claim to notability to meet either WP:GNG or WP:SPORTCRIT. No valid redirect target. Geschichte (talk) 07:09, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Japan. Shellwood (talk) 09:16, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Fails in WP:GNG. Svartner (talk) 01:17, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Very common name, kind of like the Japanese counterpart to "Philip Wright". Corresponding article on Japanese Wikipedia likewise contains references, but those are just database. ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 14:58, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Shinya Kato

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

No usable sources (including ja:wiki) and no good claim to notability to meet either WP:GNG or WP:SPORTCRIT. No valid redirect target. Geschichte (talk) 07:08, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Japan. Shellwood (talk) 09:15, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Shinji Kaneko

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

No usable sources (including ja:wiki) and no good claim to notability to meet either WP:GNG or WP:SPORTCRIT. No valid redirect target. Geschichte (talk) 07:07, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Japan. Shellwood (talk) 09:15, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

2008 CON-CAN Movie Festival

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

Article about an individual iteration of a film festival, not properly referenced as passing inclusion criteria for events. As always, individual annual editions of film festivals can have their own standalone articles if they contain WP:GNG-worthy sourcing to establish that the event was seen as significant -- see e.g. Cannes, Berlin, TIFF, Sundance -- but they do not automatically need their own separate articles just because they happened. But this cites just one reference, which isn't enough all by itself and hasn't even been represented accurately -- it's claimed as an article in the Japan Times, but the link actually leads to archived content self-published by the festival itself rather than anything GNG-building.
This was also shot through with dozens of WP:ELNO-violating embedded offsite links to the archived page for every individual film in the program, still from the festival's own website rather than third-party coverage about the festival or any of the films, which I've had to strip. This is, further, the only edition of this film festival with its own standalone article, as no others have ever been created for any other year, and it's not at all clear that the 2008 edition would somehow be a special case of greater notability than any other edition of the same festival.
Simply existing is not "inherently" notable enough to exempt this from having to pass WP:GNG on its sourceability. Bearcat (talk) 16:22, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film and Japan. Bearcat (talk) 16:22, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, per nom. TurboSuperA+_(connect) 18:10, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 23:21, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Jo Nakajima

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

Footballer with no usable sources and no good claim to notability. Someone tried to redirect it, but without any valid target. Geschichte (talk) 11:04, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Japan. Shellwood (talk) 11:19, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Fails in WP:GNG. Svartner (talk) 20:23, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 20:16, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 20:18, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Seiichi Negishi

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

Footballer with no usable sources and no good claim to notability. Someone tried to redirect it, but without any valid target. Geschichte (talk) 11:04, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Japan. Shellwood (talk) 11:18, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Fails in WP:GNG. Svartner (talk) 20:22, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 20:16, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 20:18, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tales of Commons

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

This was a redirect, blown up to article size--but the supplied links are basically all company sources and manuals, and I cannot find any secondary sources either. A redirect to Tales of Mobile is the proper solution. Drmies (talk) 19:28, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I see now that the editor has done the same with Tales of Breaker, with the same problems. Drmies (talk) 19:30, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

As said earlier, I do not see the need for deletion when the alternative, Tales of Mobile, is empty and mostly bland, offering no informations whatsoever. I followed closely the formats of other Tales games, adding references, links and everything. A lot of game pages (especially for old i-mode games like this) could realistically fit into a main page, Xenosaga Pied Piper could be deleted and just be a passing mention on the main Xenosaga article, BCFFVII could be deleted and just have its content in the "Compilation of Final Fantasy VII" article. Both of those coexist with one another and with no problems with the dedicated page adding on to what is missing on the other ones. As for links, I do not see the problem when pages like Tales of the World: Summoner's Lineage which has no external link except a simple blog, no references, no nothing and yet this page is still allowed to exist despite being less well put together than Tales of Commons which properly source everything and uses different websites rather than just sticking to the same. Leptitgay (talk) 19:38, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- You'll want to explain how it meets our notability standards, not how its like or unalike other random articles. Sergecross73 msg me 19:42, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  I'm gonna have to compare it for this reply. Unlike other random articles, it and the other 4 mobile articles were covered by well-known respect and Japanese tech and gaming media like ITmedia, dengeki or Gaming Tech alongside official sources from the parent company. That's already 3 reliable sources. I am sorry but I will once again compare it to Tales Summoner Lineage which has nothing supporting it having its own page.
  
  https://dengekionline.com/data/news/2005/9/27/b147d1f6198573a00f8c38c4f6b18ca8.html
  
  https://www.itmedia.co.jp/mobile/spv/0509/27/news100.html
  
  https://game.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/20051122/toc.htm
  
  I have read the notability rules and this should be enough. I am of course open to other possibilities to improve the articles Leptitgay (talk) 20:40, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- You need to discuss how this article meets our standards, and it seems to me, from your words, that the more likely way to achieve success is to improve the main article. Stop talking about other articles. Drmies (talk) 19:44, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I added some references from the corresponding Japanese article. Bandai Namco has changed its web domain. I couldn't find Tales of Commons on the https://www.bandainamcoent.com/ Eastmain (talk • contribs) 20:26, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games and Japan. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 07:19, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Restore redirect Right now, highly lacking in WP:SIGCOV. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 07:27, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect. It was more suitable as a redirect given its lower sigcov. MimirIsSmart (talk) 02:28, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nabi Tajima

AfDs for this article:

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

Has been deleted twice through AfD's. As per the last AfD, nothing has changed. I'll quote JFG: "This person's only claim to notability was her advanced age. Her name and age are properly recorded in various tables, such as List of Japanese supercentenarians and List of the verified oldest people. Available sources do not cover her life and deeds in any noteworthy detail, and the article offers nothing more than trivia about other "recordholders", hence WP:NOPAGE applies." Onel5969 ^{TT me} 01:20, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. As per previous Afds. WP:NOPAGE and WP:ANYBIO still apply: no substantive content to justify a stand-alone article, all pertinent information, DoB, DoD and age, is found in the List of verified oldest people. DerbyCountyinNZ ^{(Talk Contribs)} 01:33, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete -- No new substantive sources since previous deletions. The minibio at the redirect already contains all the essential sourced information about her life. — JFG ^talk 15:24, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women and Japan. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 04:15, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep If this article doesn't stand as-is, then I don't think most of the other articles about supercentenarians do either. Being a record holder is notable, this article never should've never been deleted. Rylee Amelia (talk) 16:13, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

WP:OTHERSTUFF applies. Your argument could equally be used as reasons to delete those articles. And exactly which "record" did/does she hold? She was the oldest living person, but that is a title not a record. She was the oldest Asian person ever, but where are the independent sources which recognise such a "record" (i.e. is there a list of such "record holders"?)? And is "Last living person born in the 19th century" a record or a title? DerbyCountyinNZ ^{(Talk Contribs)} 08:06, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It is notable to be regarded as the final verified person to have been born in the 19th century and therefore this article should be preserved 2001:56A:7CFE:3000:C81:C60F:635C:8E64 (talk) 15:29, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No, it's not. It's a footnote, not notability. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 16:17, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Freeky

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

Non-notable single (song). It can be redirected to Ai Otsuka per WP:ATD. Mekomo (talk) 15:16, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 15:38, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 15:38, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Marble (EP): Not enough reliable sources to explain notability outside this subject. 🦅White-tailed eagle^{Talk to the eagle}Stalking eagle 17:03, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
"Not enough relaible sources"? The news from the artist's official website about this release, an article by Billboard Japan about the digital release of this single, plus an interview in which it explains its creative process from the artists themselves, all seem pretty reliable to me. クラウデド (talk) 17:51, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect Only one mention from Billboard Japan is not enough. The other sources are reliable, but it is by an interest third-party, in this case the artists and label. Need more independent sources. MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 07:34, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Motoki Imagawa

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

Footballer with no usable sources and no good claim to notability. Someone tried to redirect it, but without any valid target. Geschichte (talk) 06:58, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Japan. Shellwood (talk) 09:09, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Fails in WP:GNG. Svartner (talk) 18:41, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 20:08, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 20:11, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Toshihiro Yahata

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

Footballer with no usable sources and no good claim to notability. Someone tried to redirect it, but without any valid target. Geschichte (talk) 06:58, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Japan. Shellwood (talk) 09:09, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Strong delete The article cites no sources. Mikeycdiamond (talk) 11:37, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – The secondary sources provided on Japanese Wikipedia are just press release. ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 16:09, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 20:08, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 20:10, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Taiki Maekawa

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

Footballer with no usable sources and no good claim to notability. Someone tried to redirect it, but without any valid target. Geschichte (talk) 06:58, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Japan. Shellwood (talk) 09:08, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Corresponding article on Japanese Wikipedia is just an unsourced dumping ground. ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 16:12, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Only made two cup appearances, the rest are all at a lower level. Fails GNG. RossEvans19 (talk) 18:04, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 20:08, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 20:10, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yōsuke Nishi

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

Footballer with no usable sources and no good claim to notability. Someone tried to redirect it, but without any valid target. Geschichte (talk) 06:57, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Japan. Shellwood (talk) 09:08, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Corresponding article on Japanese Wikipedia only consists of one source that is a press release, and nothing else. ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 16:16, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Fails in WP:GNG. Svartner (talk) 17:29, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 20:07, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 20:10, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Utsunomiya University Yoto Campus Station

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

This is a railway station that appears to lack independent coverage. As best I can tell (not Japanese), most of the listed sources are either from the city of Utsunomiya itself or passing mentions that are actually covering Utsunomiya Light Rail as a whole. Per WP:NTRAINSTATION, this station doesn't appear to be notable on its own. This page should either be deleted or redirected to the rail system page linked above. Garsh (talk) 16:39, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Stations and Japan. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 16:58, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect Along with several other stations for the reasons above. Please speedy close this AfD unless there is somehow a consensus to delete it instead of redirecting it back to the line article.

AlphaBetaGamma (Talk/report any mistakes here) 23:06, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Utsunomiya Light Rail per above as ATD. Noting that this qualifies for G7 as Alpha was the only significant contributor and they have voted for redirection Jumpytoo Talk 16:45, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Utsunomiya Light Rail: Not notable on it's own. — Itzcuauhtli11 (talk) 19:26, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Kin'unken

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

I did my WP:BEFORE and am nominating it for deletion under the grounds of WP:N. It could barely find any sources in Japanese, and none in English. DankPedia (talk) 02:43, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and Japan. DankPedia (talk) 02:43, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: What's your assessment of the Japanese sources you found? MarioGom (talk) 22:33, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Arts-related deletion discussions. MarioGom (talk) 22:33, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 03:22, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

20th Kisei

AfDs for this article:

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

Insufficient independent in-depth sources to establish notability. The page is a record of a tournament, rather than an encyclopedia page. The contest has run since 1977, but there have been no individual pages since 2008. I've put some through PROD, but some have been dePRODed in 2008, 2010 & 2013 (22, 24 & 25). This one (20th) went to AfD in 2007. I am also nominating the following related pages for the same reason:

Blackballnz (talk) 09:42, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Games, and Netherlands. Shellwood (talk) 10:19, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Blackballnz: per WP:BEFORE, what is your assessment of the Japanese sources on various Kisei editions? MarioGom (talk) 21:56, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your comment. I don't read Japanese but would welcome the involvement of someone who does. Of the articles listed above, around half have no sources at all. The rest are sourced to links with similar tournament information, which could not be said to be independent. Many of these articles have no leads. When 20th Kisei went to AFD in 2007, editors said they would work to bring them up to standard. That as 18 years ago, and very little has changed. The articles above relate to the years 1977 - 2007. In recent years, there have been no articles, but all the winners are listed on Kisei (Go). Blackballnz (talk) 00:03, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the answer. So note for the closer and other participants: someone should assess the existing sources WP:BEFORE deciding here. MarioGom (talk) 09:01, 12 May 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 11:50, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. MarioGom (talk) 12:06, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. 23rd Kisei was prodded and deleted earlier this year. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 15:43, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge the pages into Kisei (Go) under new sections. Redirect afterwards. SeaDragon1 (talk) 14:50, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge all as suggested by SeaDragon1. It would be great if we can also merge the deleted article! Can be done by undelete. Probably the hard working PROD review team missed something this once. gidonb (talk) 18:28, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: So far, there are arguments for a Merge but with such a large bundled deletion nomination, I'd like for there to be a firmer consensus. If there is a relevant WikiProject, maybe they could be notified especially if this does become a Merge closure, we could use their help.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:31, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Notified: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Japan. MarioGom (talk) 21:15, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

.

Comment. As a Japanese speaker, I had a look at sources. I'm having a hard time finding reliable third-party coverage for the older kisei tournaments online, but I am finding a few news articles on the more recent ones (here's one for the 49th for example: https://www.asahi.com/articles/DA3S16178212.html). Even those are relatively rare though it seems. Erynamrod (talk) 19:13, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

As a non-speaker of Japanese, I could see that the 49th Kisei was recognized as such. If we indeed go for a merge, the editions do not need to be individually notable. Only Kisei. The merged content would strengthen the article! gidonb (talk) 21:53, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Kotaro Shimbara

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

Subject does not quite pass WP:SPORTCRIT and a cursory search did not yield anything useful. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 16:41, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Motorsport, and Japan. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 16:55, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep There is no indication that @Vanderwaalforces did even a cursory WP:BEFORE search in Japanese WP:NOENG or is competent enough in Japanese to do so. Just the first page of Japanese results include a full-length feature in Motorsport Magazine (which while partially an interview passes for notability), Auto Sport coverage of his Honda Racing School scholarship (also in Chinichi Shimbun), another full feature in JSport, along with regular coverage of his race results. DCsansei (talk) 04:44, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@DCsansei Ah, I surely I’m not Japanese neither do I speak the language; so, thank you so much for pointing to those sources. I checked them, and the machine translations I used were pretty competent in giving me an English version; they, I mean all the sources your mentioned, do not contribute to adding a substance of notability for the subject. Winning a school championship does not count in itself at all, and having sources that either fail WP:INDEPENDENT or WP:SIGCOV do not help too. @JTtheOG thoughts? Vanderwaalforces (talk) 06:19, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Absolutely none of the sources DCsansei provided fail WP:INDEPENDENT. You could, at most, class Auto Sport as WP:ROUTINE. MSport1005 (talk) 08:02, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oh no, the publications might not be directly connected to the subject, but those pieces from them clearly are. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 09:03, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
"Those pieces from them clearly are" isn't a compelling argument. You're gonna need to try harder. MSport1005 (talk) 22:22, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

As I mentioned, I only looked at the first page of results. Doing a competent WP:BEFORE is something nominators are expected to do, which you've stated you're unable to do in Japanese. DCsansei (talk) 11:01, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Unless you both provide clear-cut GNG-sufficient sources to establish notability for the subject, then I am still very confident the subject does not meet the threshold. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 22:29, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - This seems like a borderline case from a WP:GNG perspective, although Formula Four drivers are rarely notable. My suspicion is that this needs a thorough WP:BEFORE review from multiple people who can read Japanese to resolve the above dispute. HumanBodyPiloter5 (talk) 08:12, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. No indication that a WP:BEFORE search was conducted in Japanese or that the nominator is competent enough in Japanese to do so. What DCsansei said is correct, and I agree with the statement made before

Thfeeder (talk) 04:56, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Thfeeder I’m sorry, but your !vote is baseless in terms of policy as it applies to notability, which is what I am questioning in the first place. You’re telling me I do not have competence in Japanese but you’re not bringing any source to justify your stance. If you are competent, please bring the sources and let us evaluate, that is what AfD is about, not to caste aspersions indirectly. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 05:56, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Draftify - I am going to mostly agree with HumanBodyPiloter5 here. It may well be borderline, but we are not at GNG on the sourcing presented so far. The reports that he will participate in FIA is routine announcements of the kind that every racer will get. These are not independent of the subject, because the announcement is not independent, regardless of who repeats it. It is technically primary news reporting, and also excluded on that basis. This can't be used to demonstrate notability on its own. If we accepted this then all F4 drivers would be automatically notable, and there is no consensus for that. So what we need are sources that independently cover the subject. It may also be WP:TOOSOON in that he is much more likely to be notable should he win races. Is there a suitable redirect target? If there is no suitable redirect, then I would suggest we draftify this new page (and this is my !vote for now). We have no evidence of notability, but we have at least the possibility that a deep search in Japanese searches will yield more, and also that he may do well and thus see more coverage. Equally, a very real possibility there are no better sources right now. But if the page creator of this new page can find sources, they could submit through AFC when they have been found. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 08:30, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Draftify Seems new to the game and has not received significant coverage. May indeed be WP:TOOSOON. Ramos1990 (talk) 05:00, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: For the record, there's no ban on nominating subjects where there might be sourcing in a language you don't read, and no obligation to do a full, in-depth search before nominating an article for deletion. Please focus on the sources, thank you.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 06:07, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Probably too low in the "minor leagues" to gather much attention. I searched for .jp sources, they all appear to be blogs. This site [32], has coverage typical of this, but that's pretty much it. I don't see enough to show notability. Sources above are as explained. Oaktree b (talk) 13:50, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I continue to believe the GNG threshold is met for this article given the three separate sources I've provided. I'm also disappointed by the comment in the relist suggesting that a competent native-language WP:BEFORE is unnecessary. That would only make Wikipedia's systematic-bias problem worse. That said, if editors don't feel that the subject currently merits his own article, I suggest a merge to 2025 F4 Japanese Championship. DCsansei (talk) 05:40, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Kiyoshi Umegaki

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

Subject does not quite pass WP:SPORTCRIT and a cursory search did not yield anything useful. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 16:36, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Motorsport, and Japan. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 16:55, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep No indication that a WP:BEFORE search was conducted in Japanese or that the nominator is competent enough in Japanese to do so. I see some significant coverage from Auto Sport and Chunichi for his win last week. I urge nominator to do a complete search in Japanese before nominating (or leave the nominating of Japanese articles to those who can evaluate Japanese sources). DCsansei (talk) 04:54, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Again, I surely I’m not Japanese neither do I speak the language; so, thank you so much for pointing to those sources. I checked them, and the machine translations I used were pretty competent in giving me an English version; they, I mean all the sources your mentioned, do not contribute to adding a substance of notability for the subject. Do you mind pointing me to what point in WP:NMOTORSPORT does Umegaki pass? I’d appreciate it. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 06:27, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NMOTORSPORT is a broad indicator of what's considered notable. It's not an exhaustive list and shall not be used as a disqualifier. WP:GNG matters. MSport1005 (talk) 08:10, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

GNG is in fact not met here also. Do you remember what it says about independent reliable sources that covers the subject substantially? These three parameters need to be met for GNG to be satisfied, it isn’t the case here. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 09:01, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If you're unable to conduct a thorough WP:BEFORE search in Japanese, you're unable to make an early judgement on whether coverage exists. You've stated your case. Now please leave it to others. I'm waiting before casting a !vote for the same reason. MSport1005 (talk) 22:30, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment, leaning delete unless further evidence of notability emerges - Seems like a possible case of WP:ONEEVENT, but I'd need to see evidence of a more thorough Japanese-language WP:BEFORE search before committing to a delete vote. I do, however, find it highly implausible that a driver at this stage of their career would meet the WP:GNG. Neither Formula Four nor Formula Regional are particularly high profile categories (I would personally consider them to be the fifth and sixth tiers of single-seater racing) and drivers who compete in them are rarely notable. HumanBodyPiloter5 (talk) 08:08, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. No indication that a WP:BEFORE search was conducted in Japanese or that the nominator is competent enough in Japanese to do so. What DCsansei said is correct, and I agree with the statement made before. Thfeeder (talk) 04:55, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thfeeder I’m sorry, but your !vote is baseless in terms of policy as it applies to notability, which is what I am questioning in the first place. You’re telling me I do not have competence in Japanese but you’re not bringing any source to justify your stance. If you are competent, please bring the sources and let us evaluate, that is what AfD is about, not to caste aspersions indirectly. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 05:58, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Draftify. May be WP:TOOSOON. Not really notable from the sources in the article. Not enough for a stand alone article. Ramos1990 (talk) 05:03, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Draftify per Ramos1990. Does not meet WP:GNG and at this early stage in their career, very unlikely a deep search in Japanese sources would yield anything. However the page is new, as is the career. If there is early success the sources could follow, so draftify or redirect are suitable WP:ATDs. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 08:24, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Any more support for ATD?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Benison (Beni · talk) 02:49, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Draftify. If Japanese editors think they can find sufficient coverage, or believe it will appear in the near future, they can work on it in draft. JoelleJay (talk) 03:33, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I continue to believe the GNG threshold is met for this article so my !vote is unchanged, and I continue to object to deletion where the nominator has not shown that they've completed a competent native-language WP:BEFORE. That said, if a consensus against keep develops, I suggest considering a merge to 2025 F4 Japanese Championship as an ATD. DCsansei (talk) 05:44, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hokkaido Kaminokuni High School

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

No apparent notability JustMakeTheAccount (talk) 11:40, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - per nom. Upon search, the school does not seem to have reliable, secondary coverage. There is no real reason to presume the school is notable per WP:NSCHOOL or WP:GNG. Was PROD'd by @Alphabetagamma in August '24 but contested. WormEater13 (talk • contribs) 11:44, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education, Schools, and Japan. Shellwood (talk) 12:41, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:NSCHOOL, seems to be a WP:ROTM high school without any notability. --hroest 20:17, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

or redirect to Kaminokuni,_Hokkaido#Education. --hroest 20:18, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Kaminokuni,_Hokkaido#Education. There is not much to work with in this article. Not every high school needs its own page. Ramos1990 (talk) 06:27, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Benison (Beni · talk) 02:40, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

1992 NHK Trophy

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

Non-notable figure skating competition. I had redirected this article to NHK Trophy, but it was reverted. Recommend deletion or forced redirect. Bgsu98 (Talk) 15:26, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Skating, and Japan. Bgsu98 (Talk) 15:26, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect I could find nothing significant. Yoblyblob (Talk) :) 16:02, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – robertsky (talk) 06:11, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HilssaMansen19 (talk) 12:12, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sports Kyoushitsu

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

Fails WP:GNG. Other language wiki page has no sources that support notability. DonaldD23 talk to me 15:03, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, Sports, and Japan. DonaldD23 talk to me 15:03, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Longstanding (1961-2017) series broadcasted nationally on NHK. WP:NTVNATL. DCsansei (talk) 05:08, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:34, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kaoru Hayashi Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Digital Garage (company)

Scan for Korea-related AfDs

Korea

Laos

Souliyasak Ketkeolatsami

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

Declined prod. All the sources are databases/results and not SIGCOV to meet WP:SPORTSCRIT. LibStar (talk) 13:54, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Olympics, Sport of athletics, and Laos. LibStar (talk) 13:54, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The coverage would be in Lao, not English. We need to find his Lao name. BeanieFan11 (talk) 19:08, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Laos at the 1996 Summer Olympics. Unfortunately, I don't know much about Laos-related articles or offline newspapers. Article can be restored if enough significant coverage is found. ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 14:53, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Malaysia

Peter Chee

AfDs for this article:

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

Still fails WP:GNG as refs don't pass WP:SIRS. - UtherSRG (talk) 14:00, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Authors, Businesspeople, and Malaysia. UtherSRG (talk) 14:00, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Fourteen Days' War

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

Note tag. Supposed to be historical fact but can't verify it as no page numbers. No indication of significance. Unable to verify it in gbooks, refseek, internet archive. Fails WP:GNG. scope_creep^Talk 08:35, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History and Malaysia. Shellwood (talk) 10:21, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:47, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I somewhat agree with the deletion. The event however do exist but the source for it is very lacking and the original article mostly just anti communist fantasy. I've edited it to make it more neutral but still, proper academic source such as university research is hard to find. Dauzlee (talk) 03:41, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Dauzlee: That is the core of it. Normally I wouldnt' sent such an article to Afd. In fact I don't think I've done that before and probably wont do it again. I spent close 4 hours back and forward while I was working in the garden on Sunday and couldn't find a thing on it of worth. I must have looked at it about 8 times and couldnt determine if it was valid or not. I don't think it was a war, more like a massacre or an action but either way I could verify it. I searched for an alternate name perhaps from the opposing side and couldn't find anything there either. scope_creep^Talk 04:07, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I think that if this is hard to find coverage for, then it may better to find a page to merge or redirect rather than delete. Ramos1990 (talk) 00:57, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 01:04, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, no arguments and both a Merge and Redirect were suggested but without target article suggestions. I'd like to ask User:Wcquidditch if they could deletion sort this AFD for Military History, too. One skill I have yet to master here. Thanks in advance.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:23, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:15, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'll note that there is no deletion sorting page for "military history", just the separate ones for military and history. It was already sorted under "history" (by someone else) relatively quickly, but when I first sorted this I'm not sure how I missed that it hadn't been placed under "military" yet. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:17, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletions

Wawa Zainal (via WP:PROD on 9 September 2023)

Mongolia

District heating of Kharkhorin

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

Too narrow a topic for a standalone article, not much significant coverage. I've already merged any relevant content into the Infrastructure section on the Kharkhorin article. Mooonswimmer 09:40, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Mongolia-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 09:59, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy keep: Notable and have meaningful information. Bleeng (talk) 11:59, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:07, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nepal

Mrityu Diary

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

Another book by the author Tulasi Acharya, whose own wiki article was deleted due to No compelling keep arguments, LLMs, one-edit accounts, highly dodgy sourcing, and some of the most blatant COI promotion I've seen on Wikipedia for a long time.

Previous discussion of the author and his books:

Like the other books, I believe this one fails WP:NBOOK. Source review in the comments below. Astaire (talk) 19:40, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Literature and Nepal. Astaire (talk) 19:40, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. Source review:

Source 1 is the book's page on the publisher's website. Primary source, not independent.
Source 2 and Source 3 are reviews by the same person, Padam Bhattarai (one in English, one in Nepali) - so regardless, they would only count as one source for the purposes of WP:NBOOK. These reviews are suspicious: they appear to be the only thing that Mr. Bhattarai has written for either website. Someone named "Padam Bhattarai" appears to be Facebook friends with Acharya and is interacting with his posts: [33] Notably, Republica (Source 2) was deemed not reliable for a review of Acharya's work in this AfD due to an apparent (different) conflict of interest.
Source 4 is a review in The Rising Nepal by Narayan Prasad Ghimire. Mr. Ghimire seems to have a special interest in Acharya's books: he has also reviewed Sex, Desire, and Taboo for the Kathmandu Post [34] and Swapnabhumi for Nepal News [35]. In addition, Mr. Ghimire and Acharya appear to be Facebook friends: see e.g. this recent post with a comment from Mr. Ghimire. Major COI red flags here.
Source 5 is a review for the Sahitya Post by Badri Prasad Dhakal (in Nepali). The Sahitya Post is a "literary portal" that seems to accept a wide variety of content from writers, including promotional and self-promotional content. Its reliability and editorial controls are dubious.

Astaire (talk) 19:42, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tulsi Bhagat

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

Non-notable person, we've been through this discussion numerous times elsewhere. Tulsi is not a notable person as an "activist" nor a Wikipedian, and this article conveniently leaves out their block and ban on this very project, for paid editing, among other things, which was only reversed 4 months ago. There are not generally "founders" of individual projects on Wikimedia - and all of the sources are either unreliable or nonsense. COOLIDICAE🕶 21:38, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, some several Nepali-language reliable sources are translated into English for headlines as mentioned on Wikipedia:

"जनकपुरका 'तुलसी भगत' जसले विश्वव्यापी सम्मानबाट मधेश र देशको शान बढाए" [Janakpur's 'Tulsi Bhagat', who brought global respect to Madhesh and the country]. NewsBureau Nepal (in Nepali). 5 February 2021.
Joshi, Yagyaraj (13 February 2021). "मैथिली विकिपिडिया स्थापना गरेर जो विश्वका १८ योगदानकर्ताभित्र छानिए" [Selected among 18 contributors around the world who established Maithili Wikipedia]. Nepal Khabar (in Nepali). Retrieved 20 April 2025.
Tharu, Bunu (25 January 2021). "जनकपुरका युवा जसले मैथिली विकिपिडियाको सुरुवात गरे" [Youth from Janakpur who started Maithili Wikipedia]. Kantipur Publications (in Nepali). Retrieved 20 January 2025.
Kamal, KC (15 February 2021). "मैथिली विकिपिडियाका संस्थापक २१ वर्षिय नेपाली युवा, जो विश्वका टप १८ योगदानकर्तामा छानिए" [The founder of Maithili Wikipedia is a 21-year-old Nepali youth who has been selected as one of the top 18 contributors in the world]. ICT Samachar (in Nepali). Retrieved 20 January 2025.
Bista, Kamal (24 January 2021). "२१ वर्षीय तुलसीको मैथिली विक्सनरी सपना" [21 year old Tulsi’s Maithili Wiktionary dream]. Farakdhar (in Nepali). Retrieved 20 January 2025.</ref><ref name="Kamal">Kamal, KC (15 February 2021). "मैथिली विकिपिडियाका संस्थापक २१ वर्षिय नेपाली युवा, जो विश्वका टप १८ योगदानकर्तामा छानिए" [The founder of Maithili Wikipedia is a 21-year-old Nepali youth who has been selected as one of the top 18 contributors in the world]. ICT Samachar (in Nepali). Retrieved 20 January 2025.
Kamal, KC (15 February 2021). "मैथिली विकिपिडियाका संस्थापक २१ वर्षिय नेपाली युवा, जो विश्वका टप १८ योगदानकर्तामा छानिए" [The founder of Maithili Wikipedia is a 21-year-old Nepali youth who has been selected as one of the top 18 contributors in the world]. ICT Samachar (in Nepali). Retrieved 20 January 2025.

Absolutiva (talk) 21:56, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You mean all of the clearly copy-pasted press-release equivalent sources? Sure. COOLIDICAE🕶 21:58, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No, just reliable news sources. So I decided to rewrite text so that it signifies the subject is notable and remains to exist on Wikipedia as a standalone article. Absolutiva (talk) 22:04, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sure. COOLIDICAE🕶 22:18, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: I rewrite the text per request. (edit conflict) I added notable details in the article. Absolutiva (talk) 22:33, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Nepal. Shellwood (talk) 22:05, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 23:14, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete for mostly the same reasons the nominator mentions. I don't trust any of the "sources" that are used to claim Tulsi is notable given this user has a very long history of UPE. --SHB2000 (talk) 08:16, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I rarely comment on AFDs but given past history of Tulsi these sources presented by Absolutiva do not convince. I too share UPE concerns given these comments.--A09|(talk) 11:03, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
A biased article (regarding the undisclosed block) can be fixed, and I think the wording issues (eg "founder") can be attributed to language barriers. The problem I see is more that out of the five sources cited, only one of them appears to be sufficiently major for it to have its own Wikipedia article (Kantipur Publications) - the other four are non-notable at best. I do not know whether such an article can be "saved" or not. Leaderboard (talk) 15:19, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and salt Just another episode in the long-running endeavour by various individuals to leverage their Wikimedia experience and goodwill for money, fame and career. There's no meat here. Sources are not independent, reliable or significant. Also fails 1E. Usedtobecool ☎️ 04:23, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and salt the same stuff keeps on appearing once a few years. I am very against writing articles about Wikipedia editors. Its just milking at this point. shame बडा काजी (talk) 11:32, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – This individual clearly does not meet Wikipedia notability standards. Drdpw (talk) 15:38, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Like the nominator, I see no evidence that the article subject satisfies WP:GNG. I spent a few hours doing independent research and did not find any WP:RS that would qualify as WP:SIGCOV. ZachH007 (talk) 04:04, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete- I wonder how someone can even think to write this article, As far I know, Tulsi Bhagat was recently released from block of more than 1 year duration due to some kind of professional issue. So its not ethical to write a Wikipedia article on such controversial subject. This is my personal view. Regarding notability, It has coverage but not in independent media. Hereby fails notability. Rahmatula786 (talk) 16:37, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Siddhartha Cricket Stadium

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

Contested redirect without improvement (along with a personal attack). Searches did not turn up enough in-depth coverage from independent, reliable sources to support meeting WP:GNG. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 22:53, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If this was a state level sports stadium in the US would this deletion nomination ever have been put forward? Let's try and counter - not reinforce - Wikipedia's bias problems. Atrapalhado (talk) 09:20, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

KEEP This is a perfectly valid article that should not have been put forward for deletion (if you get your kicks deleting articles people have worked hard on, at least focus on the many thousands of unnecessary articles on US sports and popular culture, rather than seeking to scrap valid articles from non western/ non Anglosphere country topics which are inevitably harder to source but no less notable).

Anyway, this is clearly a major regional cricket ground in Nepal. Sources make clear it's one of the grounds for the major cricket tournament in the country. The article is substantially developed. Yes it needs more sources but the source cited is independent and provides good material. If our friend who put this forward for deletion wanted to do something more useful with their time, he/she could readily add additional sources from independent professional cricketing sites which can be readily found on Google. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Atrapalhado (talk • contribs) 23:42, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Cricket and Nepal. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 08:09, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:49, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

All Nepal National Independent Students Union (Sixth) (RJM group)

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

Single source. Neither reliable nor significant. No online coverage about this union. Rahmatula786 (talk) 15:10, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Politics, Schools, and Nepal. Rahmatula786 (talk) 15:10, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Fails WP:GNG. Only 1 source and that is also archived. Agletarang (talk) 17:15, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
~~keep~~ there is some in depth coverage here and independent coverage here and here, there is news coverage of them [36] [37] [38] [39] [40] some of which contain in-depth coverage of the electoral mechanics and factions in the organization. Clearly notable. --hroest 20:09, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
you are mistaken. There are other such unions with similar names. Plz make sure you search with exactly same name ( Sixth) RJM group. If you find anything with that particular name , plz let me know. There are many unions with initial name All Nepal National Independent Student Union but here sixth and RJM group is also included which lacks notability. Rahmatula786 (talk) 03:15, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

thanks, the sources I found indeed seem to be for a similarly named but different organization. ---hroest 11:47, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Rastriya Janamorcha as a new section titled "Youth wing". Yue🌙 05:03, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, notable movement. An organization with 59 district branches is not insignificant. --Soman (talk) 09:49, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Based solely on reliable secondary coverage (or lack thereof, i.e. WP:ORG), this article should at best be turned into a redirect to a section of their parent organisation's article. Size is irrelevant; there are Final Fantasy XIV clans with more than 59 regional branches. Yue🌙 17:21, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: There is no significant discussion or consensus here yet. The arguments are of keep, delete and merge at 1 each vote after another keep was striked out. No significant mention of policies and their relevance. Discussion sought for a consensus would be whether WP:TOOSOON if there is minor or no notability or should be kept per WP:ATD.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HilssaMansen19 (talk) 18:53, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Rastriya Janamorcha as a new section titled "Youth wing." As a stand-alone page, this fails WP:GNG, but as there is verifiable information, this could be added to the parent page. --Enos733 (talk) 15:54, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nepal Revolutionary Students' Union

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

Article doesn’t cite any article neither it has online coverage. Rahmatula786 (talk) 15:04, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Politics, Schools, and Nepal. Rahmatula786 (talk) 15:04, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Nepal Workers Peasants Party as a new section titled "Youth wing". Yue🌙 22:02, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Nepal Revolutionary Students' Union, a.k.a. Nekravisangh, is a major organization. It has declined in the past, but it was the dominant student movement in Bhaktapur for many years. --Soman (talk) 09:48, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Nepal Workers Peasants Party. There is some WP:ROUTINE coverage, especially if you search with the native name. मल्ल (talk) 03:02, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HilssaMansen19 (talk) 18:55, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nepal Proposed deletions

Pardeshi (via WP:PROD on 11 April 2025)
Zindagi Rocks (via WP:PROD on 11 April 2025)

Deletion review

Pakistan

Gupta–Kidarite conflict

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

Lacks notability as a standalone topic; minimal sourcing, limited content, and better covered within broader articles like Gupta Empire or Kidarites. Duplicative and does not meet WP:N. BharatGanguly (talk) 06:46, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Military, Hinduism, Pakistan, Iran, India, Punjab, and Uttar Pradesh. BharatGanguly (talk) 06:46, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:37, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Babusar bus accident

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

Causing deaths and being reported in the news do not confer notability, and high-casualty bus crashes are common. Fails WP:EVENT. Unable to find sustained significant coverage. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 🛸 03:55, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Transportation, and Pakistan. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 🛸 03:55, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sajjad Ibraheem

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

No evidence of WP:SIGCOV for this young cricketer. More coverage would be needed to meet WP:SPORTBASIC. PROD was contested by linking a deprecated essay. JTtheOG (talk) 20:44, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Cricket, and Pakistan. JTtheOG (talk) 20:44, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep – The subject meets the inclusion criteria as defined in Wikipedia:WikiProject Cricket/Notability#Individuals, which states that any cricketer who has played in a single officially recognized first-class, List A, or T20 match is presumed notable. Sajjad Ibraheem made his first-class debut for Peshawar in the 2024–25 Quaid-e-Azam Trophy on 5 November 2024, in a match against Rawalpindi. This competition is recognized as first-class by the Pakistan Cricket Board (PCB), which is the governing body of cricket in Pakistan. Therefore, the article satisfies the notability requirement under subject-specific guidelines, regardless of broader media coverage. ESPNcricinfo profile. Behappyyar (talk) 20:53, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
According to the guideline you linked, that page is currently inactive and is retained for historical reference. Sports figures need at the very least one independent source with significant coverage (WP:SIGCOV). JTtheOG (talk) 21:08, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the reply. While Wikipedia:WikiProject Cricket/Notability is marked as inactive, the notability principle that first-class cricketers are presumed notable is still active policy via WP:NCRICKET, and has been consistently upheld at AfD. As per WP:NCRICKET: "Playing in a first-class match is usually sufficient for notability." This is supported by numerous prior AfD closures. This satisfies WP:NCRICKET and aligns with community consensus for cricketer notability. WP:GNG is not required when reliable subject-specific notability exists and has been broadly applied in practice. Behappyyar (talk) 21:15, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Are these AfDs from the previous three years? Participation-based guidelines have been deprecated since 2022. JTtheOG (talk) 21:27, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Just to clarify: WP:NCRICKET notes that significant coverage should not be assumed for all domestic players, but it also states that playing in an officially recognized first-class match is usually sufficient for notability. This reflects established AfD precedent. Since Sajjad Ibraheem debuted in a PCB-sanctioned first-class match, the subject meets this standard, regardless of media coverage.

This will rest on whether sufficient sources can be found to meet the WP:GNG – something along the lines of WP:BASIC level. I don't read Urdu so can't determine if the source in that language would significantly help reach that sort of bar. Simply meeting NCRIC has not been considered sufficient for an article to be kept for years. In this case there appears to not be a suitable list to redirect the article to, so I would suggest sending the article to draft initially unless suitable sourcing can be found Blue Square Thing (talk) 08:39, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. According to global consensus, all sportsperson articles are required to cite a source of IRS SIGCOV in addition to the subject meeting GNG. Meeting NCRICKET only affords a presumption of further SIGCOV if this SPORTCRIT criterion is satisfied. JoelleJay (talk) 15:42, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ali Alam Qamar

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

Fails WP:GNG. Sources are interview, paid for articles and primary sources. Mekomo (talk) 15:07, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 15:29, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 15:29, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete for now. I didn't found sufficient coverage in mentioned references in the article. Fails to show WP:SIGCOV and WP:NBUSINESSPERSON. Fade258 (talk) 17:33, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sajjad Ghani

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

Fails WP:GNG. Unremarkable military officer. TheLongTone (talk) 13:31, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - three star general with country's second highest award. Passes WP:ANYBIO 𝗭𝗲𝗽𝗵𝘆𝗿 (ᴛᴀʟᴋ) 14:52, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep – Lt Gen (retd) Sajjad Ghani held the rank of Lieutenant General , the second-highest active rank in the Pakistan Army. Per WP:MILMOS#Notability, general officers of this rank are presumed notable, particularly when they hold high-level commands.

Ghani served as:

Commander V Corps (one of Pakistan’s key operational corps), [41]
Quartermaster General at GHQ, [42]
Commander of an infantry division during operations in Swat,
Chairman of WAPDA, a major civilian post after retirement.[43]
Vice Chief of General Staff at GHQ [44]

Behappyyar (talk) 14:30, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Military, and Pakistan. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 14:48, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep No question about his notability in light of his long service and high rank achieved in the Pakistan Armed Forces which was acknowledged by the Government of Pakistan by awarding him the second highest award in Pakistan - Hilal-i-Imtiaz (Crescent of Excellence) award. Besides this article already is supported by 5 references from major newspapers of Pakistan and 2 major TV news channels of Pakistan....Ngrewal1 (talk) 20:00, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nur Shah railway station

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

No reliable source covers the station, does not meet WP:GNG Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 18:38, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Travel and tourism, Asia, and Pakistan. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 18:38, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Stations-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:03, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Lodhran–Raiwind Branch Line. To give context, I came across this article yesterday, felt that something was fishy, and did a dive into the sources only to find that almost every single one was being severely misrepresented (diff). This article does not have sufficient sourcing to meet GNG. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 12:25, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Lodhran–Raiwind Branch Line. — Preceding unsigned comment added by PunjabiEditor69 (talk • contribs) 18:11, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You were the same person who added this "fan club" source, weren't you? Why are you adding such sources? - PunjabiEditor69 (talk) 19:58, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@SheriffIsInTown - PunjabiEditor69 (talk) 19:58, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your question is beyond the scope of this discussion. That source was added in an effort to provide some sourcing to a completely unsourced article so it could be removed from the unsourced list. Its presence does not confer notability. These articles just add to the management overhead for editors. Thank you for the reminder — I will be nominating other such articles for deletion as well. I hope I can count on your support, since you were the one who raised this point. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 20:46, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

We should redirect pages of small stations that have no reliable sources. - PunjabiEditor69 (talk) 08:23, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Umair (music producer)

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

Fails WP:GNG and WP:NMUSICIAN. At first glance there appears to be significant coverage but looking closer you will see that most are not bylined, are from unreliable sources, or just routine coverage or mentions. CNMall41 (talk) 17:39, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Bands and musicians, and Pakistan. CNMall41 (talk) 17:41, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep – Umair meets WP:GNG and WP:NMUSIC. His 2024 album Rockstar Without a Guitar peaked at #8 on Spotify Pakistan and was featured in Genius Community’s 25 Best Albums of 2024 (ThePrint). His single “Asli Hai” topped YouTube Pakistan charts (Music Metrics Vault). Covered by reliable sources like Samaa TV, ThePrint, Wordplay Magazine, and Itz Hip Hop. Producer for notable duo Young Stunners. Meets NMUSIC via charting work, media coverage, and national significance.

— Behappyyar (talk) 15:41, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

NMUSICIAN would not be met based on charting. Spotify and YouTube are not acceptable under WP:CHART. Also, being a producer for someone notable does not come with inherent notability. Can you address the non-bylined references? Do you feel these are reliable and if so how? For WP:GNG, you are also cited press releases above which can never be used for notability. --CNMall41 (talk) 21:46, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@CNMall41 While it’s true that WP:CHART places limits on YouTube/Spotify data for standalone notability, those indicators support broader cultural relevance under WP:NMUSIC#1 and WP:GNG. Chart placements help demonstrate impact in the absence of traditional charts in South Asia, where mainstream media often lags behind independent or digital-first musicians.

Regarding sources:

Samaa TV and ThePrint are independent, professional outlets with editorial oversight and journalistic standards. These are not self-published or fan-driven and are widely accepted as RS in other music-related AfDs.
The Itz Hip Hop review is bylined and analytical, not promotional; it contains critical assessment of Umair’s production and album structure.
The Wordplay Magazine article, while regional, is independent and contains critical evaluation — see similar RS used in AfDs for artists in UK/India-Pak context.

I accept that the ANI press release cannot count toward WP:GNG, but it was cited for factual support of chart placements, not to satisfy notability directly.

Notability isn’t only about headlining credits. Umair is the primary producer behind Rebirth and Open Letter, two of the most discussed hip-hop albums in Pakistan — both critically reviewed in RS and recognized in independent retrospectives. His influence is creative and structural, meeting WP:NMUSIC#2 (“significant contribution to the work of others that is covered in reliable sources”).

On balance, the article meets WP:GNG through multiple independent sources with critical commentary, and WP:NMUSIC through documented production of notable albums and influence on Pakistan’s hip-hop scene.

— Behappyyar (talk) 06:45, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Playing a major role in major works proves notability. Could you give more info on the part he played and on the notability of those albums? — Itzcuauhtli11 (talk) 14:03, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Not to forget: Talha Anjum's most famous song Kaun Talha? in which he diss an Indian rapper Naezy was produced by Umair. ^[1] Behappyyar (talk) 15:15, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@(Itzcuauhtli11) He served as the lead producer and co-composer on both Rebirth (2017) and Open Letter (2023), two landmark Urdu hip-hop albums in Pakistan.

On Rebirth, Umair produced all 15 tracks for Young Stunners, a duo considered foundational to Pakistani rap. The album is credited with shaping the Urdu hip-hop scene and received wide media attention from outlets like SAMAA TV.^[2]

For Open Letter, he was again the key producer, collaborating with Talha Anjum and international names such as KRSNA. The album was reviewed independently and discussed critically within South Asian music forums.^[3]^[4]

These albums are not just popular but culturally significant, marking key points in the evolution of Pakistani hip-hop. Umair’s complete production involvement and critical coverage of these albums demonstrate a major creative role in notable works, satisfying WP:NMUSIC#2 and strengthening his case under WP:GNG. ^[5]

References

^ "Indian rapper asks 'Talha Kaun?', Talha Anjum responds with a brutal diss track". Images.Dawn.com. Dawn Media Group. 21 May 2025. Retrieved 23 May 2025.
^ "Young Stunners' new Album Rebirth is a must listen". Samaa TV.
^ "Open Letter - Talha Anjum [Album Review]".
^ "Open Letter Talha Anjum's album blend of hip-hop and Urdu poetry".
^ "Umair and Jokhay The man behind the rise of Talha Anjum amd Talha Younas".

There is a huge WP:WALLOFTEXT so I will only be addressing some of the main points. I wouldn't consider Young Stunners even notable despite having a Wikipedia page (that one needs to go to AfD as well). A single collaboration with a rapper is not something that gains inherent notability. Everything else is more of an WP:ILIKEIT argument. As far as the "landmark" albums you speak of, I would guess they would have enough coverage to warrant a Wikipedia page since they are landmark, yet I do not see it. Fact is, the coverage has some mentions, routine announcements, and unreliable sources (even a publication that is reliable like Dawn can have specific articles considered unreliable - see WP:NEWSORGINDIA). The rest of what you cited is not reliable (two blogs and Reddit?). If this artist was truly worthy of notice (a requirement of notability), there would be more than blog posts and promotional churnalism. --CNMall41 (talk) 17:16, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

CNMall41 This isn’t WP:ILIKEIT—his notability stems from his influence on multiple notable works. While some early coverage may be light or promotional, there is independent, reliable coverage (e.g., SAMAA TV, The Express Tribune, and Dawn articles/interviews) highlighting Umair’s production role. [45]. Behappyyar (talk) 18:10, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. The comment proves what I have been saying. You cite this which is a routine announcement and not-bylined. It is not reliable for the purpose of establishing notability. It is the same concept as WP:NEWSORGINDIA. Finally, please do not cite interviews anymore. They are not independent and cannot be used to establish notability. --CNMall41 (talk) 18:15, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The link i have shared Umair slides into Genius Top Albums of the Year is not a routine announcement. It highlights Umair’s recognition by Genius alongside global artists like Beyoncé. This editorial coverage by a reliable source (The Express Tribune) goes beyond routine mentions and supports notability per WP:GNG. Behappyyar (talk) 19:12, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Already stated numerous times. It is NOT BYLINED and falls under similar concerns as WP:NEWSORGINDIA. Articles published under "news desk" or "webdesk" have consistently found to be unreliable for notability purposes as they are promotional churnalism, not something in-depth written by a journalist. Please see WP:CIR. --CNMall41 (talk) 19:48, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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

The result was redirect‎ to Ghulam Mohammed Baloch. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 15:47, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Baloch National Movement

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

Fails WP:GNG, mostly primary/affiliated sources, no significant coverage in WP:RS. Doesn't meet notability per WP:ORG or WP:NPOV. - PunjabiEditor69 (talk) 15:05, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians, Organizations, and Pakistan. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:01, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Ghulam Mohammed Baloch.❯❯❯Pravega^g=9.8 03:55, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Ghulam Mohammed Baloch. Yue🌙 05:33, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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

Family tree of the Greco-Bactrian and Indo-Greek kings

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

Opening introduction explicitly admits to "This family tree (and the trees below it) is based on a combination of Tarn's and Narain's genealogies of the Greco-Bactrian kings, which are not necessarily fully correct, as with all ancient family trees." The combination of these two trees is the entire basis of the article, which seems like not good enough for an article. It is highly speculative and not verifiable and the original authors (Tarn and Narain) have been criticised in more recent scholarship for speculative inventions. ForWhomTheSunShines (talk) 01:34, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello ForWhomTheSunShines, I understand the concerns and understand that Tarn and Narain may be inaccurate, but these are the texts that I have. I know that other authors say something different, so when I get those texts, I (or someone else) will revise the trees. Additionally, I give the kings several different fathers (for example, see Apollodotus I in the tree, who has 5 different possible fathers, so I am taking all possible considerations into account here). I also put dotted lines for some kings when the relationship is very unclear, making it being speculation clear. So I am making it clear these Greco-Bactrian trees, just like an Egyptian one (like the 1st Dynasty), will not necessarily be fully accurate. As for the speculation and unverifiable of the tree, well, we do have Greco-Bactrian coinage. The reason I said "This family tree (and the trees below it) is based on a combination of Tarn's and Narain's genealogies of the Greco-Bactrian kings, which are not necessarily fully correct, as with all ancient family trees." is because I want to make it very clear that is a probable layout for how the various kings are related to each other and is not supposed to be taken as dogma, just like many ancient family trees. If you want me to find different authors and replace Tarn and Narain, I will. I just wanted to use two of the most important Greco-Bactrian historians who helped establish the discipline.

OrthodoxByzantineRoman (talk) 01:51, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Lists of people, History, Royalty and nobility, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iran, India, and Greece. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:15, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: couldn't this be saved simply by identifying the differences between the two authors' reconstructions, either by presenting different versions of the trees, or by showing the different positions taken by each author using the varying line and border options? If other scholars disagree with their opinions, that can also be noted on or adjacent to the trees. I will suggest that the trees might need to be less horizontal and more vertical. I never stretch my browser window to the whole width of the screen, and without that the trees exceed the width of the page. But this, like noting disagreements between the authors named and other scholarship, can be achieved through ordinary editing; the page does not have to be deleted in order to improve it to Wikipedia standards. P Aculeius (talk) 13:04, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for this comment. I agree that it could be saved this way, and I will add the position of the various authors too. OrthodoxByzantineRoman (talk) 15:46, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The authors' proposals themselves are questionable and unreliable. The first citation for the first tree is clear that it is “pedigree of the Euthydemids and Eucratides to show the fictitious descent from Alexander." (emphasis added). Tarn, William Woodthorpe (1966). The Greeks in Bactria and India (2 ed.). New York, U.S.: Cambridge University Press. p. 568. ISBN 9781108009416. Retrieved 30 December 2024. The placement of a daughter of Euthydemus I marrying a Chinese emperor and bearing is son is based on speculation from an uncited paragraph. There's mashing together of speculative theory throughout the page.

This seems to be a violation of reason for deleting #6, "[a]rticles that cannot possibly be attributed to reliable sources, including neologisms, original theories and conclusions, and hoaxes." The combination of multiple speculative, unreliable articles into one family tree is effectively the construction of an original theory or conclusion. It also violates ForWhomTheSunShines (talk) 23:40, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, but if we ignore the descent from Alexander, doesn't Tarn still state everything else, according to The Greeks in Bactria and India pgs 71ff? And I agree that the connection to Qin Shi Huangdi is spurious, I just added it on the off chance it could be correct. It was taken from Christopoulos, Lucas (September 2022). "SINO-PLATONIC PAPERS: Dionysian Rituals and the Golden Zeus of China" (PDF). Sino-Platonic Papers. Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, U.S.: University of Pennsylvania. pp. 84–86. Retrieved 4 January 2025. Also, if we clean up and or/delete this article (hopefully not because I did work hard on it), we must clean up the individual articles on the Greco-Bactrian and Indo-Greek kings too, as sources need to be cited for each king's article and other changes need to be made. However, we don't have to delete this article, as it can be cleaned up to remove it of any "speculative theory." OrthodoxByzantineRoman (talk) 03:01, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
"the off chance" is not a reason to add something to an article. And you are correct, many of the Greco-Bactrian and Indo-Greek king articles should also be cleaned up. ForWhomTheSunShines (talk) 04:10, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I mean, it is my first article that I made. I did not know those rules. But tomorrow, I will delete Qin Shi Huangdi, as I see now that the Lucas reference in the Xiutu article was removed. OrthodoxByzantineRoman (talk) 04:33, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Move to draft. Not ready for main space. Celia Homeford (talk) 11:02, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Umm....other editors allowed my article to be published back in December. Why would we put it back into draft? OrthodoxByzantineRoman (talk) 14:48, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Because it's "Not ready for main space". If it's not moved, it should be deleted as a badly-formatted and ill-cited mess of original research and speculative fiction. Celia Homeford (talk) 08:08, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 01:44, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per above. See WP:NOPAGE. Koshuri ^(グ) 15:21, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - there's a thin line between using a "special interest" to build an encyclopedia – and using us a free web host to your synthesis of original material. This has crossed the line. Bearian (talk) 08:54, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - I give up. Let's just delete my article. OrthodoxByzantineRoman (talk) 16:40, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - The insistence on calling it "my article" by the originating editor tends towards this being a special interest. Parts of the article's tree could be salvageable as part of the related articles, but only parts. ForWhomTheSunShines (talk) 03:03, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I call it mine because I was the one who made the entire article, including all of the family trees and everything else in it. Other editors made only minor edits. I probably shouldn't call it mine, as this is an encyclopedia for all. However, let us just delete the article. I do not know if any of the trees could be salvagable, maybe some are, but I don’t know which ones could be saved. OrthodoxByzantineRoman (talk) 20:37, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletions

Files for deletion

Category discussion debates

Template discussion debates

Redirects for deletion

MfD discussion debates

Other deletion discussions

Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Philippines Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Singapore Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/South Korea Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Taiwan Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Thailand Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Vietnam

[1] "Indian rapper asks 'Talha Kaun?', Talha Anjum responds with a brutal diss track". Images.Dawn.com. Dawn Media Group. 21 May 2025. Retrieved 23 May 2025.

[2] "Young Stunners' new Album Rebirth is a must listen". Samaa TV.

[3] "Open Letter - Talha Anjum [Album Review]".

[4] "Open Letter Talha Anjum's album blend of hip-hop and Urdu poetry".

[5] "Umair and Jokhay The man behind the rise of Talha Anjum amd Talha Younas".

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]