Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/Today

Purge
Shortcut WP:AFD/T

20 January 2025

Read how to nominate an article for deletion.

Recent AfDs: Today Yesterday

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

< January 19	January 21 >

Guide to deletion

Purge server cache

Jonas Torsvik

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

Cannot find any independent WP:SIGCOV for this Norwegian footballer, just trivial mentions in routine game coverage and brief transfer coverage. Fails WP:GNG/WP:NSPORT. Dclemens1971 (talk) 03:21, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Norway. Dclemens1971 (talk) 03:21, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Dyson (operating system)

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

Only sources in the article are primary and non-independent. With a WP:BEFORE, I did find this, which appears to be a self-published blog, of which I'm not sure about the reliability. Otherwise, everything else I found was about vacuum cleaners. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 02:22, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 02:22, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Non-notable niche software project, only other source I found was another blog (this one in Russian) and a few forum posts. MCE89 (talk) 02:58, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Starchess

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

No independent sources in the article. Only independent mention I could find is:

McC. Haworth, Guy; Rusz, Á. (2012). "Position Criticality in Chess Endgames". In Jaap van den Herik, H.; Plat, Aske (eds.). Advances in Computer Science. pp. 252–255.

It only discusses a specific chess algorithm that uses Starchess as a test case, most of the four pages are just a list of lines discovered by the algorithm. Likely not SIGCOV, and certainly not enough for it to meet WP:GNG Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 02:17, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 02:17, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sport City station

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

Redirect to Gold Line (Doha Metro) until better sourcing is found. I am unable to find any WP:SIGCOV from independent sources. JTtheOG (talk) 01:50, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Transportation and Qatar. JTtheOG (talk) 01:50, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oqba Ibn Nafie station

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

Redirect to Red Line (Doha Metro) until better sourcing is found. All that I came up with were a handful of sentences of coverage here, which seems to be a re-hashing of a press release anyways. JTtheOG (talk) 01:43, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Transportation and Qatar. JTtheOG (talk) 01:43, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Umm Ghuwailina station

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

Redirect to Red Line (Doha Metro) as I am struggling to find any independent coverage of this metro station. JTtheOG (talk) 01:38, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Transportation and Qatar. JTtheOG (talk) 01:38, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Mohammad Karaki

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

Doesn't reach notability for MMA criteria nor in general notability. HeinzMaster (talk) 01:31, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Martial arts, Middle East, and Lebanon. HeinzMaster (talk) 01:31, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sepulveda Rose

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

A fairly WP:ROTM mid-century Los Angeles apartment building. The only WP:GNG-qualifying source is the LA Conservancy page on the complex. The LA Historic Resources Inventory (a WP:PRIMARYSOURCE) indicates that the building may be eligible for a historic designation but it's not designated now. I don't see a pass of WP:GNG or WP:NBUILDING. Dclemens1971 (talk) 16:18, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Architecture and California. Dclemens1971 (talk) 16:18, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: almost, but not quite notable. Some historical interest noted, but nothing we can use to build an article. If it gets some sort of listing, either local or in the NRHP, we can look at revisiting the article. Delete for now Oaktree b (talk) 18:40, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Some insight as the author - I saw it on the Conservancies' website and am definitely more of an inclusionist. It has a few mentions on various city and are historical society pages, and the architect had his own article which pushed me over the edge. I thought it was on the line but decided to write it and hash it out later if people disagreed. Blervis (talk) 04:50, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: See my reasoning above. I've seen buildings that feel less notable to me, I guess it just depends how much stock you put in the LA Conservancies opinion of what constitutes a historic building. Blervis (talk) 04:52, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
WP:NCREATIVE works generally only one direction; being the creator of a notable/significant work can qualify for notability, but it's not really possible for a work to have WP:INHERITED notability from its creator. (The exception is articulated under WP:NBOOK for works by creators of such fame that every work they produce is considered notable (say, Shakespeare), but this architect is not at that level and buildings aren't covered by NBOOK.) So until we have more independent SIGCOV besides the LA Conservancy, there's not a GNG pass. Dclemens1971 (talk) 16:04, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't mean to imply it was notable solely because of the article, just that a building on a recognized historic listing by an architect of note is more notable than one that isn't. As I said above, I agree that this is on the line, I feel that the conservancy and city sources elevate it to notability. With respect to the WP:ROTM comment, it clearly isn't since the Conservancy has designated it as of particular interest. Whether you think that particular organization is too free with designations is another question.

If people feel that both city and Conservancy recognition doesn't amount to notability then I won't fight it - that's all there is at this time. I'm of the opinion that those two are enough to constitute notability - not every building is going to have books dedicated to it. It seems consensus is against me on this one. If it does get recognized by the city or other entity someday we can revisit this. Blervis (talk) 02:04, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I'm very pro NRHP buildings having a listing here, but the sourcing just doesn't seem to be there. I've been creating articles on and off on this subject, and it's a high bar to meet for inclusion, but it is what it is. Oaktree b (talk) 16:48, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting for further discussion. BD2412 T 01:21, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ~~~~

Silex Microsystems

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

It looks like most of the sources are press releases or routine coverage in industry publications, and I didn't find much SIGCOV on a WP:BEFORE. BuySomeApples (talk) 01:33, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and Technology. BuySomeApples (talk) 01:33, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sweden-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:33, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:55, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Richard Hills (politician)

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

Fails GNG and WP:POLITICIAN - see previous discussion of Auckland Councillors Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John Watson (New Zealand politician) TheLoyalOrder (talk) 00:55, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians and New Zealand. TheLoyalOrder (talk) 00:55, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wayne Walker (politician), Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Greg Sayers (2nd nomination) TheLoyalOrder (talk) 00:55, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Also nominated related councillor articles:

Chris Darby (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) TheLoyalOrder (talk) 00:59, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Shane Henderson (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Ken Turner (New Zealand politician) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Kerrin Leoni (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Julie Fairey (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Josephine Bartley (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) TheLoyalOrder (talk) 01:03, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Auckland Councillors each represent wards that are often larger than most New Zealand electorates, earn a full-time wage of over $100k, and control a budget and asset base in the billions. As the majority don't represent any mainstream political party it's difficult for citizens of New Zealand's largest city to access basic, objective information about their public representatives. It's really concerning to see these pages being deleted. All should be kept and maintained. Otakoulane (talk) 22:43, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Procedural keep Simply being an Auckland councillor in its own right doesn't meet WP:NPOL, and city councillors across the world need to have a heightened level of coverage in order to be kept. That being said, this isn't the worst article in the world, and while I'd still vote to delete for failing GNG, it feels potentially salvageable if other sources exist. I'm not looking through the other six since they all need to be reviewed on their own merits, so these need individual AfD discussions, hence the procedural keep. SportingFlyer T·C 23:00, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Richard Hill: only SIGCOV I found is this: [1]
Delete Chris Darby: did not find any SIGCOV
Delete Shane Henderson: only SIGCOV I found is this: [2]
Delete Ken Turner: only SIGCOV I found is this: [3]
Delete Kerrin Leoni: only SIGCO I found is this: [4] [5]
Redirect Julie Fairey to Michael Wood (politician) (her husband) as an ATD. The coverage of her relates to Michael Wood and the airport shares issues.
Keep Josephine Bartley: there is SIGCOV that isn't just related to the election: [6] [7] [8] Traumnovelle (talk) 00:00, 14 January 2025 (UTC) (indented these "votes" to show that they are all arguments by Traumnovelle)[reply]

Keep Julie Fairey - not accurate to redirect to her spouse's article as there is no joint coverage or joint projects etc. They have separate careers. MurielMary (talk) 10:02, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Josephine Bartley: there are sources that are beyond her election and councillor work. MurielMary (talk) 10:22, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, for a bundled nomination, we need to hear from more editors and there may not be enough opinions here to form a consensus. Also, Michael Wood (politician) is not an appropriate target page as it is a redirect, not an article.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:54, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I meant Michael Wood (New Zealand politician) as the ATD redirect. Traumnovelle (talk) 01:08, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Richard Hills (politician) - plenty of additional sources available (e.g. [9][10][11][12]), many others have extensive additional coverage as well (e.g. Chris Darby [13][14] [15][16]). I'll integrate any additional sources I can for the pages shortly, hopefully to the point where the pages will meet GNG (and/or I'll update my comment if I don't feel that there is enough published about these figures). --Prosperosity (talk) 03:15, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]